Carson nails this one! I am reminded of a seminar that I attended while in college about ethics in business. This practice of dropping people from the roles because they actually use the benefits that they payed for is, in my opinion, appalling.
Archive for the ‘Economics’ Category
Carsons Post
November 11, 2007More from the blond bombshell!
October 15, 2007“On illegal immigration, [Mike] Huckabee makes George Bush sound like Tom Tancredo. He has compared illegal aliens to slaves brought here in chains from Africa, saying, ‘I think frankly the Lord is giving us a second chance to do better than we did before.’ Toward that end, when an Arkansas legislator introduced a bill that would prevent illegal aliens from voting and receiving state benefits, Huckabee denounced the bill, saying it would rile up ‘those who are racist and bigots.’ He also made the insane point that companies like Toyota would not invest in Arkansas if the state didn’t allow non-citizens to vote because it would ‘send the message that, essentially, ‘If you don’t look like us, talk like us and speak like us, we don’t want you.’ Like all the (other) Democratic candidates for president, he supports a federal law to ban smoking—unless you’re an illegal alien smoking at a Toyota plant. (I just realized why Mike Huckabee can’t run for president as a Democrat—they’ve already got Mike Gravel.) Huckabee also joined with impeached president Bill Clinton in a campaign against childhood obesity. What, O.J. wasn’t available?”—Ann Coulter
I just love her perspective on some issues! 🙂
CITGO
October 7, 2007I recieved this in an email from AFA, I think it needs some checking but am very busy all this week.
Don’t know if this is true, but it sounds scary!
IN ORLANDO LAST WEEK, AT A CITGO STATION REGULAR WAS PRICED AT $2.82 PER GALLON, NO CUSTOMERS, HOWEVER
ACROSS THE STREET FUEL WAS SELLING FOR $2.85 PER GALLON AND ALL PUMPS THERE HAD CARS WAITING TO FUEL.
Have you noticed how the CITGO signs have disappeared in the past 7-8 months? Very clever move by Chavez.
But guess what CITGO IS CHANGING ITS NAME…this is serious Americans…make sure you read.
NEWS FLASH:
Chavez is NOW getting a Russian Weapons Factory built by Putin. The RUSSIANS are building an AK-47
Kalashnikov Assault Rifle factory in Venezuela, to give armament support to Communist Rebel groups throughout the
Americas.
Chavez NOW has IRANIANS operating his oil refineries in Venezuela for him. It is likely only a matter of
time, if not already, before Chavez has Iranian built LONG RANGE missiles, with a variety of warhead types aimed
at: Guess Who?
CITGO is NOW in the process of Changing Its Name to PETRO EXPRESS due to the loss of gasoline sales in the
USA due to the recent publicity of ownership by Chavez of Venezuela.
Every dollar you spend with CITGO or PETRO EXPRESS gasoline will be used against you, your basic human
rights, and your freedoms.
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT because Chavez is starting to feel the loss of revenue from his holdings. HE OWNS
CITGO. This is a very important move that everyone should be aware of.
ANNOUNCED JUST RECENTLY, CITGO, BEING AWARE THAT SALES ARE DOWN DUE TO U.S. CUSTOMERS NOT WANTING TO BUY
FROM “CITGO-CHAVEZ”, HAVE STARTED TO CHANGE THE NAME OF SOME OF THEIR STORES TO: “PETRO EXPRESS” DO NOT BUY
FROM “PETRO EXPRESS” EITHER!!! “PETRO EXPRESS” IS ALSO 100% OWNED BY “CHAVEZ.” KEEP THIS MEMO GOING S THAT
EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT IS HAPPENING.
BOYCOTT
“CITGO” AND “PETRO EXPRESS”
Ron Paul – beating Hillary
October 4, 2007This is from the Republican Liberty Caucus, and while I certainly do not agree with everything that is said in it. It does give one reason to pause, assess, and plan.
Ron Paul – beating Hillary
Posted by: “Doug Newman” dougnewman@juno.com fountoftruth
Wed Oct 3, 2007 9:49 pm (PST)
http://www.chattano ogan.com/ articles/ article_114454. asp Why the GOP Must Nominate Ron Paul – And Response
posted October 2, 2007
Why must the Republican Party nominate a 72-year-old grandfather from the Gulf Coast of Texas, until the past few months little known outside his district, as its 2008 standard-bearer? Very simple: the alternative is eight years of President Hillary Clinton. That ought to be enough to get the attention of every conservative who happens upon these words, so let me explain.
It should come as no big revelation to anyone inside or outside of the Republican Party that the GOP has lost touch with its conservative roots. Massive deficit spending that would make Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter blush; foreign adventurism beyond the wildest dreams of Woodrow Wilson or Teddy Roosevelt; more big government programs than FDR or LBJ (Google “Medicare expansion” for a massive example) … the Republican Party of the early 21st century is clearly not your father’s or grandfather’ s GOP.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas- microsoft- com:office: office” />
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = “urn:schemas- microsoft- com:vml” />
There are no more Robert Tafts, no more Barry Goldwaters, not even any more Ronald Reagans (as imperfect as he turned out to be after reaching the White House) … except one: Ron Paul. Dr. Paul (an OB/GYN who has delivered more than 4,000 babies) is the last, best hope for the GOP to reclaim its once-upon-a- time status as the party of limited government.
It isn’t his status as the leading advocate of limited, constitutional government that makes Ron Paul a must-nominate for the GOP, though. It is true that in the long run, the Republican Party needs him to help it reclaim its spirit, and this indeed will be his lasting legacy. But, in the short run, the party needs him to win the 2008 election and save the country from another <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = “urn:schemas- microsoft- com:office: smarttags” />Clinton presidency that would be far worse than the first. (Unlike Bill, who was apparently mainly involved in politics to get the attention of the ladies, Hillary is a true believer in socialism; and, with a Democratic majority in Congress, she will have an excellent opportunity to expedite its widespread implementation in America.)
Fact one: Hillary Clinton will win the 2008 Democratic nomination. She is an experienced, cut-throat politician with deep ties in the party, and can take Barack Obama down pretty much any time she wants to. And John Edwards is not serious about pursuing the nomination. He is just positioning himself to be the VP nominee again, because in the wake of the 2006 Congressional elections he believes that Hillary will win the Presidency by taking a few key states where John Kerry fell short. Long story short: forget the others – Hillary is the woman to beat in 2008.
Fact two: The 2008 election will be won by the candidate who most credibly addresses the growing anti-war sentiment that has been embraced by the majority of the country’s voters. (Google “2006 mid-term elections.) 70% or more of Americans want out of Iraq, and for many of them, it is the defining issue of the campaign. You may agree or disagree, but it’s a fact and it’s going to decide the 2008 Presidential election.
If it comes down to Hillary Clinton vs. any of the “establishment” Republican candidates, she wins by default. She may have voted for the war originally, but she will continue to claim that she was misled by the Republican administration, and that we should trust her to make things right. (Of course she won’t really get us out of the Middle East mess, but Joe Six-Pack won’t figure that out until after she wins the election.)
If any of the supposed “front runner” Republican candidates (Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain, or Fred Thompson) wins the GOP nomination, Hillary Clinton is essentially a lock. Not only will she win over a sizable portion of the independent vote with her (perceived) status as “the anti-war candidate,” but – simply put – the GOP will not turn out its base in sufficient numbers to win.
Nominate Rudy Giuliani? Conservative, red-state voters are not going to turn out to support a gun-grabbing Northern liberal faux Republican who dresses in drag and is a charter member of the Wife-Of-The- Month Club. The social conservatives, along with the fiscal conservatives and the key swing voters (libertarians and constitutionalists) will either stay home on Election Day or vote third party. Rudy won’t even carry his home state, and ask Al Gore how that usually works out. Slam dunk, Hillary wins.
Nominate Mitt Romney? You get basically the same result as Giuliani without the (bogus) “America’s Mayor” 9/11 cachet. Conservatives in the South and West won’t turn out for the former governor of “Taxachusetts” who has flip-flopped on virtually every issue they hold dear. The fact that Romney is a Mormon won’t help him with the mainstream Christian base, either. He probably can’t win the GOP nomination, but even if he does, Romney is toast in the general election.
Nominate John McCain? Not gonna happen. His campaign has taken a nose dive from which it will be virtually impossible to recover. As of the end of the second quarter, even (supposed) long-shot Ron Paul had more cash on hand – and, when the third quarter numbers come in, McCain will be even further behind in the money game. He probably won’t even be in the top five on the GOP side. Stick a fork in him, he’s done. And even if he could pull off the apparently impossible and come back to win the Republican nomination, he loses to Hillary on the war and many domestic issues as well.
Fred Thompson? He’s the last hope of those Republicans who are looking for a “mainstream” candidate to save them from looming, seemingly inevitable defeat in 2008. On the surface, he appears to have more of a chance than the previously mentioned “big three.” After all, he has the “actor factor.” It worked for Reagan and, more recently, Arnold Schwarzenegger in California – couldn’t it work for Fred, too? Well, no, not this time around.
Like Ronald Reagan, Fred Thompson is reasonably good at reading a script. Unlike the Gipper, though, Fred is just awful at speaking extemporaneously. In case anyone was wondering why Thompson waited so long to declare his candidacy, it’s obvious to those who know anything about his abilities and liabilities: he wanted to avoid as many debates as possible.
Like Obama on the Democratic side, Thompson is an empty suit. He looks reasonably presentable, but sooner or later he has to open his mouth, and when he does he doesn’t say anything of substance. The less he speaks in public (especially with other candidates around to rebut him), the better for Fred. Unfortunately for Thompson, while he has so far been able to duck any direct confrontation with his GOP rivals, he won’t be able to avoid debating Hillary if he wins the Republican nomination. And about five minutes into the first debate, with no “Law and Order” writers to put words in his mouth, it will be over. Game, set, match, Hillary.
When you look at it objectively, there isn’t a single one of the “Big Four” GOP candidates who can beat Hillary Clinton head-to-head. And none of the “second tier” candidates (Huckabee, Brownback, Hunter, Tancredo, et al) have stepped up to the challenge. Really, there is only one remaining viable Republican candidate: You guessed it, Ron Paul.
Only Ron Paul can take advantage of the Internet the way Howard Dean did before he imploded four years ago. Indeed, he has already captured the Internet … the Ron Paul Revolution is already in full swing online. It sure was nice of Al Gore to invent the Net for Ron Paul supporters to take over, wasn’t it?
Only Ron Paul can outflank Hillary Clinton both to the left on the war, and to the right on everything else … which is the only winning strategy the Republicans can plausibly employ in 2008.
Only Ron Paul, who is truly pro-family (married to the same woman for over 50 years, with five children and 18 grandchildren – no “trophy wives” here) can motivate the socially conservative base to actually turn out and vote.
Only Ron Paul, who wants to eliminate the IRS (and a host of other federal agencies) and stop the Federal Reserve from devaluing our money through runaway, printing-press inflation, can motivate the fiscally conservative base to cast a GOP ballot in 2008.
Only Ron Paul can keep the Libertarians and Constitution Party members from splintering off to support their own third-party nominees rather than another neo-con, Bush clone Republican. (In fact, the 2004 nominees of the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party, Michael Peroutka and Michael Badnarik, have both already endorsed Ron Paul’s candidacy.) While the LP and CP may command only a small fraction of the overall vote, that may well be enough to turn the tide in a crucial state or two. Ask Al Gore if he could have used a few thousand of Ralph Nader‘s votes in 2000….
Yes, when you look at things objectively, there are only two candidates who can win the White House in 2008: Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul. The contrast could not be more stark, nor the results for the future of America more divergent. If you are a social or fiscal conservative, a libertarian, a constitutionalist, or just a concerned independent … now is the time to consider your options and act accordingly while there is still time to affect the outcome.
The Ron Paul Revolution has begun.
Joe Dumas
joe@joedumas. com
And I’m proud to be an American, and so are some others…
October 3, 2007Barak Obama! Man for America..?
October 3, 2007As always, do your own research. I say that because there is so much misinformation floating around. From the NRA being blamed for school shootings, to rumors of Hilary Clinton’s homosexuality, mystery abounds in this information age! I recieved this, did my own research, and found it to be sound, or at least as sound as one can do from a distance.
I got this from a life long friend and I am passing it along to you because I KNOW that he does his research… Fred
Subject: Muslim in the White House?
Friends and relatives:Thought you might find this interesting, so I ‘snops’ed it and
‘googled’ it. The results scared the heck out of me.Pure facts:
Who is Barack Obama?
Probable U. S.presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born
in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a Black Muslim
from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from
Wichita,Kansas.
Obama’s parents met at the University of Hawaii.
When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father
returned to Kenya.
His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim From
Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia.
Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years
in a Catholic school.
Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He
Is quick to point out that, “He was once a Muslim, but that he also
attended Catholic school.”
Obama’s political handlers are attempting to make it appear that
Obama’s introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this
influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama
returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct
influence over his son’s education.
Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham,
introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in
Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim
terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world.
Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking
Major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined
the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim
background.Let us all remain alert concerning Obama’s expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level?
Please forward to everyone you know.
—
http://TexasFred.net/
Now, after all of that, ask yourselves, why would this man want America disarmed? His maniacal stance on gun control is, I believe an indicator of ulterior motives. Why would this man want Rush Limbaugh, and others muzzled? Again, I suspect ulterior motives. Why, I ask, is he apparently hell bent on income redistribution? Yet again, I suspect ulterior motives.
Personal weaponry, freedom of speech, and a relatively free economic system are all essentials to maintaining a free America.
The United Nations are again seeking to undermine our Constitution
September 30, 2007U.N. Members, Gun Lobby Face Arms Fight
September 30th, 2007
UNITED NATIONS (AP) – Britain, Japan, Australia and others are pushing for an unprecedented treaty regulating the arms trade worldwide, in a campaign sure to last years and to pit them against a determined American foe, the National Rifle Association.In what U.N. officials say is an “overwhelming” response, almost 100 governments have submitted ideas for such a treaty, to be reviewed over the next year. There’s an “extremely urgent” need for controls on the international gun trade, says Kenya, echoing the sentiment in much of guns-besieged Africa.
But in the U.S., the NRA says it sees a creeping attempt to limit civilian gun ownership within nations – even though the focus now is on setting standards for arms exports and imports.
The international issues “necessarily will come to involve at some point domestic laws and policies regarding firearms,” said former congressman Bob Barr, a leading NRA voice on the subject.
“That’s not what we’re looking at here,” countered Greg Puley, of the Control Arms coalition of pro-treaty advocacy groups. “The point is to control trade in weapons that contribute to conflict and atrocities.”
The NRA and other U.S. gun lobbyists have helped blunt earlier efforts at the United Nations to rein in the weapons trade. Last December, the U.S. delegation cast the lone negative vote when 153 nations approved a General Assembly resolution initiating this new treaty process.
Full Story Here:
U.N. Members, Gun Lobby Face Arms Fightsource:http://texasfred.net/archives/586/trackback/
This is yet again another attempt, in the long run, to undermine the Constitution of the United States. They (elements of authoritarianism within the U.N.) continue to attempt to weaken, and destroy freedom and liberty across the entire globe. So what? It’s only guns…. Well people it’s time to wake up. What will it be next? Your right to spew forth whatever you care to say? Or, it could be any of the other rights that are found in the documents that are the foundations of the United States of America? Those rights are all needed in place, for one supports the other, and so on. Chip away, or remove any of them and the entire ideology that they support will come apart.
Stuck in the Middle
September 27, 2007Seems like what is going on in most of the country these days.
The University of Socialism « THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS
September 21, 2007The University of Socialism « THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS
And I thought only us Goims had these situations!
Frankin’ Foods got nothing on this!
September 17, 2007The new supermarket near our house has an automatic water mister to keep the produce fresh.
Just before it goes on, you hear the sound of distant thunder and the smell of fresh rain.
When you approach the milk cases, you hear cows mooing and witness the scent of fresh hay.
When you approach the egg case, you hear hens cluck and cackle and the air is filled with the pleasing aroma of bacon and eggs frying.
The veggie department features the smell of fresh buttered corn.
I don’t buy toilet paper there any more.
Stolen from…
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 