Sunday, October 25, 2009

Toddlers for Congress

Is anything productive happening in Congress? Should anything productive happen there? Would toddlers appreciate a socialist state? Can toddlers comprehend socialism?

It seems that Congress (Dems and GOP included) are spending their time arguing about who's pet project receives the most funding rather than listening to the American people. Is that the way it is intended? Do any of our representatives have our best interests at heart? When a majority of the American people want no part of a "single payer" health care policy, why is Congress still crafting models of it? Can Nancy Pelosi hear, or did a botched botox destroy her aural integrity? Does Harry Reid listen, or do the voices in his head drown out millions of taxpaying citizens? I'm convinced that Mr. Obama doesn't care what the people are saying. If he truly has a degree in law with special emphasis on Constitutional Law, then he should know that the will of the people is the law of the land. But, maybe, the degree with emphasis was for a different notion. Perhaps the Constitutional knowledge would also be necessary to work around, rather than within the law, legally. (I only had to write that sentence once, you may have to read a few times) Sun Tsu, a Chinese General, said (a partial quote) "know thy enemy". If your enemy is the Constitution, a law degree with a Constitutional law emphasis, would be invaluable. If your enemy is Mr. Obama, I'm not sure what to study, he changes his mind too often.
Now to the toddlers:
Let's elect toddlers for Congress. They'll work cheap (animal crackers, diapers, juice, milk, etc.) and it will be relatively cheap day care for parents. And, best of all, when the food is handed out in equal parts, they'll fight for more and behave just like the Congresspeople we're used to, showing us just how unrealistic socialism is.


Saturday, October 10, 2009

The UN is a joke

"On Thursday, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously to extend U.N. authorization for the NATO force in Afghanistan for a year, underlining the importance of protecting civilians at a time when the U.S. and international commitment to the war is under review."

May I quote part of this quote from a AP article I found on Druge? Good, "at a time". Great, this is a time. "when the US and international commitment"... is under review". By who? The freaking UN? Who are they? I don't get it, this "war" has been going on for over 8 years now, and they're still reviewing it? We've had two polar opposite presidents that have both supported it, and wait, did i mention POLAR opposite, and they're still reviewing it? Come on, get real, get a life, find something important to decide on, like what china pattern you want at your next banquet for your next review of your next impending female review. That's important, take your time on Afghanistan, we understand. Of course they voted unanimously, so I suppose it's ok, but would they vote similarly on the female review? The UN is a joke. Can we secede?

PS- I can think of one fantastic reason for Obamacare. How old is Jimmy Carter now? =)