Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Who Decides Which U.S. Congressmen will Lose Seats?

Who Decides Which U.S. Congressmen will Lose Seats?
Al Ritter

According to the Constitution, states decide who will lose their seat in the U.S. Congress in the wake of the 2010 Census. This may sound fair on the surface, but only if there is a true bi-partisan assembly in the state in question. For instance, in the state of New York the Republicans control the state senate and the Democrats control the house. Decisions will be made by both houses then go to the Governor for a final signing. As of right now they intend to eliminate one seat in upstate and on in New York City, thus making a fair decision.

Where things take an ugly turn would be in states like Maryland (although no changes will be made here.) Our state senate and house have a super majority in favor of Democrats. In Maryland we have 8 U.S. Congressional representatives whom are all Democrats except one. If we had to eliminate one U.S. Congressman, it wouldn’t take much of an imagination to see which one we would lose.

Partisan control is ugly, it is self-serving to the elite, and it alienates the masses. Maryland’s population supposedly grew 9% in the last 10 years (which I find hard to believe with the mass exodus of the wealthy,) but what happens in the next election if that population drops? By then hopefully things won’t matter because Roscoe Bartlett will have finally retired, and the Socialist Republic of Maryland will have total power and control!

Monday, December 27, 2010

The Year in Review: The 111th Congress

The Year in Review: The 111th Congress
Al Ritter

Who can possibly forget the disastrous year of the 111th Congress? A collection of elitist progressives that took over the law making body of the United States government in an attempt to spread the message of liberal progressivism. A claim can be made that the super majority needed to pass virtually ANY bill into passage was hypocritical at best, and became unconstitutional at worst.

We saw two senators die while in office this year, and frankly this was the ONLY way to relinquish those seats….Edward Kennedy and Robert Byrd, thus removing those thrones from the establishment, and offering them back to the people. In the house we saw the passing of yet another antagonistic political figure Rep. John Murtha from PA. The passing of these senators and congressmen did nothing to subdue the open season on the American people until November 2 when the message became loud and clear that the citizens want not only the spending radically reduced, but want their representatives to return the power to the citizens, they want their representatives to represent them and not the special interests that funded their campaign.

These are the main laws that were passed in the 111st congress, but who can forget the main insults to the American people such as the ”Pay as you go act,” by the way what ever happened to that one? Or the”Stimulus Act,” or that incredibly stupid “Cash for Clunkers” or the “Obamacare debacle? Or how about the Dodd and Frank lending rules, you know those regulations that they didn’t want in the Bush administration, but NOW after the collapse see as so important? Then the very popular repeal of “Don’t ask don’t tell?”

Conservatives need to remember that we have only weeded out about 1/3 of the progressives so bent on destroying this country in November 2010. In 2012 we need to remove as many of these socialists as possible to give the vote back to the people and remove it from the hands of those whom only vote the way of their campaign donators!

Main article: Acts of the 111th United States Congress

January 29, 2009: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-2
February 4, 2009: Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (SCHIP), Pub.L. 111-3
February 17, 2009: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Pub.L. 111-5
March 11, 2009: Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub.L. 111-8
March 30, 2009: Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-11
April 21, 2009: Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, Pub.L. 111-13
May 20, 2009: Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-21
May 20, 2009: Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-22
May 22, 2009: Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-23
May 22, 2009: Credit CARD Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-24
June 22, 2009: Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, as Division A of Pub.L. 111-31
June 24, 2009: Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 including the Car Allowance Rebate System (Cash for Clunkers), Pub.L. 111-32
October 28, 2009: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, including the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Pub.L. 111-84
November 6, 2009: Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, Pub.L. 111-92
December 16, 2009: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, Pub.L. 111-117
February 12, 2010: Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, as Title I of Pub.L. 111-139
March 4, 2010: Travel Promotion Act of 2009, as Section 9 of Pub.L. 111-145
March 18, 2010: Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, Pub.L. 111-147
March 23, 2010: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub.L. 111-148
March 30, 2010: Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, including the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, Pub.L. 111-152
May 5, 2010: Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-163
July 1, 2010: Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-195
July 21, 2010: Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub.L. 111-203
August 3, 2010: Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-220
August 10, 2010: SPEECH Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-223
September 27, 2010: Small Business Jobs and Credit Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-240
December 8, 2010: Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-291, H.R. 4783
December 13, 2010: Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-296, S. 3307
December 17, 2010: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-312, H.R. 4853
December 22, 2010: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, Pub.L. 111-321, H.R. 2965
Bills and footnotes supplied by Wikipedia

Friday, December 24, 2010

Damage Control

Damage Control
Kevin Bryant

RINOs, RINOs Everywhere, Where The Hell Are The Conservatives?

Lindsey Graham, the 2nd worst RINO in the US Congress, in my opinion, is the first one to recognize that he must start working on damage control now if he is to go uncontested in his bid for re-election. John McCain, congresses 4th worst RINO pulled off a successful re-election bid against a formidable opponent who possesses a stronger conservative resume than McCain, by basically lying to the people. Scott Brown, a US Senator who rode the wave of the TEA Party to get himself elected to office has shown no inclination that he plans on supporting the principles of the TEA Party. Throw in the RINO Twins, Collins and Snowe from Maine and no matter what, these people and the other RINOs in office will not allow real conservatism to rule the Republican Party.

The 2010 Election sent a clear message to those in congress that we are sick and tired of being ruled by those in Washington. We are fed up with the wasteful and reckless spending. These people do not care. They want things to be as they think it should be, not what the American people think how and what Washington business should be.

2010 was a start and conservatives were able to get rid of some of the dead weight in Washington, but our job is not done. In the House, John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan have already shown since the last election that Party overrides principal on certain matters. This will only continue to get worse the deeper as the 2011 congressional session starts and goes into full swing. As much as I hate to say this, Cantor and Boehner, as well as Mitch McConnell needs to go. Ryan can stay but should be removed from his leadership position.

In 2012, 2014 & 2016, we cannot allow these people to remain in office. I know this is a dangerous approach to getting rid of those who support the people only when it serves their own interest because it opens those seats up to serious challenges from the liberal political pool. It is dangerous but it must be done. If we conservatives are serious about taking back our country and putting the power of Washington back into the hands of the people as the Constitution intended, then we must throw caution to the wind and stand on our principals. It wouldn’t hurt to pray for a little assistance from our creator who endowed us with the power to control our own lives for a little assistance either.

Those that need to go will be the ones working the hardest to do damage control in order to stay in power in the coming months and years. If they were true conservatives like Michelle Bachman, Jim DeMint, Ron Paul and I truly believe Rand Paul will be, it would only make sense that there would be no need to try to defend your voting record.

We did not accomplish our job in 2010. We set the process in motion of weeding out those in congress that would allow America and its people to be harmed and less free as a result of political policy and politics. Unfortunately, we did allow some to remain (JOHN McCAIN) despite knowing their records because either they were as good at lying to the people as our current President is or we allowed emotion to cloud our better judgment.

You don’t change the political direction by removing those at the bottom and praying those at the top got the message. It didn’t work in 2010 and it will not work in the coming years. We have to remove the leadership in the same way you cut off the head of a snake to ensure it is dead. If we want a real political shift in America, we need to cut off the head of the Republican & Democrat Parties in each house, making sure we send a clear and undeniable message to the nest head that emerges that his or her head is literally on the chopping block the second they assume a leadership role or he/she will cease to exist politically.

Which “so called Republicans” need to go as soon as possible, look no further than the 2010 congressional lame duck session voting records.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

“Don’t Ask, It Smells”

“Don’t Ask, It Smells”
Louis Lazarus

The question now becomes who else is eligible to serve in the U. S. military just because they want to? With the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this week, we have opened up a can of worms the likes of which we can’t even imagine. Once again, the people who do EVERYTHING WRONG have not failed to keep their streak going. With one stroke of the pen, the most radical and liberal president we’ve ever had has managed to add one more success in his quest to destroy our country. Serving in the military is not a right. It is a privilege. The military is not an ordinary job that you do from 9 to 5. You are on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and the nations security is what this job is all about. When the military runs smoothly, the nation is most secure. When there is unhappiness in the ranks, we are all in danger whether we know it or not.

A fringe group of abnormal people otherwise known as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender, thought they had a right to join the military even though there were common sense laws and rules against such folly. There were rules covering sexual behavior as well as age, height, weight, vision, hearing and a whole host of other qualifications. Theoretically, this opens the door for old people who want to “serve their country” to join our armed forces. After all, if you can break one rule, why not break them all?

Why shouldn’t an 80-year-old man be allowed to serve his country with the highest honor? The liberal mind should be able to come up with all sorts of reasons why this should happen. Maybe that person wasn’t able to serve when he was a young man…or woman. But, now that this person is older, he or she has the time and desire to join the service. You could also make the case for extremely obese people as well as those who can’t hear, walk or see. Why not? Everybody should be able to serve his or her country. Right? The problems these people might cause really don’t matter. What really matters is the individual. Every individual should be able to join the military just because they want to. To the conservative mind, this will seem really foolish. To the liberal mind, this will make perfect sense.

Let’s examine a few of the problems the repealing of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is going to cause. Obviously a homosexual is attracted to people of the same sex. This means a homosexual man is likely to become aroused when he sees a naked man in the shower. If this is acceptable, then why not just allow men and women to live, bathe, sleep and do whatever they like, where ever they like and when ever they like? It’s the new politically correct military. Another problem that is likely to arise is going to come when a homosexual is passed over for promotion. He or she will claim the reason for not getting the promotion was due to their homosexuality. The dispute will have to be settled in court. One more area of concern is housing. Are homosexuals going to be able to share a house the same way, as do heterosexual married couples?

Are homosexuals going to be allowed to marry each other? Are homosexuals going to attend military balls and dances? How about medical coverage? How about a transgender wanting a change of sex operation at the taxpayer’s expense? City employees in San Francisco are covered for just such an operation. What about the military dress code? Suppose a man wants to dress as a woman or a woman wants to dress as a man? What are they going to do? If a man is allowed to dress as a woman, which rest room will he use? How about the question of military careers? Are normal people who have several years in service going to re-enlist? Are they going to put up with all this foolishness? I doubt it. With the signing of this ridiculous bill, we could theoretically have two men enlisting, wanting to dress as women, wanting to marry each other and both demanding a change of sex operation. This same couple could then demand they be allowed to adopt a child. After all…why shouldn’t they be able to? There are no rules anymore. Liberals don’t like to hurt anyone’s feelings.

No doubt there are more consequences to this dumbest of dumb laws. Who can think of them all? Once we go down this road, there is no chance of turning back. Once homosexuals are allowed to be part of the mainstream, everybody is going to be allowed to be part of the mainstream. At some point, normal people are going to become “the fringe group”. We’re well on our way to that point in time.

Nancy Pelosi seemed ecstatic when this law was repealed. To my way of thinking, whenever this lunatic of a woman is happy, the rest of us have all the reason in the world to be sad. She is the barometer of wackiness. Her thoughts and ideas are so far left; there really is no way to describe them. The woman is Catholic and she totally supports partial birth abortion. This alone should tell the average American what kind of person she really is. There isn’t one ounce of common sense in her entire body. When you see her smiling, it’s time to hunker down and prepare for the worst. She smiled a really big smile this week.

Once again I want to point out that the source for all of our misery is this twisted thinking by liberals. We just don’t think like they think. It’s not in our genes. They have a missing gene, crossed wire, short circuit or something mentally defective that makes them this way. The problem is they are causing a danger to our lives. The only solution is to separate due to irreconcilable differences. My first blog dealt with this idea and the more brilliant, the more workable this idea becomes. We can all still be Americans but there is no reason we should have to live with them and put up with their thoughts and ideas…especially if they endanger our lives. Please re-read my first blog and give the idea some serious thought. The separation of the United States into two countries could energize our economy. Jobs would be created and ultimately people would be happier.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell worked. It wasn’t great but it did work. Now that a person can be openly abnormal in his or her sexual preferences, there is no limit to the problems this is going to cause. It’s just another reason to cause us grief. They will never stop doing this. If there is a better solution, please don’t be shy. Contact me on my Facebook page and maybe, just maybe we can improve life in this country for everyone. That’s really all I want!!

Monday, December 20, 2010

Politics, and their effect on Hollywood

Politics, and their effect on Hollywood
Al Ritter

I find it funny how Hollywood keeps rehashing old movies because of their lack of imagination and creativity. Are there no new ideas or writers in Hollywood? I’m sure you have thought the same thing at one time or another in the last decade, as the old classics and mediocre weekly TV shows get remade with today’s “vanilla stars.”
However some new and fresh writing comes out time to time, and even so they seem to bomb in the box office never the less. Maybe it’s just me but I find myself playing connect the dots on the reason why.

Many Hollywood stars of today seem to drawn to making political stances as if their life has been filled with the study of political science and not the theatrical arts. We don’t watch movies because of their political stance but because they have the ability (some more than others) to entertain us. This has baffled me, because I wonder why an entertainer would be willing to sacrifice half their audience and fans to make a political statement.

Never the less I watch as the usual suspects in this assault continue to make movies and the box office rankings continue to drop for these political activists. Sean Penn, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Matt Damon, George Clooney……..but you know all the names, I don’t need to tell you who they are. In fact a little over 10 years ago they were known as the “brat pack.”

Some of these actors have already floated into obscurity only to be replaced by the next generation of polarizing actors. They fail to see that they are becoming the very thing they seem to be fighting!

I truly wonder if the problem of sagging box office sales is from poor writing, or rather a result of the actor’s need to have his or her opinion heard on political matters…………..just look at the box office rankings today and see if you don’t agree.

Friday, December 17, 2010

The United States Golf Association and The United States Constitution

The United States Golf Association and The United States Constitution
Louis Lazarus

The following is dedicated to President Barack Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid
and all those members of this current administration who break all the rules they can every chance they get.

Golf is to some the greatest game ever invented by man. To others, it’s a really stupid game. You hit a ball with a stick and then go chase it and hit it again. Your goal is to knock that stupid little ball into a hole that is far away in as few shots as possible. Could anything be dumber? The ball isn’t moving when you hit it and nobody is making any noise trying to disturb you. You can take your time and when you are absolutely ready you simply swing the stick and try to hit the ball “out there” somewhere toward the hole. Out there somewhere can be around 300 yards away and the only way you can hit another shot is to walk 300 yards, find your ball and hit it again, and again and again until you knock it in a rather small hole that isn’t much bigger than the ball. The pleasure comes from doing it right. It isn’t as easy as it looks and when you do get right, it feels rather good. In fact, there almost isn’t a feeling at all. It’s a pure rush to hit the ball perfect and then watch it soar toward the place where you aimed it. This doesn’t happen very often to even the best of players so you can imagine how often it happens to those of us with much less skill. Yet, we go out and play as often as we can all the while just trying to get it right. You can play golf for 50 years and still have no clue as to how to get it right. There are as many ways to swing that stick, as there are golfers. The way you hold onto the implement is up to you. Some say there are several recommended ways that will generally give you the best results more of the time but yet there is no one way you have to do it. The way you stand is up to you also. You can place your feet and body in any position you like or that is most comfortable. You can even wear special shoes just made for golf that help prevent your feet from slipping. There’s even a special glove to make it easier to hold on to the club while you swing it. The stick is actually called a golf club and it’s now designed by scientists and engineers to make your efforts more productive. The new clubs are designed in such a way as to help the ball get air born and travel the greatest distance possible for the amount of force applied. The balls are also a scientific miracle. The sticks and balls were originally so primitive it’s a wonder people had any kind of fun. The original stick was actually a Sheppard’s staff which he used to control his flock of sheep and the original ball was a rock. The hole was something dug by a rabbit or gopher. The equipment these days is simply wonderful and yet the game still remains very hard to play well. The original golf course was nothing more than pasture land. It was as natural as God made it. Today golf architects design golf courses and there is so much science and engineering that goes into making a great golf course it’s mind blowing. The architect is presented with a plot of land to work with and he sculpts out a creation that is like a work of art. The course is designed to be fun, challenging and beautiful all at the same time. The tees, fairways, bunkers and green are manicured to perfection. Even with all of this the simple game is still hard.

Now you’d think a simple but hard game should have little or no rules but golf is a game of contrary. It looks simple but it is hard to play well. The rules should seem simple but yet they are complex. The most important thing in golf is honor. It doesn’t matter what score you shoot but it does matter how honorably you played. You are supposed to, while on the golf course; follow all the rules to the letter. In golf, that can be a monstrous task because there are so many rules. When you do break a rule, it is expected that you call a penalty of one or more strokes on yourself. If your opponent sees that you broke a rule, he will advise you so. If you did break that rule, you will incur the penalty. It’s usually one stroke but sometimes it can be more. If you break a rule and nobody sees you do it, you STILL CALL THE PENALTY on yourself. Think about that last statement! It’s the only game where this takes place. Some of these rules are just downright silly and we golfers know this but yet we do follow the rules because that’s what golfers do. Cheating in golf is about as low as it gets. For example, if your ball is on the green and you are getting ready to putt and you have addressed the ball by grounding your putter behind the ball and you see the ball move a thousandth of an inch due to the wind but nobody else sees it, it is expected that you call a penalty of one stroke on yourself. Is that fair? No. But, those are the rules. We all do it. There are tens if not hundreds of crazy rules like this but we follow them all. We play the game honorably and we call penalties on ourselves when we break the rules, knowingly or otherwise. There are times when we actually lose a match or competition because of some stupid rule that we called on ourselves.

What’s my point with all of this? Why all this talk about golf and rules? What’s so important about golf?

Golf is life. Golf is what life should be. Golf is what life can be. Golf is a journey from the very beginning all the way to the end. It is filled with ups and downs, highs and lows, good breaks and bad breaks and at no time do you not play fairly and by the rules. You don’t even think about it. You just do it. You play the game fairly because it’s the right way to play the game. You deal with adversities and sometimes you overcome them and sometimes you don’t. You’re judged on how well you dealt with these adversities and your score reflects exactly that. You know in your heart if you’ve played well and have done your best. Sometimes you go play and your score doesn’t reflect your skill level and sometimes it does. Sound familiar? That’s golf. That’s life.

The USGA (United States Golf Association) is responsible for writing and interpreting the rules of golf. Those rules are “our Constitution” when we are on the golf course. We live, and die by those rules because we believe in them and we believe in the spirit of the game. It’s just a game. It is just golf and it is no big deal. We play for fun and yet we do take it seriously. We’d rather lose than cheat. When we make a mistake, we tell others even if they didn’t see us do it. The scale of importance of our golf game in the big scheme of things is almost non-existent. Yet, the other game we all play, the game of life, we don’t play by the rules. Our leaders, with whom we’ve entrusted our lives, lie, cheat and steal every chance they get. Is a game of golf more important than the game of life? I think not. I think when you have been selected to represent other people, there is nothing MORE IMPORTANT than playing by the rules and playing “the game” fairly. Lying, cheating and stealing are not things we do on our journey through life. When our elected officials do it, their behavior affects all of us. They are the role models who we’ve chosen to represent our values and us. Should they not play by the rules all the time? When they make a mistake, should they not call a penalty on themselves? We don’t expect perfection in golf and we certainly don’t expect perfection in life. However, we do expect honesty in both. There can be no exceptions.

Our Constitution is our Rule Book. We all play the game of life here in this country. Unlike some other countries, we are all expected to play by the rules. When we find ourselves in a situation that is uncomfortable, we don’t cheat and we don’t lie. We deal with it as best we can and then tally up the score when we’re finished. We won’t be judged on our score. We will be judged on how well we played the game.

The rules are explicit. The rules govern the game we love and play. The rules apply to all. Golfers know this. Golfers follow the rules without exception. When golfers don’t follow the rules they are disqualified from the game. Wouldn’t it be nice if we were all golfers?

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Omnibus Spending Bill?

Omnibus Spending Bill?
Al Ritter

Obviously Congress is either in denial, or even worse they want retribution. The Democrats in the house and senate surely didn’t get the memo from the November elections when they lost their super majority in the house, and almost lost the senate.

The country is tired of a government who can’t control their poor spending habits. It has been recently reported that the problem is not revenue, but rather spending. Congress on the average spends $1.80 for every $1.00 collected in fees or taxes. It may be different if America had the money for these spending habits. The problem is that we don’t, and to add borrowing interest to the mix only adds to the deficit.
Subsidizing every unemployed citizen for 99 weeks is certainly adding to the $14 trillion dollar debt, and as long as democrats are in control shows no signs of subsiding.

The lame duck democrats (the ones voted out,) seem to have some sort of axe to grind on America. They are blaming US for the national debt and now they have been voted out they want to impose and saddle the incoming house with a myriad spending bills.

We HAVE to stand up and tell them we have had enough! Let someone else drive that car democrats, we see what you have done to the national deficit in just 4 short years, and we don’t like it! We can only hope that the incoming republicans can reverse the damage you have done!

Monday, December 13, 2010

Absolute Power Never Dies Quietly

Absolute Power Never Dies Quietly
Al Ritter

For the first time in two years, the president had to make concessions on renewing the Bush tax cuts. It was now or never to actually bargain to give something to “get” something. President Obama wanted to extend unemployment benefits yet again, and used the Bush tax cuts in their entirety as a bargaining chip to get his part of the deal through.

For the first time in his presidency I thought he did what was “right,” he actually participated in give and take. At least the president understands that the political winds are changing and that the house must return to those pesky things like debating bills before they get passed in the cloak of darkness. No longer will he be able to force things through the house and senate in a mere two days. No longer will we just have to “pass the bill to see what’s in it outside the fog.”

Obama begrudgingly got the message in November that things won’t just go his way in the last two years of his presidency. Unfortunately the house never got the memo, and now house democrats like Anthony Weiner and his ilk are forming a mutiny on the high seas of the house, in an effort to tell the president he didn’t bargain hard enough?

Dictatorial Napolionic democrats will never give in without a fight, even when they see that the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train. They want to fight until the last man is standing, and if they don’t expediently learn the art of bargaining, their prophecy just may come true……….they will go into political extinction. The public is tired of the bickering, they want to see the two sides coexist and do things together, not just stand on two opposite sides and toss bombs back and forth.

Friday, December 10, 2010

I Need Some Opinions

I'd like to introduce you to a new writer, this article bristled my feathers, but Louis wants to know your opinions...............

Louis Lazarus

Personally I am sick to death of arguing about everything with liberals. No matter what the issue, they take the complete opposite stand and sometimes I do believe it is only for spite. My sense is that a lot of us feel the same way. Life would be great if it wasn't for these idiot Democrats and their even more idiotic ideas. The question then becomes is there something we're overlooking so that conservatives and liberals can get along OR is it a case of oil and water where the two cannot possibly mix?

My contention is we will never get along with them because we don't think like them and they will never get along with us because they don't think. The next question is what would it be worth to us to live life without ever having to deal with liberals and their stupid ideas? What would we be willing to do if we never had to deal with such silly things as spread the wealth around, gay marriage, tax the rich, crazy environmentalists, giving free college to children of illegal aliens and the gobs and gobs of other stuff that just drives us nuts? Can we picture life without all this nonsense?

It occurred to me that maybe we should split up the country into two separate countries. We could divide the country in half by North and South, or East and West or even on the diagonal. The state boundaries would remain in tact.
One side would become The Liberal United States of America and the other side would be The Conservative United States of America. Each side would be it's own country and would have the same Constitution as we have now. Each side would start out with what is provided for in our Constitution but the liberal side would be free to modify and change whatever they wanted and however they wanted. The Conservative side would follow the Constitution the way it is now. Both sides would start as equitably as humanly possible.

Of course this wouldn't be an easy thing to do and the first reaction would be to wonder "what if I'm a conservative and where I live is part of The Liberal United States of America"? The quick answer is that nobody would be forced to move. The only downside is your life would pretty much continue the way it is now. Liberals would still run your life and you will still continue to be driven crazy by their ridiculousness. However, if you decided to move to The Conservative United States of America, you would be welcomed into your new home and everything that could possibly be done to help you would be done. Once you relocated, your life would be as you always imagined it. For example, both sides could share a shuttle service that would transport conservatives to the conservative side and then liberals to the liberal side. Both sides could share the expense and that would be a way for both sides to work together toward a common goal. There could be “pick up” and “drop off” points and once the people reached these points, the rest of the trip would be free. Both sides would equally benefit because they would be getting the type of people they prefer. Liberals would also be free to have a shuttle service on the Mexican border. My sense is the would want that region as part of their country. In all probability, The Liberal United States would include all the states that border Mexico so my state of California would be included. That would mean I would have to move if I wanted to live in The Conservative United States. Personally, I would do that in a heartbeat just to have the opportunity never to watch Alan Colmes, Ellis Hennigan, Bob Beckel, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi et al ever again on any TV news show. The idea that I wouldn’t have to imagine Nancy Pelosi jumping over any fences or parachuting into my country would offset whatever inconvenience there would be in relocating. And, that’s just for starters. Imagine everything else you would no longer have to put up with.

Things would make sense in our country. Criminals would go to jail and stay there. Illegal aliens would be sent to The Liberal United States of America where they would be welcomed. There would be a flat and fair tax and you would never be punished for your success. Gay marriage wouldn't even be an issue at all because it's just too stupid for words. However, domestic partnerships would be allowed and those people would of course be welcome. We would have a military and they wouldn't because they hate guns and violence. We would get all the guns. They would get no guns at all and they wouldn’t have a military, which would give them a fiscal advantage. However, should any country decide to invade our friends and neighbors in The Liberal United States of America they would suffer severely? We would give the world fair notice of what we were doing and in the event any country attacked or invaded any part of the two nations of The United States (sounds a bit crazy, but hang in there…it will make sense) The Conservative United States would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons without warning. We would also make it clear that a mistake could be made and we just might launch on an innocent country but frankly we don’t care anymore. After what the world has put us through, we are fed up and if you aren’t an ally, you are an enemy of this country and would be treated as such. Absolutely no attacks on us would go unpunished. The punishment would be swift and not in any way fair or equitable. There would be no more “bringing the guilty to justice” policy in the new Divided United States of America.

We conservatives would all have the right to own guns and carry them once we've been certified. They would have no guns because they hate guns. Are you starting to get the point? Life would ultimately be as you always dreamed it would be. Playing by the rules would just be automatic. There side would continue to have what I would describe as NFL players. That is to say, people who think cheating is totally permissible and encouraged. Our side would primarily consist of PGA (tournament golfers) where not only is cheating not permitted or even considered but calling penalties on yourself is common. Our politicians wouldn’t be career politicians. They would serve two terms in a whole lifetime and then they were exempt from ever serving in politics again. They would be highly paid but when their terms are up, they are up for good. They would go home to their real jobs…just like The Founding Fathers intended. They wouldn’t have to spend all their time trying to get re-elected. The Libland would have no conservatives to get in their way so they could just continue to be corrupt with each other. We really wouldn’t care at all. In Conservative Land, there would be no corruption and in case we found corruption, those people would be tried and if deemed guilty would be sent to prison. There would be capital punishment in our country and there wouldn't be capital punishment in their country because they value psychotic life. As for abortion, it would only take place when absolutely necessary such as in cases of rape or incest. That issue would be between the woman and her doctor. Period. End of story. Nobody would tell you what you could or couldn't eat. We would run our country according to the Founding Fathers wishes and they could do what ever they felt like doing. Jobs would be created on our side because we would encourage individuals to take risks because they would be rewarded. Jobs would also be created just handling the influx of people into our half and helping those who wished to leave get settled into their half. They would also benefit because of an influx of liberals. Jobs would be created on their side too. In the event people moved to their side and didn't want to work, they wouldn't have to. They would get paid for not working the same way liberals do now. There would be changes but it wouldn't be as bad as one would think.

This may not be the perfect solution, but I think the idea has some merit. We would simply be two countries living in the same fifty (or fifty seven) states on the same continent but on two different sides. We would share a common border and people would be free to come and go just like they do in Europe. We would build a fence to keep illegal aliens out of our side and we would make sure our borders were secure. They would benefit too because nobody would try to "sneak" into our country where they wouldn't be welcome or rewarded handsomely. The illegal aliens would simply "pop in" to The Liberal United States of America" anytime they wanted. In fact, the entire country of Mexico could just move out of Mexico and into Libland.

Of course we know The Liberal United States of America would be doomed to fail because socialism doesn't work...ever. Before long they would be asking for our help and we would then have to make a decision as to whether we wanted to help them or not. We already know what would happen if we said yes so my instincts tell me there would have to be some drastic changes made if they wanted to come back to a place where reality exists.

I would appreciate some feedback on this. What would you be willing to put up with or give up to live in a land where everything makes sense? Would you mind moving if it meant you didn't have to turn on the news and see idiots like Barack Obama talking down to you and telling you to spread your wealth around? Would it be worth some sacrifice if you never had to look at Chuck Schumer again? Does the thought of having an all-conservative Supreme Court that actually followed the Constitution excite you? How great would it be to not even consider building Mosques anywhere in our country and especially near Ground Zero? Would we get New York? Would we get Los Angeles? Those answers are in the details.

One side could divide the country as they saw fit and then the other side would get first choice as to what side they wanted thus encouraging the side that did the dividing to do it as equitably as possible. The new countries would all have to be made up of adjoining states. You couldn’t really have a state here and a state there. There would have to be one common border. Everything would be done that way. It would take at least a decade but I can promise jobs would be created and people would be happy once everything was completed. They would be happy because they wouldn't have to deal with us and we would be happy because nonsense and foolishness would be a thing of the past.

Any and all suggestions or ideas are welcome. If you think the plan is lunacy, go ahead and say so. If you think it's the most brilliant thing you've ever heard, by all means let me know. If this idea has merit, then maybe we can present it to one of the new representatives and he or she could bring it up on the House Floor. Who knows what the reaction would be?


1. Jamey Little, my Facebook friend, suggests that as the liberal states fail and come begging to us for help, we have the option to annex them back into our side and they would then become a conservative state in our conservative half, never to be liberal again.

One thing is for sure; the way things are now is terrible. Everybody is in a bad mood and life is too short to feel that way all the time. We don’t wish liberals harm. We just don’t like their politics and they don’t like ours. There is nothing wrong with that. By dividing The United States of America into two separate but equal countries, we just might find ourselves more united than ever. This idea could make life for everyone better. In fact, we just might see the collapse of America turn into the rebirth of least half of it anyway. Only in America could such a thing actually work!! J

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Politically Incorrect or Purposely Blunt?

Politically Incorrect or Purposely Blunt?
Al Ritter

Our culture still battles about the term “politically correct,” as if it’s a political football only held by the moral high ground group. What do we really know about the term politically correct? It has been traced back as far as the 1790’s, but it was brought into the main stream by Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse.

This basic conception of language differences between those people concerned with offending others and those people not afraid to offend took root in the culture discussions of the
1980’s and 1990’s and has been brought to the forefront by the progressive liberals.

Within a few years, this previously obscure term featured regularly in the lexicon of the conservative social and political challenges against curriculum expansion and progressive teaching methods in US high schools and universities. It was the argument by the universities that the reason for lower test scores by any particular group was caused by continued use of politically incorrect terms that lowered self-esteem.

It was argued by the other side that the revisionist terms were leveled by a group that thought only on an emotional sense rather than using rational discourse. Thus the term and usage of the word politically correct took its place in the American political scene.

With the history of PC now out of the way let’s discuss the way it is used in today’s language. If it is true that the progressive liberals intend to speak from the idea of emotion rather than logical discourse, then logic is taken out of the equation in making rational decisions. Why has the political right allowed the left to only allow discussion on major issues to be done in emotional terms? Could it be that the right hasn’t been educated to the origins of the term political correctness?

Let’s look at a few ways to describe the attack on 9/11….if we said that “we were attacked on 9/11 by males,” we would have made a logical statement based on fact. If we claimed that “we were attacked by middle eastern men,” we would have made a statement based on logic, but now borderline politically incorrect. If we claimed that “we were attacked by Muslims,” we have made a statement based on fact, but HIGHLY offensive to the PC police.
When the FBI, the CIA, or the NSA compiles data they look towards “items in common.” Every sentence above shows those items in common between the attackers on 9/11, and HAS been logged in the history of the event by the respective governmental groups. The process is called “profiling,” and there are separate departments in each of these investigative branches paid to do just that, and yet terms such as we have outlined so far cannot be spoken outside of those departments because of PC.

Somehow the “PC police” of the left wing have their own groups of protectionism that are off limits. Some of these oppressed people are women, blacks, Latinos, Asians, and the newest group, Muslims. Even though a suicide bomber has never been a catholic, a Jew, or a Methodist, to cast Muslims as being the most likely to be a suicide bomber is politically incorrect, unless you place the magical words “radical extremist” before the word Muslim.
Why do we let political correctness jeopardize our physical safety? Israel has the most effective program to fight terrorism in the world; after all, they have been doing it for years longer than anyone else. They deal in facts; political correctness has no place in factual information, only in political discussion. Should politics figure into the safety of our citizens?

We are bound to failure if factual information is ignored in a process that formulates policy. Too often politics finds its way into every facet of life…………..politics should be the path to freedom, but lately it’s the politics that is removing freedom.

Monday, December 6, 2010

Wikileaks; A Terrorist Organization?

Wikileaks; A Terrorist Organization?
Al Ritter

The Administration is treating Julian Assange more like a petulant child than the terrorist organization it really is. Not one thing has been done to shut down the website even after the government enacted a new law granting them the ability to do so.

In a speech on the congressional floor a congresswoman accused the Administration of being more concerned about counterfeit Gucci bags and ripped off movies than they are about national security. Reportedly the administration is investigating the legal ramifications of shutting Wikileaks down. Legal ramifications? I’m confused, isn’t exposing national secrets against the law?

For 7 months now the Administration has merely sat on this problem and done nothing other than to arrest the Army private who supposedly downloaded a quarter of a million documents? Something is clearly not right about this story, but the damage continues to spiral out of hand.

Julian Assange is a terrorist plain and simple, and he needs to not only caught, but tried in federal court on espionage charges. To continue to ignore him only gives him relevance. He needs to be in jail away from any computer system. He started his career as a computer hacker, and now he’s graduated into using secret documents as a ransom chip.

If the Administration really wants to hide these additional security documents they should place them right next to Obama’s birth certificate where they would be most secure!

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

My Christmas Light Hanging Experience

My Christmas Light Hanging Experience
Al Ritter

Now to preface my remarks.......I HATE heights! I have a two story house with an extremely steep roof angle so my actions from herein with tainted with extreme FEAR! Of course when I bought my 24ft extension ladder I never saw the small print that said it only has a 19ft working height, this my first error.

My second error was to have a house whose edge of the roof is consistently over 21ft from the ground. Now my next big mistake was to decide to decorate in some sort of wind storm of 22mph winds. This requires me to hold onto the ladder with both hands in sheer terror, while praying for another "appendage" with which I could hang lights.

I had plenty of lights; you know the pretty little ones that blink on and off. So I went up my vertically challenged ladder hoping to use my height added to the ladder's to reach the gutter where I had to attach the lights. My next mistake was installing one of those gutter helmet systems, so now the stupid little clips that are used on everyone's gutters are sitting in a pile on the ground.

After a 5 mile round trip to my local Lowes, I found the clips I needed, just not enough to finish the job, but I figured I was off to a good start. After moving the ladder some 40 times while it was fully extended was a challenge in the now howling 30MPH gale force wind, but I was quite proud of myself braving the elements to make my house the best on the street.

At this point I think it's only fair to mention Hal's house.....he's my next door neighbor, all round nice guy, jack of all trades and DIYer short I hate him! He's one of those guys who could build a boat out of two raincoats and use a board for a paddle and make it across the Atlantic in records time. His house is beautiful and always kept perfectly manicured....have I mentioned I hate him?

Hal decorated his house in lights this weekend, actually it was only Saturday, and to be honest I think he did it in like 2 hours. After his wonderful feat, his wife brought over treats and punch to celebrate the initial house lighting at dark, which BTW happens at like 1:30 now........grrrrrrrrrrrr.

I was smiling just wishing that half his lights didn't work when he plugged them in........but I was wrong everything looked great......which brings me back to "my project." Nobody ever told me that you should actually test the light strings before installing them. Now I was faced with a dilemma, either put the ladder back up and buy some new lights, or just use the ones I already knew worked but just make a display on a smaller scale. Can't let Hal get all the glory you I gave in to the later.........Hal, buddy you don't have a thing on me!