Friday, April 30, 2010

Buycott Arizona

A couple of days ago, the wonderful and noteworthy bloggers at HillBuzz posted about the Arizona border debate.

Titled "Hey – do you like to buy stuff? Then buy stuff from Arizona. It’s BUYCOTT time, baby," the post and its comments section are a wonderful compliment to the efforts of those in Arizona's government who are trying to uphold the law.

From the post:

So, last night we had to order a couple of books for a project we’re working on, and we went to, like we usually do, to find the cheapest titles we could find. Instead of ordering from one of the Illinois or Indiana sellers like normal (because it would get to us faster), we looked through all the available books until we found a seller in Arizona.

Since the Left is caterwauling to “boycott Arizona” because Governor Jan Brewer decided to enforce the law against illegal aliens, we decided to support Arizona in our own small way, and bought something we needed, and were going to buy anyway, from an Arizona business.

While we were at it, we also looked online for an Arizona company that sells cactus candy, because we happen to love the stuff, and haven’t had any in a while. So, we got ourselves some of that, too, for the candy bowl here at Buzzquarters.

For the foreseeable future, whatever else we need, from candy to books to an Urn of Osiris or a kaleidoscope, we’re going to buy it from an Arizonan business as much as possible.

It’s a BUYCOTT, baby.

And, it’s hella on.

Read the rest of the post here, and be sure to scan through the comments section - it is absolutely inspiring to see so many people from areas outside Arizona stand up for those of us in the middle of the firestorm.

Quote of The Day

"Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a rapist an 'uninvited sex partner'."

- Mike Broomhead, KFYI AM 550.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Arizona S.B. 1070: Some of My Favorite Headlines

A couple of my favorite headlines related to the immigration debate revolving around Arizona S.B. 1070:

San Francisco Leads Charge to Boycott Arizona, But Calls Could Spark Backlash.

San Fransisco Mayor Gavin Newsom should think very long and hard before boycotting Arizona, and if he chooses to do so, he had better be prepared for a strong retaliation.

As this article from Fox News points out, Conservatives are just as capable of boycotting and waging economic warfare as are liberals, and San Fransisco and California may just need us more than we need them.

Today on Dennis Prager's radio show, he encouraged everyone in favor of Arizona's new law to boycott all San Fransisco Giants baseball games. Empty seats will send a message right back in their direction.

By acting in such an irresponsible, and dare I say "misguided" fashion, Mayor Newsom and other city or state leaders are essentially creating an economic civil war. At a time of such fiscal distress across our nation, American leadership should be coalescing in an effort to resolve our nation's issues rather than playing divisive racial politics.

City of Oakland moves toward Arizona boycott.

All of the aforementioned applies regarding the choices and consequences made by leadership types.

In addition, though... I'd have to believe that police chiefs across our state are high-five'ing each other!! Are you kidding me? Oakland? Really?

Lawsuits Over AZ Immigration Law Filed By Police Officer, Latino Group.

This article offers a few interesting points.

First, the lawsuit filed by 15-year Tucson police veteran Martin Escobar is based purely on politics and emotion. From the article:

In filing his suit against the law, Escobar, an overnight patrol officer in a heavily Latino area of Tucson, argued that there's no way for officers to confirm a person's immigration status without impeding investigations, and that the new law violates constitutional rights.

Officer Escobar is simply incorrect in his assertion that there's no way for officers to confirm a person's immigration status without impeding investigations. All an officer must do is ask for identification, just as he would during any other situation. This law calls for nothing out of the ordinary. If a person is not able to provide proper identification (as required by law in the case of green card holders) then that person should be detained until verification can be made through communication with federal authorities. And regarding Constitutional rights, I believe it is well understood by now that this law is simply a derivative of already existing federal statute.

Second, the suit filed by The National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders is incorrect on all fronts. While in theory it is correct that border security is federal jurisdiction, a state has the right to act in any way necessary to protect its sovereignty. Also, federal officials would hold suspected illegals during the time their status is verified and before conviction, therefore the state is acting as an agent of the federal government as defined in this law.

Also noteworthy in this article is the fact that Arizona lawmakers approved several changes to the law, including one that would strengthen restrictions in the law on using race or ethnicity as the basis for police questioning. The law's sponsor, Republican Sen. Russell Pearce, characterized those possible changes as clarifications "just to take away the silly arguments and the games."

And finally...

Illegal immigrants plan to leave over Ariz. law.

In other words... it's working!

Our apologies to the states in close proximity to Arizona. You may soon be overrun with masses of illegals attempting to avoid possible deportation as we Arizonans enforce the rule of law. We encourage you to contact your legislators and ask them to enact similar such laws.

Eventually if all goes well, all 12-20 million illegals will end up in San Fransisco. Once that happens, Gavin Newsom and his silly little sanctuary city can figure out how to maintain a budget while providing security, education, housing, and medical care to his new citizens.

Proof That It Is Not The Color of Skin, But Instead It Is Content of Character

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Arizona S.B. 1070, The Debate Over Illegal Immigration, and The Rule of Law

Throughout the the past weekend and into this week, I have watched and listened in amusement and amazement as pundits from both sides of the aisle discussed and debated the legitimacy and morality of Arizona Senate Bill 1070, which has come to be known as the "Arizona Immigration Bill."

Last Friday, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the controversial bill into law, and since that time we have witnessed a firestorm of fury from the left. The insanity and hyperbole from the left has been countered by a consistent and concise display of Constitutional understanding and reasonable discussion from the right, proving once again that liberals function within a realm of emotion while Conservatives operate from a perspective of the rule of natural law as it applies according to The United States Constitution.

I am not surprised at all by the reaction from the left. From "draconian" to "Gestapo-like," the left has portrayed Arizona's new law as a blatant excuse to racially profile. "Driving While Brown" has become the new catch phrase amongst some on the left to describe their hypothetical reason for possibly being pulled over by law enforcement.

Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles called the new law "Nazi and Soviet-style repression" in a blog - one full day before the State Legislators sent the bill to the governor's desk.

Huffington Post ran a headline calling calling the new law "harsh," while felon, friend of Obama, and Alinskyite Robert Creamer offered an Op-Ed on that site entitled "The Arizona of 2010 Is the Alabama of 1963."

The "Reverend" Al Sharpton has promised he will mobilize people from across the country to march in Arizona – and get arrested, if necessary – to stop the controversial new law.

“We will bring Freedom Walkers to Arizona just like Freedom Riders went to the deep south 50 years ago. [...] We cannot sit by and allow people to be arbitrarily and unilaterally picked off as suspects because of the color of their skin,” Sharpton said.

And of course it came as no surprise that President Barack Hussein Obama chimed in, calling the new law "misguided," and called for Eric Holder and the Obama Social Justice Department to investigate the law for "violations of civil rights."

Some have tried to debate the law's legitimacy based on their personal and political desire for The Constitution to supersede this State law, based on the Supremacy Clause as found in Article VI, Clause 2.

However, this argument fails miserably, based on the fact that S.B. 1070 as written is completely derived from Federal Statute. In fact, Arizona legislators were extremely careful when writing this bill to require local and state law enforcement officers to act within the confines of their normal duties before any immigration status discussion may be discussed. Furthermore, every section in the bill (which is only 17 pages long) provides reference to the specific Federal Statute to which the Arizona law enforcement officers and departments must abide.

Others are claiming that there will be infringements on the Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights of citizens. These questions are easily answered by anyone with a reasonable amount of common sense and some understanding of The Constitution.

The closest either of these two questions come to being reasonable is when applying the Fourteenth Amendment to the child of two illegal aliens, with said child being born inside United States territory. However, Arizona S.B. 1070 refers specifically to The Immigration and Nationality Act, which provides no exceptions for the children of illegal aliens, regardless of their place of birth.

All of this being said, in my opinion the most important aspect of this debate is the perspective of Arizona residents who are American citizens. With that in mind, I would like to offer the story of some of my personal experience, as well as some insight from someone living at what is quickly becoming "ground zero" in the debate over illegal immigration.

When I moved to Arizona from Ohio in early 2001, Phoenix was an up-and-coming city with many inviting possibilities. In particular, Phoenix and its surrounding communities offered a very clean, upbeat, and exciting environment with a positive outlook and a great deal of opportunity to offer.

I moved to Phoenix, Arizona specifically because of the Native American and Mexican history and culture in the region. I had visited Phoenix just one year prior to moving, and had also spent some time in the Southwest as a child. I was very aware of the fact that my new surrounding were going to be quite different than that to which I was accustomed, and I welcomed those differences. In other words, and completely contrary to what leftists would like to believe, I specifically chose Phoenix for it's racial and cultural diversity.

Certainly every major city has its issues, but I was fascinated by the Phoenix metropolitan area's lack of undesirable element. With the exception of one particular part of town, there was almost nowhere within the greater Phoenix area where I felt uncomfortable, regardless of the time of day.

During my first couple of years living here, I thoroughly enjoyed some of the cultural differences I observed.

The style of the cars young Mexican men drive, while certainly not in line with my personal preferences, is certainly intriguing. They take great pride in their workmanship, and each creates his own rolling four-wheeled personality to match his identity.

As a younger, newly single man, I was quite flattered by the flirtations of the Mexican women with whom I worked at my first couple of workplaces. I was flattered as I was called "muy guapo," and I spent many hours during work exchanging the learning of Mexican dialect and the teaching of English to many coworkers, both male and female.

Mexican music can be quite festive, and on many a lazy summer afternoon I enjoyed one of my neighbors opening their doors and turning up their stereo. Filled with excellent vocal harmonies, pleasing guitars, horn sections, and pleasant rhythms, the words might have made no sense to me, but it was pleasant nonetheless.

Hispanic families and their social networks can be quite a sight to behold. Many of my neighbors had gatherings for children's birthdays, wedding anniversaries, and other celebrations. These gatherings can become quite festive and large. As an example, a couple in my last apartment complex had a son, and for his third birthday there were probably 100 people at his party. I don't know how many were family and how many were friends, but they all acted like family. They were all very polite within their group, and they were very courteous to me and my former girlfriend, even inviting us to come partake in the food and fun.

Unfortunately over the past few years things in Phoenix have changed, and not for the better.

A part of Phoenix in which I used to live just five years ago is now a part of town to which most people will not travel unless they absolutely must, and certainly anyone in their right mind avoids that part of town after dark.

A coworker describes his neighborhood as "somewhere I used to feel comfortable, but now I don't go out at night unless I'm packing (a firearm)."

I've discussed the new law with two of my coworkers who have Mexican heritage.

One coworker is a second generation man who is roughly thirty years old, and his father was granted amnesty in 1986.

He is very concerned about the image that is being created by the recent wave of aliens that have come across the border. His father, like almost all from his generation and those before his, made every effort to assimilate, and my coworker and his father both see this new generation of Hispanic immigrants as selfish and irresponsible, paying no mind to the good graces of America and her people and their good fortune for having made it here alive.

The other coworker is a woman in her mid to late fifty's, and her opinion seems to be very much the same. I don't know exactly how and when she came to America or if she was born here, but she has quite a thick accent so I suspect she may be first generation. Regardless, she speaks English very well, and has told me that she refuses to speak Spanish anywhere, no matter her surroundings.

I don't think anyone living in Phoenix really thinks twice about most of the "brown" people living among us. As has been discussed over and over, most of the people who have migrated north have done so for very understandable reasons. They come from a land with nearly no opportunity whatsoever, and now their homeland is being overrun by violent drug cartels, and the corruption has deeply permeated law enforcement at nearly every level in Mexico, with the sole exception of the military.

However, there are many reasons to be concerned about the massive influx of humanity being experienced by The Grand Canyon State.

Our police force is greatly overextended.

Rather than working with local law enforcement, former Arizona governor turned DHS secretary Janet Napolitano has worked against the needs of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Phoenix police. Recently Napolitano's DHS halted construction and forward progress on any type of border security, citing budget concerns.

Our public school systems are overcrowded and underfunded. This problem is certainly not unique to Arizona, but there is no doubt the number of illegals whose children attend American schools free of charge and without paying taxes is overwhelming the system.

Just as is the case nationwide, Arizona's emergency rooms are overcrowded and understaffed. Enactment of the various levels of ObamaCare will certainly do nothing but worsen this already disturbing situation.

Like all of America, property values in Arizona were certainly damaged by the recent financial collapse, but homeowners will find their investments regaining value at a ration less than the national average in some parts of the state, as certain neighborhoods and regions are becoming undesirable.

Arizona has the second highest rate of vehicle theft in the nation.

Also, while John McCain was not quite correct in his statement that illegals are driving around the highways just trying to cause accidents, he was thinking in the right direction. What I believe he was referring to is a very troubling situation that we witness far to often here. This situation is the event of an accident between a legal driver and an illegal alien, after which the illegal will jump from the vehicle and abandon it in an effort to avoid law enforcement. This, in addition to vehicle theft, is causing insurance rates to skyrocket. Carrying state minimum liability insurance in Arizona is more expensive for me than was carrying full comprehensive and collision insurance in Ohio.

Phoenix has the second highest rate of kidnappings per capita in the world. Fortunately this has contained itself to the gang and drug activity that is a byproduct of illegal immigration, but many believe it is just a matter of time before this crime spills over into the general population.

Polls are showing seventy percent of Arizonans agree with S.B. 1070, with similar numbers in agreement nationwide.

However, we should not concern ourselves with positive polling any more than we should be concerned by negative reporting and incendiary rhetoric from the likes of Sharpton, Jackson, Mahoney, or some pop starlet named Shakira who plans to speak to crowds here in Phoenix.

What we must be most concerned with is the rule of law, and our president's complete and total failure to respect the rule of law as it applies to this situation.

President Obama's posturing for political expediency is beyond reprehensible; it is immoral, and it is completely unbecoming of the Office of The Presidency.

President Obama's description of S.B. 1070 as "misguided" immediately reminded me of his stating that the Caimbridge Police "acted stupidly." His reactions are emotional and based on a political ideology, not based on facts or the rule of law.

Our president is supposed to be the leader of all Americans, not just the Blacks, Latinos, college aged youth, and single women with babies who need welfare assistance, which as shown by his latest YouTube video is clearly where he knows he can turn to find a base.

It makes no difference the color of a person's skin, or from what nation they arrived; if any person acts in a manner that is unlawful, Arizona S.B. 1070 gives law enforcement officials the right and responsibility to ask anyone with whom they have contact about their citizenship status - if that officer believes there is reason to suspect said person might be in The United States illegally.

Police might pull me over for speeding or a broken tail light just as easily as they could do the same to an illegal alien, or they might even pull over the embarrassing Congressman Raul Grijalva, a man who has made the ridiculous request of everyone outside Arizona to boycott the people he was elected to represent.

I understand that while it is not probable, it is a reasonable possibility that the officers might ask me to provide documentation beyond my driver's license to prove my citizenship. Of course I do not plan to carry my birth certificate with me everywhere I go, but I certainly would be proud to but federal law does require resident aliens to carry their Green Card with them at all times.

The bottom line is that we should never have selective "social" justice because of race, class, or gender. We should always have equal justice under the law.

America must not allow Congress and President Obama (or any other president, for that matter) to enact any type of "immigration reform" until we have absolute evidence from trustworthy sources that a barrier has been constructed completely across our southern border. In no way should this barrier be seen as discriminatory; instead it must be understood as a method of protection for the rights of the citizens of The United States of America.

The president and Congressional Democrats, with the assistance of their lackey media, will attempt to use immigration as a wedge issue in an effort to gain the support of Hispanics and independents until the November 2010 elections. We must all remember that it is simply for politics and additional voters that these people wish to strike down S.B. 1070 and enact any form of immigration reform at the national level.

Until a border fence is completely constructed reform means amnesty, and we must never lose sight of this fact.

This issue - the debate over immigration and Arizona S.B. 1070, is now the most important issue of our time.

Because of the law enacted by Arizona, we are about to begin one of the most important discussions in our nation's history. By the time this debate is done, we will have full understanding of whether we are a nation of Law as provided by The Constitution, or a nation of Men as desired by Progressives.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

A Little Spring Cleaning

I got an "Are you okay?" phone call today that I was glad to receive (thanks, Mom and Dad!) and it reminded me that it's been about a week now since my last post, and I thought I'd check in with everyone and say hello. I hope this note finds you all well.

I've visited some of you through the past week and left comments on items you've posted, but my personal priorities have shifted a bit, and so I have not been posting as much.

Quite simply... we all know by now that we're bigoted, homophobic racists who cling to our God and our guns. There are only so many ways that we can discuss how Barack Hussein Obama and his crew are mocking us and poking their finger in our chest. And while there certainly are some other events taking place, I've decided to do a little personal spring cleaning, and it's shifted my focus just a bit.

Literally, I've taken on some spring cleaning in my home. There's not a lot to a one-bedroom apartment, but in addition to the basic dusting and mopping I'm planning a little re-organizing... kind of give the place a fresh feeling.

Additionally, I've begun a bit of personal cleansing this spring too... as in a new exercise routine that has consumed some of my time and much of my focus. This is something I've been needing to do for a long time, and now that I've started I'm feeling really good about it. I've got some inches to shed from the waistline, and I need to turn the flab to fab, so to speak. And while a diet of salads and veggies is helpful, there's nothing like hitting the weight room and pumping some iron to get a body back into the shape it needs to be.

A couple of days this past week I came home after a workout and tried to put together a post, but I just didn't have the energy or the focus. I've found in the past that when my schedule changes it takes some time for all the other aspects of my life to find their place, and I expect in this case the same will hold true.

So - since the narrative seems to have flattened a bit lately, and I've taken on a couple of new personal priorities, I may be posting a bit less than normal over the next little while. While I may not be writing as consistently, I'll be keeping up on events, and it's likely I'll drop in and comment on your blogs from time to time.

And I promise that no matter what, at heart I plan to remain the same racist, homophobic, uneducated, bigoted redneck that Barack Hussein Obama expects me to be, and I'll be damned proud of it!

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Information Regarding Arizona Concealed Carry Laws

LL at Virtual Mirage has Virtual Mirage up explaining Arizona's recent vote on concealed carry in the State House of Representatives.

From Virtual Mirage:

On Thursday, the Arizona House voted to make the state the third in the nation to allow people to carry concealed weapons without a permit. The legislation, approved by the House 36-19 without discussion, would make it legal for most U.S. citizens 21 or older to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without the permit now required. Governor Jan Brewer is expected to sign the measure into law.

Arizona will join Alaska and Vermont in not requiring permits to carry concealed weapons. Forty-five other states require permits for hidden guns, and two states — Illinois and Wisconsin — prohibit them altogether.

Firearms restrictions only affect people who want to follow the rules because criminals will carry hidden guns regardless of the law.

Please be sure to check out the rest of LL's post, which includes information on other pieces of legislation recently signed into law by Governor Brewer.

This is wonderful news for Arizona!

Friday, April 9, 2010

"Crash The Tea Party" is Crashing

Left Coast Rebel has a post up about a site called Seems the topic is trending high on Google Trends, and I believe it was metioned on Hannity tonight. The site is a forum, and is operated by someone calling himself "Mad Hatter." I ran a "WhoIs" at and the site is registered to a phony name - someone too scared to admit who they really are.

According to the entry page, the purpose of the site is to gather people who wish to crash the Tea Party. If you've been paying attention to current events you know this is becoming a concern.

The leftists are enraged that they are being defeated in the battlefield of ideas, and their newest tactic appears to be disrupt peaceful events while making an effort to portray themselves as sincere and honest Tea Party Patriots and that the way they are acting is the way we all act.

Expectations are that there will be an unusually high number of racist-appearing signs and aggressive or illegal behavior, all with the intent to get CNN, MSNBC, and the alphabet networks focused on these incidents, rather than focusing as they should on the true spirit of the events and the patriotic, peaceful attendees.

I checked out the site. At the time of this post it has seven pages of discussion threads, including everything from the "Welcome" thread, to others including one asking why posts are being deleted. There's one on the first page of topics called "Thanks," which has an opening post that says:

Thank goodness for this ridiculous site! Now, if anything does happen it will be blamed on you idiots! Excellent, Left-wing thinking right here. Congratulations!

Another post in this same discussion, posted by someone named "Bagger," reads:

I just invited the 9/12 groups to come over here and play. Come on liberals....we want to play. Do you jerks have any idea how millions of members we have in the movement. You think you are going to disrupt us with pranks. We are fighting for liberty and you would have to be pretty dumb to stand in front of us. But if you must come on. We will be clinging to our guns and our Bibles and I promise never to use the Bible on you.

What's great about this is that someone from the right named "NunnayaBizness" is posting in this same thread, and returned fire by saying:

"bagger" trying unsuccesssfully to frame the 9/12 movement...see? u lefties are so simple. u underestimate the intelligence of the American people every time. so sad.

Having seen this, I'm pleased to announce that it appears this sham has been infiltrated at a couple of levels.

First, the fact that bloggers like Left Coast Rebel have discovered this pathetic attempt to infiltrate our ranks gave us access into the agenda of the leftists.

Second, we have quickly and easily shown them how pathetic they truly are. We have let them know that we are aware of them, and we have informed them that we are on to their little game.

Finally, we have shown them with posts like the one from "NunnayaBizness" that we understand their game plan, and we plan to counter peacefully - regardless of their pathetic attempts to provoke.

While I was checking out the "Why are you deleting posts?" thread, I found this wonderful video I thought I'd share with you.

The video was posted by someone named "Tea Party Negro," who said his posts had been deleted twice, "because as a conservative black man, I pose a threat to his liberal mindset.

While all of the facts "Tea Party Negro" offer in his post may not be completely accurate, his heart is certainly in the right place. Additionally, he posted a video that is well worth watching. The description of the video says the scene comes from the Tea Party Movie DVD, which is available at

The full description reads:

In this scene from the Tea Party Movie DVD, black conservatives talk about the Tea Party movement. Nate, who is featured in the film, voted for Barack Obama in 2008. He says his upbringing in Detroit taught him to mistrust America because of the color of his skin. As a Libertarian with a paradigm shift and a newfound understanding of the nation he loves, he is risking the anger of family and friends by joining the march against a President's policies that would victimize the very people he loves the most. Order the MOVIE of the MOVEMENT now at www.TEAPARTYMOVIE.COM

Game on, liberals. We play for keeps.

Friday Night Videos: How Obama Got Elected, Stand-Up Comedy Routine

For comedy to be effective, it must include must be some element of reality.

Knowing this, enjoy this clip I found on YouTube. It was posted October 28, 2008 - just one week before the 2008 presidential election.

This kid is talented and funny, and he clearly had a very keen understanding of what the nation was thinking in the days leading up to election day.

Wham, Bam, Thank You, Ma'am: Bart Stupak's Had His Way With America, and Now He's Leaving

Bart Stupak had his way with America, and now he's ditching her on the side of the road like a cheap tramp.

Today Stupak announced his retirement, blaming travel, and saying he had already completed much of what he aimed to do in Congress.


“I’ve accomplished what I want to do. Either I run again and I’d be there forever or it’s time for me to make the break; it’s time for me to move on,” Stupak said.

Republicans quickly called this retirement for what it is - the chickenshit, whimpering with his tail between his legs way out for a pathetic little man, who sold his soul to the devil for a little noteriety and an airport or three with his name on them.

“After selling his soul to Nancy Pelosi, it appears that Bart Stupak finally found the courage to tell her no," said Ken Spain, communications director of the National Republican Congressional Committee. "The political fallout over the Democrats’ government takeover of health care has put the political careers of many Democrats in jeopardy, thanks in part to Stupak’s decision to abandon his alleged pro-life principles."

Thanks Bart... you sorry piece of worthless garbage. Don't let the door hit your sorry ass on the way out. Sorry you had to travel so much to earn that measly $175K salary and be wined and dined and bought nice gifts just to flip a lever in the right direction.

I hope you have a nice speech prepared for the day you meet your Creator. You're gonna need it.

More at Memeorandum.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Joy Behar, The Free Market, and Talk Radio

The other night on HLN, which is a division of CNN (The Most "Trusted Name" in News), Host Joy Behar had leftist talker Randi Rhodes, and former leftist talker-turned GQ magazine writer Ana Marie Cox on her show, and the three made an effort to explain to Behar's leftist viewers how the free market works in the talk radio business.

The subject these three chose as an example of "unfairness" was the vitriolic Rush Limbaugh and his dominance of AM radio.

Notice how Ms. Rhodes astutely defined why Rush Limbaugh is so popular:

"They have no choice, he's on every radio station... they have no choice."

According to his website, Limbaugh is "broadcast on over 600 radio stations nationwide."

According to, in 2004 there were 4781 AM stations and 2471 FM Educational stations.

For the sake of fair argument - because we certainly know how important "fairness" is to the leftists - let's just use the AM band number, since that is where Conservative talk radio is most prominent. According to these numbers, on 4781 stations (assuming all AM stations broadcast a full 24-hour cycle) there are 114,744 broadcast hours available. If Limbaugh's show is 3 hours in length and airs on 600 stations, that means he is responsible for 1800 hours of total air time used. Therefore, if we round up, Limbaugh's show uses approximately 1.6 percent of all available air time.

Or, to be more "fair," we could say that Limbaugh is broadcast on 600 of 4781 stations, which is 12.5 percent. 12.6 percent if we round up. Alright - thirteen percent.

Randi is correct. There's clearly no other choice.

Joy Behar next took the discussion to how Air America "Couldn't make it."


The two guests (again, both former Air America hosts) and Behar couldn't step over themselves quickly enough to squelch that idea. The offering Ms. Cox brought is most humorous, attempting to equate Air America to The Daily Show. "That's the same kind of stuff..." Cox said.

For the sake of honest, or shall we say "fair" comparison, here is a clip from The Daily Show in which Jon Stewart mocks Glenn Beck, followed by a clip from the now defunct Air America, in which Rosie O'Donnell and Janeane Garofalo... well, you be the judge of what they were doing.

Yep. Exactly the same - I can't even tell the difference.

I will give Ms. Rhodes credit; she understands the fact that Air America was run "really badly", but she is mistaken in her belief that this is due to the fact that "It was not run by radio people."

Actually, it was a lack of interest in the product.

According to Wikipedia (since I can't find another source for this information), Air America was broadcast on 66 stations nationwide as recently as October 2008, so the network had opportunity.

But as Limbaugh himself wisely pointed out shortly after Air America's inception, you can't build a popular radio show, or network, on ideology – and rightly or wrongly, Air America got the image that it was working from a playbook.

"First," said Limbaugh, "you have to entertain people. You have to make it interesting to listen. I don't hear any of that."

Finally, Rhodes tried to close the conversation by naming all the people who came from Air America. She began by naming her fellow guest Ana Marie Cox, of whom I only hear on MSNBC and CNN. She also named Rachel Maddow, a person who has carved a bit of a niche for herself but has been proven factually incorrect a number of times by this blogger and many others in the blogosphere and media.

And in the end, another defense of the failed Air America, yet clearly no real understanding of the free market and how it affects talk radio.

American Idol President to Appear on American Idol

It was just a matter of time...

From Row 2, Seat 4:

The President and First Lady took time out of their busy schedules on Wednesday to sit down for a taping with "American Idol" as part of the hit show's fundraising event set to air next week.

"Idol Gives Back" is a two-hour charity performance that has already raised more than $140 million in contributions for global organizations.

This year's beneficiaries include Children's Health Fund, Feeding America, Malaria No More, Save the Children's U.S. Programs and the United Nations Foundation.

The special episode typically features big-name stars. It will air on Wednesday, April 21 at 8 p.m. ET.

So glad they could take time out of their "busy schedules" to be "big-name stars."

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

I've Got Your Teabagger Right Here: Tea Party Patriot Quizzes Republican Congressman at Town Hall

Watch as Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ) gets a lesson in The Constitution, from one of his constituents.

The guy in this video comes across as some kind of Constitution Ninja. I don't know my Constitution as well as this man does, at least not off the top of my head. Kudos to him for being so well versed - or at least well prepared for this event.

I wonder if he'd have been forgiving if Rep. LoBiondo had pulled out a pocket Constitution. If it were me I would have been, because at least that would have shown good intent.

I'd recommend every person who wishes to represent Americans take heed. If this video goes viral there will be a lot of pop quizzes at town halls over the next few months until election day.

Via Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Rachel Maddow Crosses The Line, Compares Lunatic Fringe to Conservative Bloggers

Please watch this clip completely, as I believe it is very important.

To be perfectly clear, there is a difference between threats and incendiary rhetoric. I have said from the onset of this debate over rhetoric that if anyone actually makes threats, that person needs to be brought to justice.

For example, as you watch this clip, you will hear about messages left for Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) that do indeed include threats. The information provided by Maddow in this segment states that the phone call was traced and the person responsible for the blocked number has been arrested and charged.


Then you will notice how Maddow proceeds into the gray area of rhetoric as opposed to legitimate threats. This is how the leftist media begins to put together the pieces of their carefully crafted puzzle. Angry and vile rhetoric are not threats, yet Maddow ever so gently eases the viewer from the clearly

Again, to be perfectly clear: I believe there is absolutely no need whatsoever for the language "beeped" out from the voicemails left for Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) as offered by Maddow. The language is vile, hateful, and disturbing.

Then again, So is calling a Tea Party attendee a "Teabagger," so I anxiously await Maddow's admonishment of such rhetoric from the leftists.

Next Maddow presents information about a 27-year-old man in Texas who reportedly threatened to use physical violence in order to stop abortions. While there was no direct threat made on any one particular person, anyone who puts forward threats of physical violence as described must be dealt with by the proper authorities.

Now comes the agenda.

Maddow next eases her portrayal of intimidation and violence from the legitimate information to descriptions of completely legal and non-threatening Second Amendment and Pro-Gun rallies.

One of these groups plans to hold a rally on April 19th, which coincides with the anniversary of Timothy McVeigh's terrorist bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City in 1995. This is a group that plans to exercise its Constitutional right to keep and bear arms by marching in the State of Virginia. Maddow raises an issue of the proximity to Washington, D. C., "with loaded weapons."

There will also be a Second Amendment march in Washington. This will be an event attended by unarmed citizens, but Maddow certainly fuels the fire of fear and hate as she points out the fact that this is "only reluctantly so." She also makes an effort to insinuate "hatred" and "racism" to her viewers by stating that Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell has declared April to be "Confederate History Month." What she fails to tell her viewers is that this is nothing new, as this link from 2002 shows.

Conveniently, Maddow is hosting a special that airs that same night, a "retrospective" that will supposedly "Help us understand today's anti-government extremists."

Next Maddow brings in some leftist from, which without a doubt is one of the top five leftist agenda blogs on the 'net. The first couple of minutes of discussion with him are relatively benign - they rehash the same old "The Republican party is shrinking" lines we've heard time and time again.

However, as they bring the discussion to a close, they return the discussion to the first story of the clip. Maddow and her leftist comrade try to place blame on "Americans For Prosperity," since earlier in her story she described how authorities allegedly used that organization's name in an effort to gain comfort and trust with the alleged perpetrator.

Next they begin to tie all of these activities to Conservative bloggers. They describe how this person seemed to be "picking up on Republican talking points," and how he allegedly knew information about Eric Holder's "Cowardly Americans" commentary on race, and then they both said "almost like a Conservative blogger.

And Rachel Maddow wonders why there's so much hate in America. Nothing like a little guilt by association to make a person's evening.

I have absolutely no desire to act violently. And while I have not met my fellow bloggers face-to-face, I can say with great certainty that to a man (or woman, as the case may be) , there is not one person with whom I correspond on a regular basis who wishes to commit acts of violence. In fact, what I find most amazing about the group of people I have grown to know over the past year is that we all - each and every one of us - absolutely condemn violence in any instance, for any reason, from any person, regardless of political affiliation.

We condemned violence when it was SEIU thugs beating down a man in St. Louis.

We condemned violence when it was some crazy leftist biting off the fingertip of a health care protester.

We condemned violence when Eric Cantor had his life threatened by an Obama donor.

While I can only speak for myself, I trust that every Conservative blogger I know would condemn any legitimate threats or violence as described in this clip. Additionally, I personally condemn the language used toward Rep. Lewis. There is no need for such behavior, and it is not beneficial in moving this discussion forward.

Having said that - the tactics used tonight by Rachel Maddow are as incendiary as the rhetoric which she describes, because she attempts to malign good people by associating us with alleged criminals.

In doing so, she divides a nation that desperately needs to have an honest discussion about race, health care, and the future of America.

Harry Reid: The Double Standard Defined

Remember during the 2008 Presidential elections how the left accused crowds at a John McCain and Sarah Palin stump speeches of yelling "Kill him!" in reference to Barack Hussein Obama?

Remember how the media ran like wildfire with that story?

Remember how every media outlet began asking why McCain and Palin would not instantly admonish such hateful and violent rhetoric?

Every news network had a piece on this alleged rhetoric, yet not one media outlet, blog, or other source could produce an actual recording of such words being said. Crowds of tens of thousands at these rallies, camera crews from every major media outlet, yet not even one token piece of evidence.

The Secret Service declared that they had not heard any such rhetoric, yet there were absolutely no retractions from any of the media outlets that had brought the story forward as truth. Instead many, such as Huffington Post, produced additional stories with print versions of such allegations, but again; no audio or video evidence.

Now comes a story from the other side. It seems soon-to-be-retired Senator Harry Reid of Nevada held a rally in his hometown of Searchlight, Nevada this past weekend. As he spoke before the massive crowd gathered before him,estimated by the AP to be 100 people, Reid took jabs at Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, who just one week before had gathered an estimated 8000 Patriots in the same location.

While Reid was discussing how he wanted to make a few remarks about the people who gathered in the same location the previous week, one woman in the audience yells out very clearly, "Aw, they can drop dead." Reid continued by saying, "But I couldn't fit it all on my hand," clearly a reference to the ongoing joke about Palin from the February Tea Party Nation event held in Nashville.

The Palin jokes are fine. But let's ask the obvious question: Why on Earth did Harry Reid not stop and scold this woman in his audience immediately?

One thing that must be made very clear: There was no evidence whatsoever of any such actions or statements made by any member of any crowd member at any McCain or Palin rally.

Meanwhile, the evidence is very clear regarding the statement made by a person in Harry Reid's crowd of supporters.

This is not a matter of "They did it first." This is a matter of the fact that the media, Congressional representatives, their supporters and followers are all plainly and clearly liars and deceivers. For all the allegations being made, nobody from the left at any level can produce honest evidence of the incidents they allege, yet in a blatant act of hypocrisy they behave in the very same manner they falsely condemn.

At the time of this post, a Google search of the phrase "harry reid crowd drop dead" sorted for the past 24 hours showed a small handful of blogs that matched the search words, let by Gateway Pundit. The only major media outlet to appear was CBS News, but an investigation proved there is no matching text in their article which provides the same video appearing here. Therefore my conclusion is that their appearance in this query is due to a comment made by a reader.

Just another shining example of the lies, hypocrisy, and double standard coming from today's leftists in politics and the media.

I will support and defend...

Congressman Phil Hare of Illinois' 17th District has decided he no longer wishes to represent his constituents.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

An Open Letter to Congressman Alan Grayson

Dear Congressman Grayson,

You are not my representative, but I feel compelled to address this letter to you because I believe you epitomize the disgraceful behavior exhibited by the Democratic Party since the election of President Barack Hussein Obama.

Please allow me to start by stating the following:

If the event you describe in the following interview took place as you describe it, please allow me to be the first to tell you how sorry I am that any member of your family endured such a painful experience.

Now - having said that -

I do not believe you, sir. I do not believe you, not for one minute.

If this event - this threat to your family, as you describe - really transpired, Congressman Grayson - you have a responsibility to report it to the authorities. There should be a documented case file of the incident, your incoming phone records need to be investigated, and if at all possible a perpetrator needs to be criminally charged. If no charges can be filed, a public announcement such as a press release should be issued stating this is the case, bringing closure to the situation.

Until that time, it is my heartfelt belief that you are part of the leftist machine that is making every effort to smear good, honest, hard working Americans with your allegations and your animated behavior and statements, and I absolutely have no reason whatsoever to believe your story.

Congressman Grayson, you have a history of incendiary and hateful rhetoric. You are a vile, inconsiderate, and soon to be irrelevant man who needs to be voted out of office as quickly as possible. Your antics during television interviews and on the floor of The People's House are nothing less than reprehensible.

As a perfect example of your vile behavior, in the interview provided, you attempt to associate the behavior of your American political opposition to... is it Nazis, or Communists? I'm not sure, sir.

You see, Mr. Grayson, the two parties are both alleged to have been involved in the burning of the Reichstag Building in 1933, in case you're not familiar with history. Either way, what really happened in this case is that you inadvertently, and I'm sure accidentally, associated yourself with Communists. Or is it Nazis? Please help me out on this one, I'm not quite certain.

Shame on you, sir, for this outrageously hypocritical and outlandish behavior. Americans deserve better from our elected officials.

Congressman Grayson, do you not listen to the leadership of your own party? Have you not heard Nancy Pelosi and President Obama scold others for violent and incendiary rhetoric? Why is it that you choose to blatantly disobey your own party's leadership... or is this one of those cases of "Do as I say, not as I do?"

Additionally may I ask you sir; do you listen to the primetime hosts on the Democratic Party's cable news network, MSNBC? Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, and Chris Matthews are all constantly discussing the fact that the rhetoric needs to be toned down so as to not incite violence, yet here you are once again making obscure and irrelevant references to Nazi tactics as you attempt to defile honest, hardworking and Patriotic Americans.

Mr Grayson, we "Teabaggers," as you like to mock us, will not fall for your little game. We are not interested in violence, and we will not commit acts of violence in order to give you and your Democratic friends leverage. This is not a game, Mr. Grayson, this is The Constitution and the future of The United States of America we are talking about, and we "Teabaggers" take our nation's law and her future very seriously.

I hope you have enjoyed your one term representing Florida's 8th District. It is my sincere hope that your constituents have more self-respect than to ever consider reelecting you to Congress. You can count on me to provide them with all of the honest, influential information needed to make a prudent decision.

Monday, April 5, 2010

The McVeigh Tapes: An MSNBC Retrospective

In keeping with the current theme as assigned by the Barack Hussein Obama administration regime, MSNBC plans to air a special documentary about domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh.

Rachel Maddow will host the April 19 "retrospective," during which the host plans to analyze whether McVeigh's murder of 168 people could be linked to "today's anti-government extremists."

Here's the preview, during which the announcer asks; ""15 years later, can McVeigh's words help us understand today's anti-government extremists?":

As Scott Whitlock at describes:

Now, it's possible that the "anti-government extremists" the ad refers to are groups such as the recently arrested militia group in Michigan. But, it's worth remembering that after the original bombing, journalists jumped to associate McVeigh's actions with mainstream conservatism.

In the May 8, 1995 issue of Time, senior writer Richard Lacayo smeared, "In a nation that has entertained and appalled itself for years with hot talk on the radio and the campaign trail, the inflamed rhetoric of the '90s is suddenly an unindicted co-conspirator in the blast."

Then-Today show co-host Bryant Gumbel derided:

"The bombing in Oklahoma City has focused renewed attention on the rhetoric that's been coming from the right and those who cater to angry white men. While no one's suggesting right-wing radio jocks approve of violence, the extent to which their approach fosters violence is being questioned by many observers, including the President....Right-wing talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Bob Grant, Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, and others take to the air every day with basically the same format: detail a problem, blame the government or a group, and invite invective from like-minded people. Never do most of the radio hosts encourage outright violence, but the extent to which their attitudes may embolden and encourage some extremists has clearly become an issue."

-- Today co-host Bryant Gumbel, April 25.

One important question for MSNBC: Domestic terrorism, such as the attack perpetrated by an American like McVeigh, is rare. What, precisely, will MSNBC compare the incident to?

The McVeigh Tapes: Confessions of an American Terrorist will air on MSNBC on April 19 at 9pm.

Hat Tip to

DemocRats on Parade

Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee's 9th District.

Yet another DemocRat making KKK comparisons and calling Tea Party Patriots racists, homophobes, bigots, misogynists, and more.

Be sure to listen to the entire interview, so you can hear his wonderful description of John McCain on the campaign trail with Sarah Palin. Unbelievable.

It appears there are many who do not wish to serve any longer than their present term. Mr. Cohen has just added his name to the list.

I wonder how Representative Cohen feels about Barack Hussein Obama's recent treatment of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu...

Would The Left Use Violent Imagery in an Attempt to Cast Aspersions on Political Opposition?

Yet another lovely video from

Compare The Opposition to Hitler?

Another advertisement comparing President George W. Bush to Hitler.

But The Left Would Never....

A 2003 advertisement created by

Thursday, April 1, 2010

The Next Great Communicator?

A few years ago I discovered Dennis Prager on the radio.

This discovery came at a pivotal time in my life, as I was going through quite a bit of self-discovery after a five year period of methamphetamine abuse. Prager's wisdom and common sense gave me great guidance during some extremely difficult times during my recovery.

Dennis Prager is without a doubt one of the least bombastic radio personalities on the air today. His show airs live during the same time slot as Rush Limbaugh, and he offers a stark contrast to Limbaugh's aggressive style. Like Limbaugh, Prager is an extremely consistent and common sense Conservative, but with a calm and extremely approachable demeanor.

Prager takes a fair amount of calls during his broadcast, and is willing to engage in reasonable debate with liberals rather than slamming them. Because of his deep understanding of the differences between political left and right, combined with his soothing personality, he often allows liberals to hang themselves with their own statements. I have never heard a discussion during which Prager became cross or disrespectful, and I have never heard Prager lose a debate. He offers the intellect over which the left believes it holds ownership, while offering clarity and common sense of which liberals only dream.


Mr. Prager was a Fellow at Columbia University's School of International Affairs, where he did graduate work at the Middle East and Russian Institutes. He has taught Russian and Jewish history at Brooklyn College; and was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the U.S. Delegation to the Vienna Review Conference on the Helsinki Accords. He holds an honorary doctorate of laws from Pepperdine University.

Prager is a different kind of radio talk show host, in that he does not deal exclusively in politics. He often has authors on his show to discuss their recent works. He discusses religion in a very candid fashion, without being too "in-your-face" or overly rhetorical. He has a weekly segment called "The Ultimate Issues Hour" that deals in debates and discussions about God and religion. This segment is always extremely compelling. He also does a weekly segment about human nature of the sexes, called "The Male-Female Hour," and every Friday he has "The Happiness Hour," which deals in different aspects of happiness in life - such as the fact that you do not need to be completely satisfied to be happy in life, how to deal with certain emotional stimuli as they affect your happiness, and how important happiness is to a person's general well-being.

In my humble opinion, Dennis Prager is one of the best communicators of Conservativism in America today. Certainly Rush Limbaugh is the most popular radio host and very effective, but he is also the lightning rod. Sean Hannity is indeed a Great American and very popular, but sometimes he loses focus, and he has an ability (I believe subconscious) to come across in a condescending way to those with whom he disagrees. Glenn Beck is... well, Glenn Beck. I personally love his animated style and I can relate directly to his story of redemption, but he, like Limbaugh, is quite the lightning rod.

Anyway, the reason I bring all of this up tonight is because this week I rediscovered Dennis Prager's radio show and was very pleasantly reminded why I gained admiration for him in the past. With Rush on his great search for a new health care system, I listened to Mark Steyn Monday but then wanted a change of pace on Tuesday.

Since he was traveling to the Ronald Reagan Library to appear on Hannity, Tuesday's Dennis Prager show was a repeat, and the "Ultimate Issues Hour" was fantastic. Prager dealt with the idea that the core difference between left and right, Conservative and progressive, is God. The right believes in God, and the left needs something to replace their lack of belief in The Divine. This theory explains why the left is so enthralled with concepts such as "global warming," because that crisis deals in nature, which progressives hold in esteem. Prager very clearly defined how in God, Conservatives find morality which leads us correctly through life, whereas progressives seek their moral compass from objects that can not offer morality such as trees, mountains, and clouds. Nature is a creation of God, and so in nature Conservatives see God's beautiful creation. Progressives believe that Earth is God.

Also fascinating, and somewhat related, was a discussion today about the fact that the left always needs to have a crisis or a cause.

Today Prager also very clearly stated that we are in the midst of America's second Civil War. He, like all Conservatives, is rightly offended by the ridiculous comparisons of ObamaCare to Civil Rights, and found Pelosi - a lone White woman amongst a bunch of (primarily Black) men, offering her ridiculously mocking smile - to be egregious imagery.

However, these points are not (specifically) the point I wish to make.

My point is that sometime during today's show, Prager mentioned that he wishes to lead. He doesn't seem quite positive what his place is exactly, but he knows he is a person who can communicate the message of Conservatism's greatness very effectively, and he doesn't want to be "just another talk show host."

In the midst of this commentary, Prager said, "Unless I run for President, but I'm not sure that's what I want..." and he kind of left it at that.

There has been great discussion about the fact that perhaps our next leader will come from out of the shadows, almost unexpectedly. Prager, while certainly a known entity, is not on the forefront of today's media battle.

Also often discussed is the fact that the best leader for America would be an almost reluctant leader - someone who typically does not want power, but realizes that everyone has a specific purpose in life, and when you are called, you serve. I sincerely believe Dennis Prager would envision public service as service.

Prager is Jewish. Make no mistake - looking at a person's religion through a purely political prism, this could be extremely beneficial.

America is currently flipping the proverbial bird to her most important ally, Israel. Jews (for reasons I'll never understand) are almost monolithic in their voting for Democrats, but a Conservative Jew who is able to communicate the real message of Conservatism, as well as honor the obvious need to stand by Israel unequivocally... well, let's just say he'd be a perfect candidate in this respect.

Additionally, Prager is a Jew who hold utmost respect for Christianity, which is something greatly needed today. He discussed the ridiculous situation in Davenport, Iowa with great clarity and reason.

We are clearly in a moral decline, and a man who understands his own moral compass and is able to share that idea without offending others or leaving questions about his sincerity would be a welcome change after four years of questionable and offensive behavior.

From his website:

Dennis has engaged in interfaith dialogue with Catholics at the Vatican, Muslims in the Persian Gulf, Hindus in India, and Protestants at Christian seminaries throughout America. For ten years, he conducted a weekly interfaith dialogue on radio with representatives of virtually every religion in the world. New York's Jewish Week described Dennis Prager as "one of the three most interesting minds in American Jewish Life."

Ronald Reagan was known as "The Great Communicator." He could tell America what we needed to hear without equivocation. He was soft-spoken, extremely well spoken, modest, attractive without being threatening. He understood the danger of liberalism, or progressivism, and knew how to communicate why the left was wrong and what the right course was for America. He offered a moral compass without imposing or forcing any particular religion, while making it perfectly clear that America is a gift from God and that we should honor and cherish American Exceptionalism.

I believe Dennis Prager may be the next Great Communicator, and just might be the person who will come out of the shadows to lead America back to greatness.

I'd love to know what you think. My comments section is always open.