Monday, July 31, 2006

Come on Daryl, answer the question.

If Daryl doesn't want to answer, maybe some of her celeb friends will. What's the question? Remember the fight between Ralph Horowitz - rightful owner of property in Los Angeles and the squatters on his land? National Summary has asked Daryl Hannah a couple questions, and I would like to know if she or her buddies plan to answer.

Daryl Hannah, why don’t you let these people or anybody else for that matter, plant crops and gardens on your own properties?

I realize that Hollywood celebrities highly value their own privacy and security but since you are trespassing on someone else’s property, why don’t you allow squatters to use your own land for what they want to do since you are demanding the very same thing from someone else. If you and other celebrities don’t want to spring for buying land, why not let people use your own property

The rest of the questions and entry are here: Daryl Hannah's Garden - When Squatters Take Your Land.

Swann For Governor

My ideal political candidate is someone their opponents respect and fear because that person is genuinely concerned about the people he or she will answer to, someone who can speak their mind and voice their views, someone who is capable of actually understanding the issues and finding solutions for those issues, someone with character, and someone who speaks in details instead of ambiguity. My ideal campaign is one where all candidates respect one another and attempt to do their very best because that's the only way to win. Essentially, I want Dave for President - an honest and sincere combination of all the good ideas and solutions from both sides of the aisle, a person who is not a professional politician, and a person who understands that his or her time in government is a temp job. In My Country that is how it would be, and while My Country exists only in my mind, it's my dream -my refuge from what angers and alarms me about my government and those within it.

While watching a local interview with Republican gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swann this weekend I was mesmorized by his detailed answers to tough questions, his directness, and his plans to change government. I applauded his philosophy concerning education, welfare, and fiscal responsibility, and was stunned when he closed with the acknowledgment that government office is only temporary. The only words I could come up were "It's DAVE!".

Subsequent homework has found no catch to anything Mr. Swann said in that interview, and both my cohort and I feel confident that Lynn Swann could be the right man for Pennsylvania.

Here at Mostly Political we are impressed with Mr. Swann's positive attitude toward his years with the Steelers and the utilization of his competitive and leadership skills, and his awareness of his own imperfections. We are impressed with real answers to questions, obvious comfort with his position and goals, and his common-sense approach to what Pennsylvanians need, want and deserve, both at home in the Commonwealth and in D.C.. We are impressed with a candidate who appears so genuine and in touch that incumbent Governor Rendell is probably wishing Lynn Swann would disappear even though the governor is leading in the polls 47.5% to 41.1%.

We do not take political endorsement lightly. We do not endorse anyone without first doing the research and homework that should always be conducted before deciding on an issue or a candidate. We believe voting the party line is dangerous, and voting in ignorance even worse. With that said, at this time we recommend that all Pennsylvanians take at look at Mr. Swann and learn what he's about and what kind of man he is. We think you will be as impressed as we are.

Here are a few Swann/Matthews Policies for Change:
Government Reform
Creating Economic Opportunities

You can find more information on the website Swann for Governor

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Political Science for Dummies

We have no idea where this originated, but it's too fun to pass up.

Political Science with cows!

You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
You feel guilty for being successful.
Barbara Streisand sings for you.

You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.

You have two cows.
The government takes one and gives it to your neighbor.
You form a cooperative to tell him how to manage his cow.

You have two cows.
The government seizes both and provides you with milk.
You wait in line for hours to get it.
It is expensive and sour.

You have two cows.
You sell one, buy a bull, and build a herd of cows.

You have two cows.
Under the new farm program the government pays you to shoot one, milk the other, and then pours the milk down the drain.

You have two cows.
You sell one, lease it back to yourself and do an IPO on the 2nd one.
You force the two cows to produce the milk of four cows. You are surprised when one cow drops dead. You spin an announcement to the analysts stating you have downsized and are reducing expenses.
Your stock goes up.

You have a black cow and a brown cow.
Everyone votes for the best looking one.
Some of the people who actually like the brown one best accidentally vote for the black one.
Some people vote for both.
Some people vote for neither.
Some people can't figure out how to vote at all.
Finally, a bunch of guys from out-of-state tell you which one you think is the best-looking cow.

You have millions of cows.
They make real California cheese.
Only five speak English.
Most are illegals.
Arnold likes the ones with the big udders

You have all the cows in Afghanistan, which are two.
You don't milk them because you cannot touch any creature's private parts.
You get a $40 million grant from the US government to find alternatives to milk production but use the money to buy weapons.

You have two cows.
They go into hiding.
They send radio tapes of their mooing.

You have two cows.
You go on strike because you want three cows.
You go to lunch and drink wine.
Life is good.

You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
They learn to travel on unbelievably crowded trains.
Most are at the top of their class at cow school.

You have two cows.
You engineer them so they are all blond, drink lots of beer, give excellent quality milk, and run a hundred miles an hour.
Unfortunately they also demand 13 weeks of vacation per year.

You have two cows but you don't know where they are.
While ambling around, you see a beautiful woman.
You break for lunch.
Life is good.

You have two cows.
You have some vodka.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You have some more vodka.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.
The Mafia shows up and takes over however many cows you really have.

You have one cow.
The cow is schizophrenic.
Sometimes the cow thinks he's French, other times he's Flemish.
The Flemish cow won't share with the French cow.
The French cow wants control of the Flemish cow's milk.
The cow asks permission to be cut in half.
The cow dies happy.

Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Our thoughts exactly

I received this from my cohort in an e-mail this morning (a little goodie going around the Internet):

The Way It Should Be

* Press "1" for English.

* Press "2" to Disconnect until you have learned to speak English

Carry on.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Let's straighten this out

American Agenda has a post concerning the recent presidential veto that makes it appear that our president has done an injustice to our entire country. I suppose this isn't totally surprising considering that most people seem to believe the same thing.

Here's the deal - Mr. Bush did not ban stem cell research. What he did was say no to increased taxpayer dollars supporting that research - a prudent move to save YOU money. Articles like Despite Bush Veto, Stem Cell Research Abounds show how this is not a tragedy.

For all the weeping and gnashing of teeth from the Dems over government spending, you would think they would appreciate this move, but of course they do not. It's another fact-twisted fit of whining instead.

Additional Link:

Stem Cell Work Gets States' Aid After Bush Veto

Seems to us stem cell research funding is going to be just fine.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Blogs, blogs and more blogs

Since I am the primary poster here at Mostly Political, I want to devote some time to a few blogs in Cyberland. Some you will like, some you will not, but all are interesting, if for no other reason than pure entertainment.


My personal favorite is The Absurd Report. It is the only blog to make it to the links list so far, and with good reason - it is far and away the best of the best. The layout is well done, it is organized, and the writing interesting, humorous and current. I go there daily.

No sane person likes War and the death and destruction that comes with it. No other species in the history of the world has killed more of its own than the human species and when this savagery is done in the name of God, it defies logic.

The wisdom of man has been able to tame the elements but man’s vengeance against man has been untameable. Until such time that the human species solves this dilemma, War is the ultimate solution against those who would seek to destroy civilization in the name of God.

Failure to recognize this reality is akin to pronouncing a death sentence on one’s self. One can not ignore the words of the enemy when he says that he intends to kill all nonbelievers. There is no common ground between believers and nonbelievers for no amount of gold or silver will satisfy their desire of conquest, only your life; and for one to become tone deaf in the face of such reality is foolish.

The history of appeasement has common tread, it has failed time after time and with it came more death and destruction because of the failure of people to recognize the problem they faced and act preemptively.

The National Summary is fast becoming another favorite. It has a compelling commentary style that isn't found anywhere else on the WWW; as if you are talking to a good friend. The cartoons are fun, too.

Immigration Protests
The Fort Sumter Of Our Times?
Quite a country we live in, eh? Where hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people here in this country illegally, can publicly gather to protest a law being debated in Congress concerning the problem of illegal immigration and what to do about it.


Aggressive Voice Daily is new to my attention, but I find myself returning day after day. It approaches issues with a more Moderate and Libertarian voice, one that I find refreshing.

Of course the ACLU could care less about Brittany McComb because they're more concerned about the students who have the right to not hear the word God. I mean, there could have been atheists in the crowd and hearing the forbidden three-letter word might have offended them.

ACLU lawyer Allen Lichtenstein was happy with the school's decision, saying "Proselytizing is improper in school-sponsored speech at valedictorian graduations."

Proselytizing? Thanking God is now a form of proselytizing? Did I miss the part in the story about McComb passing around Bibles or a signup sheet for potential converts during the brief speech? Of course, if she credited "Sex and the City" reruns for her straight-A performance we wouldn't be in the mess. But alas, what got her through high school is the one thing too dastardly to mention before a graduating class

Liberally Whacked, But Funny

Chronically Pissed is definitely entertaining. It's the one stop in my daily blog journey that always has me wondering what kind of paranoid, foul, hilarious, shake-my-head venomous nonsense I will find next. *Warning* As you might pick up from the title, foul language is almost an art on Chronically Pissed.

A quick thought for the day...
Why is it that Believers are free to suggest that God is responsible for everything from newborn puppies to terrorist attacks, but I'm not allowed to speculate that Ronald Reagan died a slow, painful, hideous death because God hated him? First of all, there is no god. Secondly, blow me

Monday, July 17, 2006

What part of "illegal" don't you understand?

Yes, it IS another post concerning illegal immigration.

National Summary has a post concerning illegal immigrants. It illustrates the ridiculousness of what is happening with this issue, as well as many myths and a few facts you may not be aware of. Most of all, it contains some humor and a truckload of common sense.

Whenever you mention doing something about all the illegal aliens pouring across the borders (and an estimated population of 12 million is definitely more than a trickle), the first thing you hear out of a liberal’s mouth is the word “racist”. (The second thing is how they are only taking jobs that Americans “won’t take” – more on that later.) After that, you are told, passionately, that not all illegals are coming from Mexico (as if that makes it ok); some are coming from other countries, such as Russia, or Sweden, or even the United Kingdom and Canada.

Ok, fine, I believe that. It was never my opinion that all illegals are from Mexico. I did see an awful lot of Mexican flags waiving during the protest marches, however, and a dearth of flags from such places as Russia, the UK, Canada, or anywhere else for that matter. And somehow, I don’t think those kind souls with the banners reading “This is our continent not yours”, “We are indigenous! The only owners of this continent!”, and “If you think I’m illegal because I’m a Mexican, learn the true history, because I’m in my homeland”, were here from Sweden

We can't help but think of the shelters built for legal and illegal migrant workers around the country with no one seemingly bothering to think "Hmmm. I wonder if this would be a good place to find a few illegal workers?". Absurdity personified.

Your Brain on Politics

There is an interesting Scientific American article on how we all make our political decisions. Take a look.

This surety is called the confirmation bias, whereby we seek and find confirmatory evidence in support of already existing beliefs and ignore or reinterpret disconfirmatory evidence. Now a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study shows where in the brain the confirmation bias arises and how it is unconscious and driven by emotions. Psychologist Drew Westen led the study, conducted at Emory University, and the team presented the results at the 2006 annual conference of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

During the run-up to the 2004 presidential election, while undergoing an fMRI bran scan, 30 men--half self-described as "strong" Republicans and half as "strong" Democrats--were tasked with assessing statements by both George W. Bush and John Kerry in which the candidates clearly contradicted themselves. Not surprisingly, in their assessments Republican subjects were as critical of Kerry as Democratic subjects were of Bush, yet both let their own candidate off the hook

Friday, July 14, 2006

We interrupt our regularly scheduled programming for this "Duh" moment ...

Over at The Emerging Democratic Majority Weblog they have a post concerning the value of current and illegal immigrants to the Left's success in future elections.

Awakening Immigrant Vote Can Help Dems
USA Today may not be known for cutting-edge political reporting, but they have an article that should be clipped and posted on the bulletin boards of every Democratic campaign. The article, Martin Kasindorf’s “Immigrant Groups Aim: Turn Marchers to Voters” provides an encouraging introduction to the current and potential power of immigrant voters

What came to mind while reading it was "No kidding. This is news?"

This is a no brainer. The Left is so adrift in their own psychotic, paranoid meltdown that the only people willing to vote for them come from other countries. That's why they are so desperately trying to keep 12 million illegal immigrants in this country - more voters. When you have no platform other than to bash every word that comes from President Bush's mouth, and your own people won't cast a ballot for you, you have to look elsewhere.

Didn't the rest of us figure this out months ago?

The USA Today article

Hero of the Week

Mayor Lou Barletta of Hazleton, PA. has stood up for his convictions and the United States of America by not only putting illegal immigrants on notice in his community, but by also passing the Illegal Immigration Relief Act.

Illegal immigrants seeking to make a home in this northeastern Pennsylvania city could face barriers to finding a home and job after the city council passed one of the nation's strictest ordinances to fight illegal immigration.

City documents would be printed in English, landlords would face $1,000 fines for each illegal immigrant found renting their properties and business who employ illegal immigrants wouldn't be granted licenses.

The ordinance, designed to make the city one of the most hostile in the country for illegal immigrants, passed on a 4-to-1 vote after two hours of passionate debate.

"The illegal citizens, I would recommend they leave," said Mayor Lou Barletta, who said he wore a bulletproof vest to the vote as a precaution because the issue was emotionally charged

Because we are so impressed and inspired by his willingness to stand up for our country and make a difference, Mayor Lou Barletta is our very first Hero of the Week.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Anarchy is serious business

Jim Quinn has a saying (that we can't seem to find anywhere, so we will paraphrase)- Everything the Democrats do has the opposite effect of what they intended. This will be true of Separation of Church and State, as well.

Think about it - if the atheists and Left ever accomplish true separation, the result will not be what they intended at all. It will be something far worse. With true separation the court systems will not be allowed to touch anything that has to do with religion. Nothing. And that will lead to all churches having carte blanche to do as they please, no matter the church. This means that The Church of 200 Guns, or The Church of Snoopy or whatever else ridiculous worship you can think of will be able to amass weapons if they choose (anyone remember David Koresh and the Branch Davidians?), and behave in any way they please, running rampant in our society with no legal avenues to stop them. It sounds absurd, but true separation will have to be that way.

Maybe the Left should step back and consider the future before they continue to push this agenda any further. Of course, if they actually practiced what they preach they wouldn't really have issues with people who believe in God, to begin with. They are constantly pushing it down everyone's throats to accept all people, all groups, but they seem to draw a hard line when it comes to Christians. They love the gays, the criminals, the whacked out and even the terrorists, thinking they are all misunderstood and just need a good hug, but bring up Christians and watch their heads explode. They are hypocrites, but that isn't the point for this post.

Separation of Church and State. It won't be for the squeamish. Anarchy is serious business.

Friday, July 07, 2006

All together now ...

Awwwww. Some convicted sexual predators are feeling banished once they are released from prison. What a pity. Unfortunately the ACLU is listening to these animals AND trying to help them legally.

This is absurd on both counts. Sexual predators are the lowest scum on the planet, especially those who molest children, and they should be removed from the public. It's that simple. They destroy the lives of their victims, and forever change the lives of those who love those victims.

A child who has been molested can spend a lifetime suffering the effects of that crime - depression, anger, future sexual problems, drug and alcohol dependency, antisocial issues, lack of trust for everyone in their lives, and possibly an altering of their brain function if the abuse occurs early in life. Child molestation has far reaching effects in our society. This is fact, a fact that the ACLU has to be aware of, yet they are defending the deviants who perpetrate one of the worst crimes on this planet. What is wrong with this picture?

The ACLU is doing unbelievable damage - from defending the above mentioned sexual predators, to siding with schools who turn off microphones when a high school student attempts to thank God at their graduation. They are on the wrong side of many issues, and slipping scandalously close to crossing the line and promoting censorship in some cases. We're not even going to dwell on the fact that they believe they live in a Democracy (we will save that gem for another time).

Our point? Child molesters deserve banishment and more, and the ACLU is a dangerous organization, an organization that appears to be doing all that it can to undermine decency in the United States. Any group that is willing to put the rights of a monster over the safety of a child is an organization that should be run out of existence.

Monday, July 03, 2006

Idolatry, or could it be the "R" word?

A comment was left responding to the last entry concerning the 34 senators who shot down the flag burning ban amendment. The reader evidently feels that "idolatry" is what the other 66 senators are involved in because they voted "yes" to the amendment.

Maybe some people do have a form of idol worship where the flag is concerned, but I think it's more a healthy respect for the most public and outward symbol of our country. It's respect for what it took to become a country, respect for the founding fathers, and for those men and women who have died for this country. It's respect for the office of the President, respect for an ideology that makes us a society, and the laws of our land.

With respect in such short supply for, well, almost everything, it seems, I don't see a problem with holding our national symbol in high regard, and I expect my government to reflect that regard. Do we need an amendment to show respect? Probably not, but it doesn't bother me to have one. I don't see it as a potential loss of my First Amendment right to freely express myself, but then I usually tend to go about more effective and less extreme forms of expression, anyway.

I support the amendment for these two reasons:
1) Because of everything I just said concerning basic respect for this country.
2) Because I don't want illegal immigrants walking around thinking it's acceptable to burn my flag. I want it crystal clear to them that it won't be tolerated while they are on American soil.

Idolatry? No. Basic and earned respect for the country I was born in and choose to live in? You bet your ass.

Hi Ho! Hi Ho! These senators have to go!

In case you don't know which senators voted to keep flag burners in business, here they are:

Akaka D-Hawaii
Biden D-Delaware
Bingaman D-New Mexico
Boxer D-California
Byrd D-West Virginia
Cantwell D-Washington
Carper D-Delaware
Clinton D-New York
Conrad D-North Dakota
Dodd D-Con.
Dorgan D-North Dakota
Durbin D-Illinois
Feingold D-Wisconsin
Harkin D-Iowa
Inouye D-Hawaii
Kennedy D-Mass.
Kerry D-Mass.
Kohl D-Wisconsin
Lautenberg D-N.J.
Leahy D-Vt.
Levin D-Michigan
Lieberman D-Con
Mikulski D-Md.
Murray D-Wash.
Obama D-Ill.
Pryor D-Ark.
Reed D-R.I.
Sarbanes D-Md.
Schumer D-N.Y.
Wyden D-Ore.

Bennett R-Utah
Chafee R-R.I.
McConnell R-Ky.

Jeffords I-Vt.

If any of them speak for you, it might be prudent to check their voting record for further confirmation of why you should be sure to vote them out when you get your next opportunity. Taking back your government would get a jump-start with the ousting of these 34 senators.

List found here.

Other coverage:
The Absurd Report
Flag Burning Insults Those Who Served Country