If you had asked me anything political around 2002 or 2003, I probably would have looked at you dumbfounded and would have just walked away. I wouldn’t have been able to tell you about a single political thing that was happening then; for instance, the PATRIOT Act. That was a huge story around that time and I had no idea what it was about. I knew it had something to do with invading one’s privacy for security issues, but other than that, I knew nothing else about it. I was a teenager, I had more important things to worry about: like baseball, music, high school, having no courage to talk to girls, things of that nature. Most kids my age didn’t know a thing about anything relevant either. The only thing we teenagers thought about was the ongoing battle of “class warfare” within school; who was cool and who wasn’t (certainly not me). We had no interest in politics whatsoever. The only thing I had going for me then was my love of history. I have always loved history, especially American history. I’ve always found it fascinating to learn about our country and how it was made; and what our Fore Fathers went through to create this great country. I knew the history behind the country, but I wasn’t invested in its future. 

I wouldn’t say I wasn’t interested in politics, I just wasn’t informed, and I didn’t go out of my way to get informed. I was well-informed on the historical aspects, just not the then-modern happenings. Of course, I wasn’t old enough to vote, so I guess I thought it didn’t matter. I wish I was more interested in world issues at that time. It was obviously after September 11th and I remember that well, as does every American. I remember watching what had happened on TV and feeling heartbroken for every family that had lost a family member. I was in global history class of all places when we had heard about it and started watching it on TV. I’m sure I wasn’t the only student in that room, or even in the school, that didn’t feel some sort of confusion about what was happening. We were young, but we weren’t THAT young. We were about fourteen years old, well old enough to know about the evil in the world. But I sat there feeling angry and confused, and I really didn’t know why. Obviously I was mad about what happened, but I didn’t understand why it had happened. When most people were saying that is was terrorists in the Middle East that attacked us, and they did it simply because they didn’t like us; I thought everyone was crazy. I didn’t think it was logical for people to attack and kill others simply because they didn’t like them - with the exception of maybe Hitler. Of course, others thought it was an inside job by the government to give them an excuse to invade the Middle East, and I thought that was even more ridiculous (and still do).  We were all still young and I don’t think there would have been anyway for us to fully understand it. Hell, I’m 25 now and I can still barely believe it. September 11th woke me up to the real world. You see this type of thing on TV and in movies, but it’s usually always fiction. Not that day. Even though I was only 14, I didn’t like feeling confused; I felt the need to get informed and learn more about my country and its enemies.

It took sometime for me to really understand how things in the world of politics really worked. As I said, even during the early to mid ‘00’s, I still didn’t know much about world happenings. 2004 was an interesting year for politics to say the least, and it was still way over my head. Soon after that I started to see how much the media and even the American people were attacking President Bush for what seemed like the dumbest things. I knew it was fine to disagree with your leader and hold him accountable for things, but I thought the media was being way too unfair to the President, and I found it disgraceful how some of our own citizens were wishing certain horrible things on the President. I started paying attention. Could our President really be that bad as too have people say those malicious things about him? I started paying more attention. It didn’t seem right to me; the First Amendment does give the right to free speech, but I knew that the media was supposed to be fair and objective. That’s why the press was created in the first place; to hold its leader in check, not to completely destroy him. Or in our present case, one that completely kisses ass and doesn’t hold anything in check and purposely ignores stories that will harm him. I saw the mainstream media go completely out of its bounds during the Bush Administration. The mainstream media is what kicked my political interest into high gear. 

There wasn’t really any revelation for me becoming conservative; I’ve always been conservative. I was still conservative while being uninformed; I just couldn’t back myself up with facts then, now I can. I had nothing against Obama when he first came on the political stage. I quickly learned more about him, and I thought his personal story was incredible. A man with his upbringing becoming a nominee for President was what the American dream was all about. But as I learned more about him, I realized that I had absolutely nothing in common with him politically. If we say we don’t know Barack Obama then that’s on us. We know so much about him, and he clearly reveals his character and political ideology in his books. He will never stray from his far-left ideology because he is an ideologue at heart. I felt that his vision for America was not the one America needed. And when he got elected, I really wanted him to succeed and wanted him to bring America back on the right track. For me, love of country trumps political ideology any day. I would rather be proven wrong than have the country take the wrong turn. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen, and I didn’t expect it too. I knew exactly what direction Obama was going to lead this country the moment he got elected. Barack Obama has reinforced my conservative beliefs, and that is why I am ready to fight to take my country back; and to restore it to what it once was: the greatest country on Earth.

I have been meaning to talk about gun control for sometime, but I never got around to doing it. I meant to do it after the movie theater shooting in Colorado when everyone was talking about it. I hope you all enjoy it, even if you don’t agree with me.

America has some serious issues to work out. Some are more important than others. Some people care, but most people don’t. Apparently, some people think gun control is one of those serious issues. Well I hate to burst everyone’s little bubble of happiness, but gun control is NOT a serious issue. It never has been. The Second Amendment clearly states the issue on guns and an American’s right to bear them. America has 315 million people. Yes, some of them are going to be crazy gun-wielding lunatic assholes that shoot up movie theaters and elementary schools. But the majority of people are not crazy lunatics. The majority of them are caring and loving individuals, and many of them happen to own a gun. Guns are not the problem here. Weapons in general, are not the problem. The problem is crazy people. No wait…the problem is evil people. The problem is evil people and violence.

The idea of gun control itself is lunacy. I don’t understand why people think making something illegal, or making it harder to get will, in fact, solve the problem. History has shown countless times that that is not true. Prohibition is by far the biggest and easiest example to cite. Making alcohol illegal only spiked it’s use and it’s trading and selling on the Black Market more lucrative. Does anyone know how well drug laws work? Not very well? That’s what I thought. Criminals don’t care about gun laws. Criminals don’t follow laws of any kind. That’s what makes them criminals in the first place. If I was really intent on killing someone, I could find a thousand ways to do it without a gun. And most ways are much easier and quicker than getting a gun legally. The vast majority of guns used in crimes and murders are illegal anyway. Timothy McVeigh was a crazy lunatic asshole who killed 168 people and injured almost 700 in the Oklahoma City Bombing. He didn’t need a gun to commit his crime. Criminals find ways to commit their crimes. Why take guns from law-abiding citizens, or make it harder for us to get guns? We are protecting ourselves from those crazies who are going to get guns no matter what. Law-abiding citizens don’t go out on shooting rampages.

Let’s take a look at Switzerland, which doesn’t have a standing army, it has a people’s militia. They also have one of the loosest gun laws in the world for that reason. The militia members keep their weapons at home, and they are also highly trained with those weapons. Therefore, Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownerships in the  world. You know how many people died in 2006 due to gun related shootings? 34. In 2001 the BBC claimed that, “Switzerland’s crime rate is so low that we don’t even keep numbers.” Try that one on for size.   

Connecticut has one of the most strictest gun laws in the country. Worked out real great didn’t it? The shooting also took place in a gun free zone. See how much crazy lunatic criminal assholes care about laws? Chicago also has some of the strictest gun policies in the country. You know what else they have? The highest murder rate in the country. By the way, can anybody tell me the last time a mass shooting happened in a gun friendly zone like a firing range or an NRA meeting? ………Great Britain also has extremely tight gun policies, and a recent study showed that they were the most violent country in the EU, with more murders per capita, than the US. Violence is violence. We never talk about banning knives when someone kills someone with a knife. Whether it’s with a gun, or a knife, or any other kind of weapon, violence is violence, and you will never stop violent people from being violent. A murder with a knife is no less important than a murder with a gun. Murders without guns are always put on the back burner. A crime is a crime and lives were taken. We always make the issue about guns, when the issue is not about guns, it’s about violence. 

It is ridiculous that after all this time we still have to have the discussion about “who is at fault.” Obviously it’s the guns fault. It’s the gun that walked out the front door and shot up that movie theater, all by its little lonesome self. If guns kill people then why didn’t the gun fire itself and shoot the killer before he killed his mother? Can you believe that people actually blame guns? Actually I can because I find most people’s common sense lacking these days. After all, Alexander Hamilton said, “The masses are asses.” Cars cause more injury and death per year than guns do. Let’s make cars harder to get or just plain ban them. It’s obviously the cars fault that football player went out drunk driving, got in a car accident and killed his teammate. People are to blame. It’s not more complicated than that. It really is that simple. 

While I do believe that they are genuinely concerned about the incident, it didn’t take long for the celebrities to react on Twitter and politicize the event. Almost all of them called for stricter and tighter gun laws. Obviously they are a little out of touch with the real world. They hate guns. Yet, they constantly use them in their movies and TV shows for numerous reasons. Sometimes to show how they can be used for evil, but many times they use them to defend themselves. They play cops, spies, assassins and other types of professionals that carry and use guns on a regular basis, usually to help other people out a life-threatening situation. I don’t really care if they do this, that’s show business. But don’t go around totting bullshit about more gun control and stricter gun laws when you are flaunting them around in your movies. If you really hate guns that much then refuse to use them in your movies, even if the guns are fake. If you didn’t like something, then you wouldn’t want to promote its use. Hypocrites run deep in Hollywood. I’ve come to expect nothing less. 

Let’s say, for example, that a dozen congressmen - people who have Secret Service with them all the time - were assassinated; we would be crying for more security, not less. Why is it any different in this case? We need more law-abiding citizens with guns. Schools and other public places need to have more security, especially armed with guns. This pyscho wouldn’t have made it very far if someone else had shot him first. But no one could shoot him first because it was a gun free zone. 

Say we had these two signs, which one would you rather have? 

I’m going with the second one thanks. 

A few select people in the media, as well as other celebrities, also had a few comments about the Second Amendment and how it pertains to the Fore Fathers. They said that when the Fore Fathers wrote it, muskets were the primary firearm. A much less dangerous weapon than today’s semi-automatic and automatic machine guns. Well in that case I have a fun one for them. Televisions and radios weren’t around in the late 18th-century, does that mean everything said on TV and radio can’t be considered free speech? Give me a break, those musket comments are extremely naive and ridiculous. 

I also saw many people asking, “if God is so loving then why do things like this happen?” When God created us he gave us freewill because that is the biggest form of freedom that humans can have. God doesn’t want to control us. He wants us to make our own decisions. He could have forced us to do anything, but He didn’t. With freewill comes consequences, just like everything else. Some people use their lives for good, while other use their lives for evil. That is just the way of humans. It’s human nature. There is certainly more good than evil in this world, and the good will prevail and be the better solution. The evil is just more horrendous and is reported much more in the media, not surprisingly.

Nicholas Kristof, the always erroneous reporter for the New York Times suggested - and so did other media people - that the NRA is responsible for actually arming the lunatic. No, the NRA did not arm anybody. Just like the tobacco company didn’t put cigarrettes in the hands of citizens, the citizens went out and got them themselves. Kristof also said - and I am paraphrassing - “if forks are as dangerous as guns then we should arm our military with cutlery.” I don’t use erroneous lightly. Yea, Nicholas, armed cutlery works really well against your enemies who have automatic weapons. Moron.

So what do we do to fix the gun problem in America? Nothing. The number of mass murders in the US are still incredibly low. Crime is lower and gun ownership is higher. You don’t have to own a gun, or even ever use one if you don’t want. But law-abiding citizens should have the right to own firearms if they want. The FBI does a background check on people who want guns anyway, so I don’t really see what else needs to be done. The real problem is dealing with people who are mentally challenged. But that is for another discussion.

Oh, and please continue to tell me why guns are the reasons people kill each other. I really find those statements to be astute and sagacious. It’s not like people killed each other before guns existed or something.

Wanna see what some of the world’s best thinkers thought about guns?

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun - is a good guy with a gun. - Wayne LaPierre

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.” - Thomas Paine

Well it is official, I am leaving Los Angeles at the end of October. I am moving to Austin, Texas with my mom and grandparents. This was not an easy decision to make by any means, I really love it here in LA. The weather, the beach, the fun, and most importantly- my friends. I love you guys, thank you for making LA an incredible experience for me. It was an amazing experience for 6 years, but now the time has come for a new chapter in my life.

Like I stated earlier, the reason I am leaving is for family reasons. Most of you already know the situation with my family, but for those that don’t, I’d rather not mention all the details on this post. I’m sure I will see a lot of you before I leave, so I will be able to give you more details in person. My mom has taken a new nursing job in Round Rock, which is just north of Austin. 

Austin is a great city, I went there for a few days last year and it was a lot of fun. Austin is considered the live music capital of the country, there is music everynight, at pretty much every place. So there will be no shortage of musical opportunities for me, especially since I am a bass player.  

The feeling of leaving is rather bittersweet. I have talked to many of you about the situation for sometime now, and I appreciate all the prayers and support for me and my family. I was not quick to the idea of moving. I wanted to have a job and a steady income so I could have stayed, but even if I got a job, it would have been very hard to stay afloat easily. Everything in LA is so expensive and it would have just been a pain to deal with all of that all the time. And traffic of course, which I really didn’t mind for the longest time, but now that I know I am leaving it has been starting to irritate me. Everything is much cheaper in Austin, and in Texas in particular. Austin is one of the fastest growing cities in the country, and there are plenty of job opportunities; it’s also a college town so there are plenty of young people for me to hang out with and annoy. 

I will miss Los Angeles tremendously, mainly my friends. It was not an easy decision when I packed up and left upstate NY 6 years ago either, but moving to LA turned out to be one of the best decisions I have ever made in my life. So I am not really worried about what Austin holds in store, I am usually content no matter where I am anyway, so I am not worried at all. Just the moving process, getting settled, and meeting new people is the hardest part. 

So once again, I want to thank you all for making my 6 year stay in Los Angeles awesome and memorable. I had some of the best times of my life here. This of course, does not mean that I will never return to Los Angeles, I will definately plan on visiting, and who knows, maybe someday in the future I will move back. I have to take things one day at a time. If you want to see me before I leave, just hit me up here or text me and I will do everything in my power to make it happen. 

Again, thank you so much. I love you all. Many blessings, 

Kyle

The first debate between President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney was watched by over 60 million people last night, and was the most tweeted about subject in Twitter’s history, or rather the most tweets per minute about one subject. That is certainly good news for Mitt Romney as he was declared the winner by the majority of news outlets and commentators on both sides of the aisle. But I am not writing about the debate itself, although there is one point I want to make at the end, I am writing about the high amount of political division and discourse during this election and even over the past few years.

The biggest reason the American public is so divided politically is because of the mainstream media. The mainstream media is the biggest arm of propaganda for the Obama administration. The media should be around to keep the President and other members of Congress in line, but sadly, it is the exact opposite. Unless of course your a Republican, then you will be hammered for everything you do and say, regardless of how trivial or insignificant. The mainstream media in not-so-many-words openly campained for Barack Obama in 2008, doing whatever it could to get him elected, and obviously it eventually worked. They hammered all who opposed him, including Hillary Clinton. The mainstream media will never turn on Obama because he is their savior, their annointed one, their diamond in the rough. Where was the mainstream media during the Fast and Furious scandal? *crickets* Where was the mainstream media on the recent Libyan terror attacks and the poor handling of it by the Obama administration, and the possible cover-up? *crickets* The media didn’t seem to care when Obama went to campaign in Vegas the day after the terror attack in Libya, or declined a meeting with Netanyahu because he was too busy. Yea, too busy partying with Jay-Z and Beyonce, going on David Letterman, and every-other-mans-but-Obama’s worst nightmare The View. If any Republican had handled a situation so poorly, tried to cover it up, or went somewhere during a crisis the media would hound them. In fact, it happened with Nixon with Watergate, and Reagan with the Iran-Contra affair, and Bush during Hurricane Katrina, but nothing when it happens with Barack Obama. Furthermore, nobody died in either Watergate nor the Iran-Contra affair, but four Americans are dead in this terrorist attack, and nobody wants to ask the President why there was minimum security at an American embassy when the administration knew of the upcoming attack? Absolutely ridiculous on every level. 

It is situations like this, and the failure of the mainstream media to report them, and to report them honestly, that has lead to political division and discourse in this country. The American people rarely get the full and honest story on anything anymore. There are so many facts out there that are just flat out false, which really eliminates them as facts, and others that are scewed to make the President look better. But of course the media wont report the real numbers because it makes their savior look weak, powerless and incompetent. Obama has been playing this bogus class warfare bullshit before he even entered the doors of the White House. And recently he started the bogus War on Women and how Mitt Romney and the Republicans want to take women’s reproductive rights away. And of course, the media buys into it once more without blinking an eye. The media reports these things as truth because Obama is their savior, so obviously everything he says must be true. It then creates fear within certain people and creates a division. 

The division has become so strong that many people from different political ideals can’t even have a rational discussion with each other without it turning somewhat hostile. Disagreement seems to have turned into stupidity. One is not stupid for disagreeing with you, although some people really are just stupid, while others are just uninformed. I disagree with Obama on almost everything, but I don’t think he’s stupid. We have different beliefs, and that’s just the way it is.   

The one thing I want to talk about from the debate is Mitt Romney’s PBS comments. Twitter went crazy once Mitt said that he would stop federal funding to PBS. Many starting talking about how Mitt wanted to “kill Big Bird,” and other things like that. People need to realize that just because he wants to cut federal funding to PBS doesn’t mean PBS is going anywhere. PBS receives the majority of it’s money from private donations from citizens, much like the the ever so wonderful (Un)Planned Parenthood. The total government contribution to PBS’ final revenue is about 15%. So it is obviously no significant amount of money that they would be losing. Both PBS and (Un)Planned Parenthood would have no problem surviving without government funding. It’s not the government’s job to fund private companies anyway. Obviously Obama didn’t get that memo with Solyndra. 

To call Israel Obama’s biggest foreign policy blunder certainly is a bold statement, especially when the President has had many foreign policy blunders. China pretty much owns the United States. Obama blocked the Keystone Pipeline which made Canada turn to China for its oil supply instead of the United States, amongst other positives that wont happen, but that’s for another day. He hasn’t handled Russia very well, and has embarrassed Britain several times. However, I will admit that President Obama has been better on foreign policy than I thought he would be. On the big issues he has excelled somewhat. The killing of bin Laden is certainly something he can take credit for, but it would not have happened without troops in Iraq or enhanced interrogation, two things that he opposed when he was senator. He did continue to use President Bush’s drone tactics, something I thought would surely stop when he became president. He also  increased the number of troops in Afghanistan, although temporary.  No doubt the economy will be center stage during this election season, and rightfully so, it is in horrible shape and President Obama has done nothing to make it better, and in turn is only making things worse. But I want to talk about something different today. I am sick of talking about the economy, we’ve been talking about that for a while now and any rational person should be able to realize that Obama has no idea what he’s doing when it comes to the economy. Obviously I want to talk about Israel and how it is Obama’s biggest foreign policy fail. It is a little bit older of a topic, but still relevant and important. 

Without question Israel is the United States’ most important ally, and vice-versa. Israel is the only country in the Middle East to be fully democratic, which is why the US and Israel are so important to each other.  Back in May of 2011, President Obama said that Israel should go back to its 1967 borders. I remember when he said this, I didn’t hear many people talk about it then, and I still don’t hear many people talking about it now. Here are two maps of the borders of Israel in 1967.

So let’s look at President Obama’s proposal and see how bad it really is. Let’s keep in mind that most of Israel is less than 50 miles wide. Obama’s plan would divide Jerusalem and leave only about 9 miles of land to maintain the Mediterranean Sea. Obviously not a very defensible border. Obama also stated how he wants a contiguous state for Palestine that has borders with both Egypt and Jordan. In order for that to happen Israel would have to forfeit the majority of it’s southern border and lose its only access to the Red Sea. Obama said that the key to understanding his proposal was land swaping. But that in no way helps Israel, the Palestinians would already be gaining at least a fourth of Israel, if not more, plus most of Israel’s southern territory, as well as taking half of Jerusalem. The Palestinians would have everything to gain, and Israel would have everything to lose. Certainly the Palestinians would succeed in taking over Israel, as Israel’s borders would be nearly indefensible.

Two things about this that bother me. One is the overwhelming support that Jewish voters have for the Democratic Party, when for years the party that has been pro-Israel has clearly been the Republicans. In 2008 Obama had 74% of the Jewish vote, a Gallop poll from June of this year has his support at 64% while Mitt Romney’s is at 29%. So no doubt that his support from Jewish voters has fallen, but 64% is still strong. The other thing that bothers me about this is the obvious flaw and weakness in Obama’s proposal. If I can figure this out, Obama and all his advisors certainly can too, but it wasn’t very hard to figure out either, just common sense. I don’t think Obama is stupid, so that can only mean one of two things. Either he wants to have a Palestinian state in that section of the Middle East or he really is stupid and doesn’t get this. And like I said, I don’t think he’s stupid, just misguided. So it is obviously not the latter. He must want a Palestinian state. 

As some of you may know, or may not know, or may not even care, today was Chick-fil-A appreciation day. Chick-fil-A has been in controversy lately due to its owner (Mr. Cathy) saying that he has strong Christian values, including traditional marriage; the belief that marriage should stay between a man and a woman. Many people have taken offense to Mr. Cathy’s recent remarks and have verbally assaulted the fast-food chain calling them bigots and homophobes. 

There are several things that bother me about this whole situation, and one is the verbal assault of the company. While you can absolutley agree or disagree with Mr. Cathy’s statements, he and his company should not be demonized for what was said. He gave his opinion and you just have to deal with it. If you don’t like it, fine, don’t eat there. Nobody is making you go there and eat. I know some people are more upset with the fact that Chick-fil-A donates a lot of its money to anti-gay marriage groups. Still, nothing changes. If you don’t like it, then don’t go there; it’s that simple. Don’t demonize a whole entire company because of something they said, they have every right to say it, and people, regardless of what they say, should not be demonized for what they say. That’s why we have the First Amendment. I think this issue would be much worse and my opinion would be extrememly different if Chick-fil-A was refusing service to gay people or refusing to hire them. But that is not the case, it is much less extreme than that. 

Another thing that bothers me about this is the “bigotry” arguement. Let’s get something straight: just because you are anti-gay marriage does not mean you are anti-gay or homophobic. Many religious beliefs define marriage between a man and a woman, and many also state how being gay is a “sin”. But that still does not mean anti-gay. Everyone sins anyway, and most religions preach about loving one another and getting along with each other. One can easily be against gay marriage, yet totally show love to his neighbor who is gay. For instance, one may not condone or agree with the drug addicts lifestyle or habits, but that doesn’t mean they love that person any less. Disagreement is not a stepping stool to bigotry, there is a fine line between the two. Are there some people who are against gay marriage just because they hate gays? Of course, there are always crazies in every sect of something, but they are rare. 

Another thing about today that needs to be mentioned: today is not about gay marriage. Today is about freedom of speech. I went to Chick-fil-A today not because of gay marriage, but because of freedom of speech. I rarely eat Chick-fil-A anyway. But as I said early, every company has the right to say and do what they want, and whether or not you agree, that company should not be demonized because of it. Because of the country we live in, we have the right to protest in other ways, like not shopping there. Mayors of several big cities (Chicago, Boston, and San Francisco) have said publicly that they do not want Chick-fil-A’s in their cities, all have now retracted those statements, but a city can not ban a restaurant from opening in it’s city based on political belief. That’s un-American and unconstitutional. 

In the end, the choice is up to you to do what you want. If you want to support Chick-fil-A, fine. If you don’t want to, also fine. No one is stopping you from either, and no one should demonize you for doing either. And just for the record, many are saying how gay marriage is a civil rights issue, it’s not, because marriage isn’t even a civil right. I urge you to treat those around you with respect, even if you disagree with them, because that to me is really what this is about. Hell, if I didn’t like or respect those with whom I disagree with I wouldn’t have any friends.

I am sure most of you know that today the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled in favor of the Obamacare legislation. The vote came as a surprise to most conservatives, including myself, who thought that the legislation would die in the SCOTUS.  Quite frankly, I could talk forever about this subject, but it is so complicated that I could never fully eradicate the conversation. So instead, I am only going to make a few points. 

Why is it the government’s job to give you health care? Do you really trust the government handling something as personal and important as your health? I sure as hell don’t. Democrats tried endlessly to kill legislation for the PATRIOT Act when it was first brought up because it, “intervened in personal liberties.” Well, guess what? So does Obamacare. You really want the government telling you when you can get your medication, when you can have your surgery? There is already an extreme shortage of nurses and doctors in this country, and this law provides health care for 30- 40 million Americans. With an extreme shortage of medical personnel, how is one supposed to get good quality health care with so many people seeing the same doctor? This bill also REQUIRES businesses with more than 50 employees to provide health care for their workers, or they will be taxed. How are businesses supposed to hire when they are worried about being taxed even more by the federal government? They won’t hire more; in fact, most businesses with full-time employees do offer health care to their workers anyway. The ones that don’t, don’t do it out of selfishness and greed, they do it because they don’t have enough money to do so.   

My main point is this: do you really want the government to control your health care? The government controls almost ever aspect of our lives already; you really want the government to control more? The federal government can’t even control our border or balance the budget. Federal regulated transportation is horribly managed (Amtrak anyone?), the Department of Justice is a total joke, I could go on. So think about it, do you really want our incompetent government controlling your health?

For the people saying it isn’t a tax, IT IS A TAX! The Supreme Court even changed the ruling making it one. Obama and the Democrats said in 2009 that it was not a tax, that it was a “penalty,” well Obama, looks like it is a tax. You can not force Americans to buy a product and then tax them if they don’t buy it. Where does it end? Tomorrow the government could come out and say that all Americans need to buy carrots, or a Chevy Volt, or whatever, and then tax the people for not complying.

Politicians and diapers need to be changed frequently, and for the same reason. 

Many of you are probably assuming that I am going to be talking about the movie Fast and Furious. Well, I can assure that this has absolutely nothing to do with the movie. The Fast and Furious I am talking about was a sting operation set up by the Department of Justice. The goal of Fast and Furious was to track weapons from high level arms traffickers in Mexico. The United States supplied the weapons in order to see where the guns were going, but the Feds lost track of some of the guns, and 2 of the them ended up at a shoot out where US border patrol agent Brian Terry was killed. In the end, the government tried to cover it up, and obviously failed. 

If you have not heard of this scandal, I am not at all surprised. The mainstream media has completely ignored this story; however, they now have no choice but to report this story since the President invoked executive privilege this morning. The fact that President Obama invoked executive privilege comes as no surprise to me. Attorney General Holder has been going to hearings overseen by the Senate Judiciary Committee for over a year, and he has said numerous times that he did not no about Fast and Furious until much later on; however, he still refused to release documents pertaining to F&F. But since Holder has consistently refused to release the documents, the committee held him in contempt. 

There is no doubt in my mind, that President Obama is involved in this somehow. I could have easily believed before that he had no idea about this whole situation, but that fact that he invoked executive privilege today changes my mind. He is obviously hiding something, otherwise he wouldn’t have invoked executive privilege in the first place. I am of course just speculating, but this whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. I am not sure what level of involvement the President had in this, but I do believe he is involved somehow. I smell a cover up much like Watergate. 

I also find it ironic about what then Senator Obama said about President Bush when he used executive privilage back in 2007, “There has been a tendency on the part of this [Bush] administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there’s something a little shaky thats taking place. And I think the admistration would be best served, by coming clean on this.” Perhaps the President should listen to his own advice. 

In the end, I think this is was a bad decision by the President. This was Eric Holder’s mess, but now with this action by the President it has become Obama’s problem. I find it funny that Obama just created another mess for himself, one that he certainly doesn’t need, as he has had about 5 bad things happen to him over the past 2 weeks. As I mentioned the mainstream media had barely covered this story, but now they have to, though they will still make him look good somehow. Finally, I think Obama’s main objective was to drag this whole thing out. He knows this whole process will take months, or even over a year. Just enough time to delay any evidence from coming forward before the election in November. 

hermitologist:

Random Start: Nirvana, “Radio Friendly Unit Shifter”

Dave Grohl, you guys.

What a beast.

If you don’t own In Utero, open your right hand, look at your palm, and kindly put your face in it. And then buy it (for $4) here.