This will be brief, but here’s my take. A federal government surplus is a bad thing, no matter how much Democrats try to pretty it up. If the federal government has a surplus, that means it took too much of my money away from me. I promise you that money won’t be returned by Democrats with a note saying “sorry we overbilled you, here’s the balance back”. Instead, they’ll find a pet project or political action committee to give it to. Those who claim federal surpluses are a good thing are likely to be the very same people who will drive 5 miles back to Wal-Mart because they have a double charge on their receipt for a roll of toilet paper and demand a refund. Bush gave us the refund, that’s a good thing.

When we have deficits, it means the goverment is spending more than it’s taking in. The easiest answer to this is NOT raising taxes, it’s reducing spending. If you think raising taxes is the answer to deficits, then you probably believe the way out of credit card debt is increased limits, not fewer trips to the mall. I think we can all agree there are many goofy projects that federal money is being wasted on. Let’s review the Constitution and what it says our federales should be spending money on. Like $200,000 for a trucker congestion notification system in Tacoma, Washington, $500,000 to save the Prebles Meadow Jumping Mouse in Colorado, $62 million to promote the Sacajawea dollar coin, $1.5 million for taking care of the Vulcan Statue in Alabama built for the 1904 World’s Fair, and my personal favorite, “Elmo, the Sesame Street character, was invited by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education to “testify” on music education in schools. The puppet asked for $2 million for related programs.” Some will say the war is costing us to build deficits, but war is one of the few things mandated by the Constitution for spending money on… remember the whole “provide for the common defense”? (I know some will point to “promote the general welfare” to support social programs, but the forefathers certainly didn’t intend for people to not pull their own weight and rely, instead on a gubmint handout).

So, in a nutshell, the government should only spend on things allowed by the Constitution, tax according to such spending, no more, no less, and let the producers of the country keep more of what we work so hard for. Why is that so hard to understand?

I’m opening the debate floor to any of my Jewish friends who read this blog to explain something to me. Why is it that the Jewish vote traditionally goes overwhelmingly to the Democrat party?

Two major reasons I don’t understand why the last few elections have shown the following pattern:

1992: Bush got 11%, Clinton got 80%

1996: Dole got 16%, Clinton got 78%

2000: Bush got 19%, Gore got 79%

Yet, the Clinton administration’s position was an Israeli pullout, while the Bush administration defends the right (at the frustration of arabs) of Israel to protect itself. We even have images like Hillary hugging the wife of the terrorist leader hell-bent on eradicating Israel and Jews from the planet:

We have folks on the Left promoting a movie bashing President Bush while Palestinian terrorist organizations like Hamas are showing the same support for the movie. It doesn’t make sense to me that Jewish people continue to vote Democrat in wholesale. (To say nothing of the fact they even voted more for John Kerry than Joe Lieberman, a Jew).

Finally, I don’t understand, given the nature (and perhaps stereotypical description) of Jewish people being tight with their money, that they’d overwhelmingly and continuously vote for a party that is a half step away from socialism promoting the idea that everyone should give more of their hard-earned money to the government for distribution to those who don’t produce in our society. Why don’t Jews vote for Republican administrations who advocate the notion that folks should be able to keep more of what they earn?

The hidden message…
After spending much of the 2000 election season running away from Bill Clinton’s scandals and failures, the Democrat Party has come to realize it’s base doesn’t care about such moral failings in its leaders and welcomed Billy boy back into the limelight. They’ve come to understand that they’ll never appeal to the honest, decent citizens of America, so they’ve finally accepted the simple fact that Bill Clinton is good for their party. They’re finally admitting that nobody else in their midst can stir up the unethical, immoral base like he can. They welcome him back with open arms like a runaway coming home. They’re throwing out the red carpet and tearing up at the mere mention of his name.

The definition of “UNIlateral”…
The Democrats keep repeating the mantra that Bush is a divider (even during speeches they give at racially divisive, racist organizations like NAACP). They point to the Iraq war and the “unilateral” actions by the U.S. (failing to acknowledge the other 35+ countries involved). They point to the fact that Russia, France and Germany didn’t offer support for the overthrow of Saddam (ignoring the illegal contracts and business dealings each country lost with the fall of the Saddam regime).

But instead of giving OUR President the benefit of the doubt, the Democrats continue down the path of Blame Bush no matter what the issue. THAT’S unAmerican. Period.

France could block a NATO mission to start training Iraq’s security forces, diplomats said as alliance ambassadors met for talks on the issue Wednesday.

“There are 20-plus countries in favor of beginning the training mission inside Iraq next week, two or three are undecided — and there’s one country blocking, that’s France.”

Diplomats said Paris is determined not to hand President Bush a show of international support for his Iraq policy before the Republican Party’s pre-election convention, which opens at the end of August.

Guess I was wrong. It appears Planned Parenthood isn’t really as interested in offering women ”a choice” so much as “the choice”…. the choice to kill.

Here’s what the advertisement for the shirt says:

Planned Parenthood is proud to offer yet another t-shirt in our new social fashion line: “I Had an Abortion” fitted T-shirts are now available. These soft and comfortable fitted tees assert a powerful message in support of women’s rights.

I’m sorry, but what does “I killed a baby” have to do with a “powerful message in support of women’s rights”? I thought Planned Parenthood took the position of offering “choices” to pregnant women… choices that would include adoption or counseling. I think this shirt pretty much sums up the “pro-choice” platform….”Hooray, I killed for women’s rights today”.

I guess the “I was aborted” shirts didn’t have as big of an audience to whom they could “assert a powerful message in support of unborn women’s rights”….

Now, since most Americans aren’t that far to the right, our friends have to portray us Democrats as simply unacceptable, lacking in strength and values. - Bill Clinton’s Convention Speech, July 26, 2004.

I’ll refrain from offering my own comments and let Billy himself respond:

Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate. - Bill Clinton’s address, August 17, 1998

Sometimes our best response is simply no response at all. Eventually those on the Left always come around to offer the best retorts to their own comments.

In a chapter right out of Liberal Politics 101, Teresa Heinz Kerry has finally entered the fray. While the major networks are doing their best to portray her as the second-coming of Mother Teresa, it doesn’t take much to uncover what she’s really all about. Perhaps she’s the second-coming of Madame Hillary. In a speech Sunday evening in Boston, Teresa said:

“We need to turn back some of the creeping, un-Pennsylvanian and sometimes un-American traits that are coming into some of our politics,” she told her fellow Pennsylvanians at a Sunday night reception at the Massachusetts Statehouse.

While I think we’d all agree the tone should be turned back, one must wonder if she really meant it.

Minutes later, Colin McNickle, the editorial page editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, questioned her on exactly what she meant by the term “un-American,” according to a tape of the encounter recorded by WTAE Channel 4 Action News. Heinz Kerry said “I didn’t say that” several times to McNickle.

Denial ain’t just a river in Africa. Teresa, if you’re going to blatantly lie, at least make sure there weren’t cameras recording the event. As if that weren’t enough, Teresa then decides the tone of politics for this moment should be turned right back up….

When she faced McNickle again a short time later, he continued to question her, and she replied, “You said something I didn’t say. Now shove it.”

Ok, so much for changing the tone of political discussions. She, in fact DID say it, and he questioned her about the comment. Typical, she didn’t have any substance to back up her outrageous accusations, so she resorted to name calling and third-grade comebacks. Nice discourse, Teresa. To make matters even more typical of the liberal playbook, her goons went on the offensive:

Marla Romash, Teresa Heinz Kerry spokeswoman, told WTAE-TV’s Scott Baker, “This was sheer frustration, aimed at a right-wing rag, that has consistently and purposely misrepresented the facts in reporting on Mrs. Kerry and her family.”

And there you have it, folks. This reporter wasn’t misrepresenting the facts, it’s on tape to prove it. She just couldn’t respond, because her accusation was pure crap. She thought she could sling it out there without being challenged, and when asked about it, she caved into an immature, bratty liberal. Notice the trend? When liberals commit crimes, get caught in lies or just lose their cool when they can’t handle questions about their ridiculous, unproven accusations, the standard operating procedure is always to turn it back on their opponents. Remember Hillary calling the Lewinsky scandal a “vast right wing conspiracy”? Now Teresa’s people are calling this “frustration at a right-wing rag”. It’s like deja vu.

Here’s more of her speech:

“We have to go back to those days when we can do things properly, for the people need it. My prayers for you, for me, for the country, for the world, are that we keep this at a high level, with dignity, with respect and with a great idealism and courage that took our forefathers to build this great nation.”

According to Teresa, “high level, dignified, respectful, idealistic and courageous” discourse is shoving a reporter and telling him to “shove it”. Only in the liberal world.

Kerry “Rolls” into Detroit…
In yet another display of John Kerry being out of touch with the average American, here’s what his press-pass logo looked like when the team rolled into Detroit, the Motor City.

For those of you that don’t know, that’s a Rolls-Royce 100EX luxury convertible concept car. Why was this such an ironic choice of logos? Aside from the cashmere lining under the hood and dark Curzon leather upholstery, mahogany and teak wood inside the passenger cabin, that is…

1. Kerry has focused his campaign on the “plight of the American blue-collar worker”. He’s pandered to the unions only the way a Democrat can. So what does it say about his “promises” when he rolls into Detroit with the logo of a FOREIGN automaker? Kerry’s take: ï¿½Iï¿½ve met steelworkers and mineworkers and autoworkers who have seen their jobs and equipment unbolted before their eyes and shipped overseas.ï¿½

2. The typical Rolls-Royce generally comes off the assembly line (outside of America) with a sticker price of $200,000+. I’m sure the average American will take two.

So what does Joe America think of this? “That’s an insult to the auto worker, it’s an insult to the American worker, it’s an insult to mainstream America,” said Sam Burwell from Corunna, Mich., a third-generation auto worker for General Motors. “It also shows who he’s really in touch with: his European, elitist French friends and not Americans like me. A Rolls-Royce, for cryin’ out loud.”

Warning: file_get_contents(http://webbiscuits.net/images/blank.gif) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: Connection refused in /home/texasrai/public_html/wp-content/themes/rainmaker/index.php on line 36