Hope, Change, and leftist washington insiders

Somewhere along the way, Americans are going to realize how foolish they were to believe that President-elect Obama would be any different than any other mainstream Chicago-style politician. He still has a couple months left before becoming our president, and yet his newly forming cabinet already tells a tale of Washington insiders, Clinton junkies, and partisan leftists. If this is any indication (which surely it is) of Obama's administration, we can expect anything but hope and change. If you don't believe me, I suggest you learn a little more about Obama's new cabinet.

Rahm Emanuel (Chief of Staff):
-After helping Democrats win congress in 2006, he is quoted telling his colleagues that republicans can go "f*** themselves."
-His favorite expression for republicans is "knuckef***s."
-In the 1980s he sent a dead, rotting fish to pollster whom he quarreled with.
-He sat on the board of Fredddie Mac and pocketed over $200,000 in fees after he and his board encouraged risky, sub prime mortgages, and then subsequently blamed republicans for Freddie's collapse.
-As an investment banker in Chicago, Rahm made over $18 million by working on merger deals that caused thousands of layoffs.

Read more here.

Eric Holder (presumptive Attorney General):
-Known for his extreme anti-gun positions, supporting hand-gun bans and believing that the 2nd amendment does not protect an individual's right to own a gun.
-Under the Clinton administration, he supported the controversial presidential pardon of fugitive Marc Rich which was decried by republicans and democrats alike (Marc just happened to be a Clinton campaign contributor).
-"The Attorney General is the one Cabinet member who's different from all the rest. The Attorney General serves first the people, but also serves the president. There has to be a closeness at the same time there needs to be distance." (What about the oath to protect and defend the constitution?)

Read more here.

Janet Napolitano (presumptive Secretary of Homeland Security):
-Represented Anita Hill in controversial sexual harassment case in an attempt to derail Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Later, she was unable to confirm certain details and facts when two testimonies presented did not corroborate and Janet was accused of stonewalling.
-Defended a legislator, Alan Stephens, who illegaly accepted bribes and later appointed him as co-chief of staff.
-Big supporter of more bailouts and federal stimulus packages aka as big a federal government as possible.

Read more here.

Tom Daschle (presumptive Secretary of Health and Human Services):
-“As majority leader, Daschle was a notorious opponent of every pro-life measure,” the Family Research Council said. “He blocked the partial-birth abortion ban, voted for taxpayer-funded military abortions, and supported a measure that would have forced Americans to pay for the distribution of the morning-after pill to young school girls.”
-Has no direct experience or qualification in the health care industry.
-His appointment will cause a direct conflict of interest, one that Obama promised to avoid, by Daschle currently working for a firm that will be effected by his future jurisdiction.

Read more here.
And here.

And then, of course, there is Hillary Clinton as the presumptive Secretary of State. Need I say more?

Come on Obama, I mean... really?? I can't say that I am surprised at all these appointments, but I certainly am disappointed.

What do you think?

Founding Father quote of the day

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.

Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779

Global warming and Bigfoot

Now here is a meaty subject. I realize that there is a lot of passion that goes into the debate of this subject. I mean, have your heard Al Gore give one of his $100,000 speeches when he's not relaxing in a mansion that uses more electricity than my entire neighborhood? That is serious passion. But I mean, it's cool, because he buys the rights to use all that energy. Nevermind that he buys it from his own company, thus increasing demand and generating higher profits for himself.

I digress. I just can't help but to praise Al. Ok, let's get serious here. You can believe whatever you want. You can believe that we are destroying our planet and that it is helpless to defend itself. That is fine. Just don't try to tell me that you belief is rooted in fact. It's not. Here is the hard truth: man-made global climate change is about as scientifically proven as aliens and bigfoot. I mean, there are believers, sightings, even some evidence that both aliens and bigfoot exist. Have you seen that video from the 60s? Yeah, tell me that isn't true.

Fortunately, we don't spend tax money on "The Bigfoot Preservation Acts" or "The Department of Extraterrestrial Affairs", and yet our congressmen want to take heap loads of our hard earned money to supposedly prevent an unproven man-made global climate change. Why aren't more people outraged? I mean you want to donate your own money to a private fund somewhere, go for it! Save the world! Just don't expect me to go along.

But you've heard so much "proof" that global climate change is real, right? The debate is supposed to be long over, a done deal. And once the world was flat too... Look, anyone that tells you that they can accurately create a computer model the mimics the infinitely complex climate system of our planet, punch them in the face. It's just not possible. The models are always changing. Every week they come up with different predictions and conclusions. There just isn't anyway for us to accurately predict these things.

To me, the funniest thing is the idea that any amount of tax money could stop/prevent billions of years of natural occurring cycles in our earth's climate. Are you kidding me? The bottom line is that any congressman or government that supports global climate change initiatives is probably only interested in one thing: power. Since the dawn of time power and influence have been gained quickest when fear creates a need for people to depend on one person or one group of people in order to survive. Politicians know this, they aren't completely stupid. So what's the point? Don't be afraid, don't buy into the hype, and don't be willing to give up your money and liberty for global warming, aliens, or bigfoot.

For further enlightenment, check out these articles:

MIT scientists baffled...

Global warming or ice age?...

It's cold!..

Bigfoot sightings...

Founding Father quote of the day

A feeble executive implies a feeble execution of the government. A feeble execution is but another phrase for a bad execution; and a government ill executed, whatever may be its theory, must be, in practice, a bad government.

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 70, 1788

I just have to ask then, what the heck where we thinking electing a president with zero executive experience?