signal12's Blog

The Difference:

John McCain, Hillary Clinton & Barak Obama were walking down the street when they came to a homeless person. The McCain gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his business for a job. He then took twenty dollars out of his pocket and gave it to the homeless person.

Hillary Clinton was very impressed, and when they came to another homeless person, she decided to help. She walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into McCain's pocket and gave the homeless person twenty dollars. She however kept fifteen dollars for her adminastrative fees and gave the homeless man five dollars.

When they came upon yet another homeless person, Barak Obama told him to have Hope.... Change was coming, and gave the homeless man nothing.

Now do you understand the difference?

I wonder if Obama gets elected, if he will change to a Muslim Flag similar to the ones below. or like Malaysia's...... (Sick thought isn't it)?  8-(

*********************************

There are several Muslim countries that currently feature the crescent moon and star symbol on their national flag.  Even more have used the symbol previously in history, but the color, size, orientation, and design features continue to vary widely from country to country.  It is also interesting to note the diversity of the countries represented.  The majority of these countries are not Arabic-speaking, but rather are part of the greater Muslim world.  Here is a sample (click on the flag for a map and more information about the country):

Malaysia

What do you think, Obama could loose the sun and replace with 50 states small stars... 

This program is a Shocker and worth seeing.
 It may save your life and your loved ones too!

Even though it is a distasteful thought, it is happening across the
globe, and it is something to ponder!!

ALL Americans need to watch this!

Passed along as food for thought without comment or endorsement.
Turn sound on, the message is short, fast, and starts immediately .

Do NOT press 'Enter Site.'
It will start without that. Here's the link:

        http://www.usawakeup.org

WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD?

BARACK OBAMA:
The chicken crossed the road because it was time for a CHANGE! The chicken wanted CHANGE!

JOHN MC CAIN:
My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he recognized the need to engage in cooperation and dialogue with all the chickens on the
other side of the road.

HILLARY CLINTON:
When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure - right from Day One! -- that every chicken in this country gets the chance it deserves to cross the road.  But then, this really isn't about me.......

DR. PHIL:
The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that he must first deal with the problem on 'THIS' side of the road before it goes
after the problem on the 'OTHER SIDE' of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his 'CURRENT'
problems before adding 'NEW' problems.

OPRAH:
Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn
from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I'm going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live his life like the rest of the chickens.

GEORGE W. BUSH:
We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

COLIN POWELL:
Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road...

ANDERSON COOPER - CNN:
We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.

JOHN KERRY:
Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.

NANCY GRACE:
That chicken crossed the road because he's GUILTY! You can see it in his eyes and the way he walks.

PAT BUCHANAN:
To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.

MARTHA STEWART:
No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider information.

DR SEUSS:
Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.

ERNEST HEMINGWAY:
To die in the rain. Alone.

JERRY FALWELL:
Because the chicken was gay! Can't you people see the plain truth? That's why they call it the 'other side.' Yes, my friends, that chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal media white washes with seemingly harmless phrases like the 'other side.' That chicken should not be crossing the road. It's as plain and as simple as that.

GRANDPA:
In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.

BARBARA WALTERS:
Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its life long dream of crossing the road.

ARISTOTLE:
It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

JOHN LENNON:
Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together, in peace.

BILL GATES:
I have just released eChicken2007, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check book. Internet Explorer is an integral part of the Chicken. This new platform is much more stable and will never cra...#@&&^(C% ........reboot.

ALBERT EINSTEIN:
Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?

BILL CLINTON:
I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of chicken?

AL GORE:
I invented the chicken!

COLONEL SANDERS:
Did I miss one?

DICK CHENEY:
Where's my gun?

AL SHARPTON:
Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.

LONG READ BUT Informative!

This is the guy that wants to live in the Whitehouse

 
1.) Selma Got Me Born - LIAR, your parents felt safe enough to have
you in 1961 - Selma had no effect on your birth, as Selma was in 1965.
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder - LIAR, he was a privileged, well
educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.

3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - LIAR, he was part of one of
the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - LIAR, your cousin
Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a
legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread
violence in decades.

5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - LIAR, she does her
daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to
mention, Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives
to 1 man.

6.) My Name is African Swahili - LIAR, your name is Arabic, and
'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language.
Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

7.) I Never Practiced Islam - LIAR, you practiced it daily at school,
where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31
years,until your wife made you change so you could run for office.

8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - LIAR, you were registered
as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces
(check your own book).

9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - LIAR, not one teacher says you could
speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience -
LIAR, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak
the language. What did you learn was how to study the Koran and watch
cartoons.

11 .) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - LIAR, except for Africa
(surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been
anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our
closest allies.

12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - LIAR, you were
quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya
and no mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you did
just fine.

13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - LIAR, Ebony has yet
to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never
did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - LIAR, Life
has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and
never did, exist.

15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - LIAR, here you are,
despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience
by then, and you are all about having experience first.

16.) Present Votes Are common In Illinois - LIAR, they are common for
YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.

17.) Oops, I Misvoted - LIAR, only when caught by church groups and
democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer ON
LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - LIAR, you were a senior lecturer
ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - LIAR, you didn't
write it,introduce it, change it, or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - LIAR, it took just 14 days
from start to finish.

22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - LIAR, your bill was rejected by
your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly
because of your Nuclear Donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - LIAR, as of March, 2008, state
bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing all
the special interests pork hi dden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - LIAR, you were part
of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to
mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.

25.) My Economics Bill Will Help America - LIAR, your 111 economic
policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even
YOU voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - LIAR, even your own
supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - LIAR, they were not
YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow
Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.

28.) No One Contacted Canada About NAFTA - LIAR, the Candian
Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your
campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - LIAR, you missed the Iran Resolution
vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the
destruction of Israel.

30.) I Am Not Acting As President Yet - LIAR, after the NAFTA Memo, a
dead terrorist in the FARC, in Colombia, was found with a letter
stating how you and he were working together on getting FARC
recognized officially.

31.) I Didn't Run Ads In Florida - LIAR, you allowed national ads to
run 8-12 times per day for two weeks - and you still lost.

32.) I Won Michigan - LIAR, no you didn't.

33.) I won Nevada - LIAR, no you did not.

34.) I Want All Votes To Count - LIAR, you said let the delegates
decide.

35.) I Want Americans To Decide - LIAR, you prefer caucuses that limit
the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate
during small windows of time.

36.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - LIAR, you passed 26,
most of which you didn't write yourself.

37.) My Campaign Was Extorted By A Friend - LIAR, that "friend" is
threatening to sue if you do not stop saying this. (Obama has stopped
saying this.)

38.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - LIAR, you used tactics to
eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

39.) I Don't Take PAC Money - LIAR, you take loads of it.

40.) I don't Have Lobbysists - LIAR, you have over 47 lobbyists, and
counting.

41.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - LIAR, your own
campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.

42.) My Campaign Never Took Over MySpace - LIAR, Tom, who started
MySpace issued a warning about this advertising to MySpace clients.

43.) I Inspire People With My Words - LIAR, you inspire people with
other people's words.

44.) I Have Passed Bills In The U.S. Senate - LIAR, you have passed A
SINGLE BILL in the U.S. Senate - for Africa, which shows YOUR
priorities.

45.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - LIAR, you weren't in office to
vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time,
unlike Dennis Kucinich, who seems to be out-gutting you, Obama. You
also seem to be stepping back from your departure date - AGAIN.

46.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - LIAR, your plan
leaves the rest of us all to pay the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy
it.

47.) I Only Found Out About My Investment Conflicts Via Mail - LIAR,
both companies you cite as having sent you letters about this conflict
have no record of any such letter ever being created or sent.

48.) I Am As Patriotic As Anyone - LIAR, you won't wear a flag pin and
you don't put your hand over your heart during the Anthem.

49.) My Wife Didn't Mean What She Said About Pride In Country - LIAR,
your wife's words follow lock-step in the vain of Wright and
Farrahkan, in relation to their contempt and hatred of America.

50.) Wal-Mart Is A Company I Wouldn't Support - LIAR, your wife has
received nearly a quarter of a million dollars through Treehouse,
which is connected to Wal-Mart.

.
You should find these details interesting.
 
The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers' Party.  Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton are lawyers.  Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are
lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a
lawyer and so is his wife Elizabeth.  Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went
to law school (although Gore did not graduate.)  Every  Democrat vice
presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Benson, went to law school.  Look
at the Democrat Party in Congress:  the Majority Leader in each house is a
lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.  President Bush and Vice President
Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen.  The leaders of the Republican
Revolution were not lawyers.  Newt Gingrich was a history professor;  Tom Delay
was an exterminator; and  Dick Armey was an economist.   House Minority Leader
Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer.  The former Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer?  Gerald Ford,
who left office thirty-one years ago and who barely won the Republican
nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in
1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. 
 
The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers.  Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history like Gingrich.

The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and
services that people want, as the enemies of America .  And so we have
seen the procession of official enemies in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party
grow. Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail?  Pharmaceutical companies, oil
companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large
retail businesses, bankers and anyone producing anything of value in
our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes
of lawyers.  Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their
clients, in this case the American people.  Lawyers seek to have new laws
passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn
precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine.  But it is an
awful way to govern a great nation.  When politicians as lawyers begin to
view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then
the role of the legal system in our life becomes all consuming.   Some
Americans become 'adverse parties' of our very government.  We are not all
litigants in some vast social class action suit.  We are citizens of a republic
which promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from
lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws, we are contorted by judicial decisions,
we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our
once private lives.  America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that
place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked.  When the most important
decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme
Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big.  When
lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means,
as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power
of lawyers in America is too great.  When House Democrats sue America in
order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do
to use, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the  Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real
reform  or real hope in America .  Most Americans know that a republic in which
every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not
what Washington intended in 1789.  Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight
a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders.  Most
Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral
values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our
nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society
and business.  Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the
mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work.
Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will
only make our problems worse.

Sorry Long read, but informative..

When it comes to the 2008 presidential election, both Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton have one common socialist goal: universal health care. The Democrats want to reform health care to the point of socialized medicine.

Universal health care is bad.

How many students on campus appreciate the fact they're required to enroll with the Student Health Insurance Plan unless they have alternate coverage? Let's consider a hypothetical situation. Imagine the university forcing us to enroll in SHIP regardless of whether or not we already have coverage. In the process of forcing every student to enroll in SHIP, it became free, causing the cost of tuition to jump 30 percent.

Take that one step farther and mandate all students must seek medical treatment at the Health and Wellness Center. Nearly 20,000 students seek treatment at the small building on the corner of University Avenue and Joyce Street. This is a universal health care system.

As a free-market capitalist, I understand the need for health care, and I understand the frustration some Americans have with our current health care system. The problem with universal health care is not the care itself, but the people who receive care without paying for it. Some people argue health insurance is too expensive and inhibits Americans from obtaining proper coverage. I argue those freeloaders need to develop strong priorities to start insuring themselves.

According to a study found on the Depository Services Program Website, America looks to Canada to model its health care system based on a number of fiscal statistics. For example, Canada's current healthcare percentage gross national product is nine percent - that is much lower than the United States' 15 percent. Also the infant mortality rate in Canada is 7.9 per 1,000 births, compated to the United States' 10.5 per 1,000. When looking at these statistics, Canada seems to have health care under control, but this can be misleading.

While Canada's health care system appears to run more fiscally efficient, other factors must be taken into account. Rationing is prominent in socialized medicine. Rationing is what will occur if every student has to receive treatment at the Health and Wellness Center. Long lines, waiting lists and understaffed hospitals are outcomes we can expect under a universal health care system.

One of the biggest myths being propogated today is the absurd notion that "people can't see a doctor without having insurance." The truth is office visits are relatively cheap, well within the means of most people. The problem is most people don't budget anything for their annual medical care. And, then when a problem arises, any expense greater than zero "isn't in the budget."

The other problem is that insurance really isn't insurance anymore. It is pre-paid health care. True insurance is intended to prevent financial disaster in the face of an unlikely event. Most people, however, have come to expect first dollar coverage for everything including very common and likely events like routine doctor office visits. "Covered'' employees don't realize it's their money going to pay for this "wonderful" non-bargain of first dollar coverage. It's not a "free" benefit provided by their employer as most employees believe. These costs are essentially hidden from employees. Money their employer wastes in purchasing first dollar coverage or inferior managed care coverage for the employee is money which would have been the employee's salary to spend as they choose.

The reason most people obtain their health insurance from their employer is because of tax discrimination. During World War II, our government enacted wage and price controls. Employers couldn't attract better workers by offering higher wages, but were allowed to offer health insurance as an untaxed benefit. Although World War II ended 54 years ago, this same tax discrimination policy remains in effect today. This atrocious policy discriminates against the working poor, part-time employees, employees working for small businesses that don't offer health insurance, and the self-employed. Those who obtain their health insurance through their employer, purchase their coverage with pre-tax dollars. On the other hand, those who purchase their health insurance on their own, purchase it with after-tax dollars --- a huge difference. In fact, the uninsured actually end up paying what amounts to a tax penalty for being uninsured.(1) It is estimated that "a family in the bottom fifth of the income distribution pays about $450 more in taxes than insured families at the same income level. For families in the top fifth of the income distribution, the tax penalty is $1,780."(1) The analysis goes on to say that "on the average, uninsured families pay about $1,018 more in federal taxes each year because they do not have employer-provided insurance. Collectively, the uninsured pay about $17.1 billion in extra taxes each year because they do not receive the same tax break as insured people with similar income. If state and local taxes are included, the extra taxes paid by the uninsured exceed $19 billion per year."(1)

Where, we must ask, is the compassion for these overtaxed, hard-working people? This is clearly a government-created problem. What we don't need is more government (nationalized health care) to "fix it." What we need is to get government out of our wallets so people can have their own money needed to purchase and own their own health insurance. The other thing the pro-socialist "crisis mongers" fail to tell people is that only one-third of the uninsured are chronically uninsured.2 For the other two-thirds, it is only a short, temporary condition, "half of all uninsured spells will last less than six-months. Three-fourths of them will be insured within 12 months. Only 18 percent of all last for more than two years."(2)

Those who brandish the "crisis" of the uninsured to promote socialized medicine also often fail to tell people that uninsured doesn't necessarily mean poor. In fact, the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) tells us that "a third of the uninsured households earn more than $30,000 a year and 10 percent earn more than $50,000."(2) That's at least 40 percent of the so-called "uninsured" that could well afford a $45 office visit or health insurance.(2) We need to get away from the concept that "someone else," big government or insurance, needs to take care of our every need.

Indeed, "universal coverage," nationalized health care, or socialized medicine, regardless of what you choose to call it, is not the same as, medical care. All of the citizens of Canada, for instance, have "universal coverage." What they often don't have, however, is the medical care that they need when they need it. That is why we see Canadians crossing the border into the United States in droves to obtain the health care that they can't get when they need it in their own country. Their government rations access to health care and thus attempts to control costs by making MRI scans, radiation oncology, bypass surgeries and many other health services largely unavailable to their own people. Is this the egalitarian's view of compassion and social justice?

Yes, we need health care reform, but it needs to be based upon the principles of individual freedom and individual responsibility. And, there are many options out there. Most people could purchase a high deductible indemnity insurance policy at a lower price than they would pay for monthly managed care premiums. That's right --- a much higher quality of health care at a lower price! Imagine, having the freedom to choose the doctor or hospital you want to go to, being able to go to specialists without denials, delays, and gatekeepers. And, the money saved by purchasing a high-deductible catastrophic policy could be set aside in a special savings account to pay for deductibles. The money saved by purchasing a high-deductible policy could also be used to pay for the insurance premiums.

And, last but not least, there is charity. No hospital ever turns any patient away because of lack of funds. Hospitals and the physicians on call at those hospitals are required by law to treat all patients presenting to the emergency department irrespective of ability to pay. And we do it all the time. It's a total myth that you can't come to the hospital because you "don't have insurance" or "can't pay." Charity is something that should involve churches, not big government. What big government does, confiscating money from all, including the minimum wage earner, and redistributing it based upon some social engineering scheme, isn't charity. It's legalized plunder. True charity comes from the heart, not from forced "contributions." Most churches and charitable agencies understand the dependency trap of big government programs. They understand that it does no good in the long run to give a man fish for his dinner. This does not help him. To help a man, you must teach him to fish. The goal should be to help a man back to his feet so he can support himself and his family, not to trap them in a cycle of dependency. I find it very sad in a country where men and women have died fighting to preserve our freedom and have died fighting off socialism and communism that some are now considering socialized medicine as a solution to improving access to health care.

Lenin once said that "medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism,'' and I believe those who are promoting "universal coverage" via government-run and government-controlled medicine know this. What they hope is that the public won't find out the truth. There is nothing compassionate about socialism. This is why the AAPS gives a high priority to educating other physicians and the public about the truth of socialized medicine. That is why AAPS should be joined and supported by all physicians!

What these politicians and many other Americans fail to understand is that there's a big difference between universal coverage and actual access to medical care.

Simply saying that people have health insurance is meaningless. Many countries provide universal insurance but deny critical procedures to patients who need them. Britain's Department of Health reported in 2006 that at any given time, nearly 900,000 Britons are waiting for admission to National Health Service hospitals, and shortages force the cancellation of more than 50,000 operations each year. In Sweden, the wait for heart surgery can be as long as 25 weeks, and the average wait for hip replacement surgery is more than a year. Many of these individuals suffer chronic pain, and judging by the numbers, some will probably die awaiting treatment. In a 2005 ruling of the Canadian Supreme Court, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin wrote that "access to a waiting list is not access to healthcare."

Parliament unanimously passed the Canada Health Act in 1984 and established a single-payer, publicly-financed health care system. To ensure a true government monopoly (is there any other kind?) Canadian provinces outlawed private health insurance.

Chaoulli v. Quebec UPDATE (June 9, 2005): In a 4 to 3 decision, the Canadian Supreme Court struck down Quebec's law that prohibits private medical insurance.

 

Other countries that have goverment controlled health care programs, are suffering as well.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socia
lized.html#europe

Example:

Universal health care: Is it worth the long waits?

Push is on for private insurance in Canada as residents come to the U.S. for timely treatment After battling brain cancer, Lindsay McCreith is ready for his next fight: He’s taking on the Canadian health care system. His case has potential repercussions on both sides of the border as pressure grows for health reform.

It started when McCreith, a resident of Newmarket, north of Toronto, suffered a seizure  (2006). He was told in Canada he would have to wait more than four months for an MRI to rule out a malignant tumor.

Rather than wait, McCreith, 66, quickly arranged a trip to Buffalo for a scan. The MRI confirmed his worst fears — a cancerous growth that a Buffalo neurosurgeon removed a few weeks later. “If I had been patient, I’d probably be disabled or dead today,” McCreith said.

Now, McCreith is suing the Ontario government in a closely watched constitutional challenge that could reshape universal health coverage in the province by striking down the prohibition against patients buying private insurance.

On this side of the border, advocates of universal health insurance champion Canada’s popular public program as a fairer system that the United States should emulate, as seen in Michael Moore film, “Sicko.” Yet critics see the long waits for some services in Canada — mainly for non-emergency surgery — as an argument against an increased role for government in health care.

In Canada, McCreith’s story reflects a debate, intensified by the long waiting times, between those who want more for-profit, private care and those who fear the rise of two-tier medicine that undermines the public system.

 

So you still think we have it bad here in the USA?

http://www.therealcuba.com/

 

 

This was a great article, read and enjoy!

" There is a great amount of interest in this year’s presidential elections, as everybody seems to recognize that our next president has to be a lot better than George Bush. The Democrats are riding high with two groundbreaking candidates — a woman and an African-American — while the conservative Republicans are in a quandary about their party’s nod to a quasi-liberal maverick, John McCain.

Each candidate is carefully pandering to a smorgasbord of special-interest groups, ranging from gay, lesbian and transgender people to children of illegal immigrants to working mothers to evangelical Christians.

There is one group no one has recognized, and it is the group that will decide the election: the Angry White Man. The Angry White Man comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America, from urban sophisticate to rural redneck, deep South to mountain West, left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.

His common traits are that he isn’t looking for anything from anyone — just the promise to be able to make his own way on a level playing field. In many cases, he is an independent businessman and employs several people. He pays more than his share of taxes and works hard.

The victimhood syndrome buzzwords — “disenfranchised,” “marginalized” and “voiceless” — don’t resonate with him. “Press ‘one’ for English” is a curse-word to him. He’s used to picking up the tab, whether it’s the company Christmas party, three sets of braces, three college educations or a beautiful wedding.

He believes the Constitution is to be interpreted literally, not as a “living document” open to the whims and vagaries of a panel of judges who have never worked an honest day in their lives.

The Angry White Man owns firearms, and he’s willing to pick up a gun to defend his home and his country. He is willing to lay down his life to defend the freedom and safety of others, and the thought of killing someone who needs killing really doesn’t bother him.

The Angry White Man is not a metrosexual, a homosexual or a victim. Nobody like him drowned in Hurricane Katrina — he got his people together and got the hell out, then went back in to rescue those too helpless and stupid to help themselves, often as a police officer, a National Guard soldier or a volunteer firefighter.

His last name and religion don’t matter. His background might be Italian, English, Polish, German, Slavic, Irish, or Russian, and he might have Cherokee, Mexican, or Puerto Rican mixed in, but he considers himself a white American.

He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf, spend a few bucks at a strip club once in a blue moon, change his own oil and build things. He coaches baseball, soccer and football teams and doesn’t ask for a penny. He’s the kind of guy who can put an addition on his house with a couple of friends, drill an oil well, weld a new bumper for his truck, design a factory and publish books. He can fill a train with 100,000 tons of coal and get it to the power plant on time so that you keep the lights on and never know what it took to flip that light switch.

Women either love him or hate him, but they know he’s a man, not a dishrag. If they’re looking for someone to walk all over, they’ve got the wrong guy. He stands up straight, opens doors for women and says “Yes, sir” and “No, ma’am.”

He might be a Republican and he might be a Democrat; he might be a Libertarian or a Green. He knows that his wife is more emotional than rational, and he guides the family in a rational manner.

He’s not a racist, but he is annoyed and disappointed when people of certain backgrounds exhibit behavior that typifies the worst stereotypes of their race. He’s willing to give everybody a fair chance if they work hard, play by the rules and learn English.

Most important, the Angry White Man is pissed off. When his job site becomes flooded with illegal workers who don’t pay taxes and his wages drop like a stone, he gets righteously angry. When his job gets shipped overseas, and he has to speak to some incomprehensible idiot in India for tech support, he simmers. When Al Sharpton comes on TV, leading some rally for reparations for slavery or some such nonsense, he bites his tongue and he remembers. When a child gets charged with carrying a concealed weapon for mistakenly bringing a penknife to school, he takes note of who the local idiots are in education and law enforcement.

He also votes, and the Angry White Man loathes Hillary Clinton. Her voice reminds him of a shovel scraping a rock. He recoils at the mere sight of her on television. Her very image disgusts him, and he cannot fathom why anyone would want her as their leader. It’s not that she is a woman. It’s that she is who she is. It’s the liberal victim groups she panders to, the “poor me” attitude that she represents, her inability to give a straight answer to an honest question, his tax dollars that she wants to give to people who refuse to do anything for themselves.

There are many millions of Angry White Men. Four million Angry White Men are members of the National Rifle Association, and all of them will vote against Hillary Clinton, just as the great majority of them voted for George Bush.

He hopes that she will be the Democratic nominee for president in 2008, and he will make sure that she gets beaten like a drum.

Gary Hubbell is a writer, photographer, location scout for films and photo shoots, and a ranch real estate broker. He writes a monthly column for the Aspen Times Weekly

Barack Obama Favorite Way To Mollify Supporters:
Nodding solemnly while gripping podium

Issues:
Pro-hopes, also supports dreams

Political Experience:
(2005–) Junior Senator from Illinois. Working directly under Senior Senator Richard Durbin himself, duties included fact-checking and copyediting the 2006 highway appropriations amendment bill. Member, Illinois State Senate (1997-2004)

Difficulty Catching A Cab:
Moderate

Personal Best For Getting Digits:
32 seconds

Odds Of Pop-Locking During Inauguration:
1 in 12
Key Issues

• Health Care Promises to reduce cost of health care by demanding private insurance companies stop liking astronomical profits.
• Iraq War Will have American soldiers tell the Iraqi soldiers that they're just going out for some smokes, and then sneak back home to America.
• Abortion Did some crazy EDIT in the '80's, not going to lie.
• Immigration Would refuse to allow Kenyans to come to America, father children, abandon children, attend Harvard PhD programs, and return to Kenya.
• Economy Will cut taxes, but occasionally hit up Oprah on behalf of treasury.
• Climate Has an extensive five-year plan to charm climate back to normal temperatures.
• Pakistaniran Guarantees improved relations with Kenya, Indonesia, Hawaii, and Illinois.
• ---------------------------------------

Hillary Clinton Experience:
Husband secretly let her run country from 1997-1999

Reason For Presidential Bid:
Left some stuff at White House

Favorite Food:
Wheat slurry injected directly into her stomach

Signature Issue:
Becoming President of the United States

Murder Convictions:
3

Make-up Secrets:
Classified

Reproductive Process:
Squirts thousands of egg sacs into host intestine, then fertilizes them herself
Key Issues

• Health Care "I am the only candidate who can claim experience on the issue of health care: an experience of glaring, humiliating failure dating back more than a decade."
• Iraq War "I would never have voted for the war had we known it would become unpopular."
• Abortion Has enforced at least two on Bill Clinton's other partners.
• Immigration "I voted for the border fence because I believe in order to solve our immigration crisis we must first show immigrants how unwelcoming, hateful, and xenophobic America is."
• Economy "We need to create new jobs in this country—green collar jobs that can help our economy and our environment. And I'd like to point out that that's my term—'green collar' jobs. See, I can come up with exciting phrases."
• Climate Will double education spending so that our children will be ready to deal with the problem once it gets really bad.
• Pakistaniran Voted to require 15 minutes' extra diplomacy before launching airstrikes.

   Worst Presidential Blunders

Sorry long article:

From engaging in sexual relations with an intern to letting the Vietnam War escalate, U.S. presidents have been blamed for some egregious errors.

So who had the worst blunder? President James Buchanan, for failing to avert the Civil War, according to a survey of presidential historians organized by the University of Louisville's McConnell Center.


"We can probably learn just as much - or maybe even more - by looking at the mistakes rather than looking at why they were great,"

 Buchanan didn't do enough to oppose efforts by Southern states to secede from the Union before the Civil War.

The second worst mistake, Andrew Johnson's decision just after the Civil War to side with Southern whites and oppose improvements in justice for Southern blacks beyond abolishing slavery.

"We continue to pay" for Johnson's errors,

Lyndon Johnson earned the No. 3 spot by allowing the Vietnam War to intensify, Gregg said.


Where does Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinsky scandal rank? Many scholars said it belonged at No. 10, saying that it probably affected Clinton's presidency more than it did American history and the public.

The rest of the top 10 blunders:

-4: Woodrow Wilson's refusal to compromise on the Treaty of Versailles after World War1.

-5: Richard Nixon's involvement in the Watergate cover-up.

-6: James Madison's failure to keep the United States out of the War of 1812 with Britain.

-7: Thomas Jefferson's Embargo Act of 1807, a self-imposed prohibition on trade with Europe during the Napoleonic Wars.

-8: John F. Kennedy allowing the Bay of Pigs Invasion that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

-9: Ronald Reagan and the Iran-Contra Affair, the effort to sell arms to Iran and use the money to finance an armed anti-communist group in Nicaragua.

seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...rs.html

Hillary Clinton Set up Website to Change Democratic Party Rules

 Mrs. Clintons words, "If you cannot win, playing by the rules, CHANGE them!"

Jefferson never told us to include in any official document that we should separate church and state! The real story, as Paul Harvey likes to say, is that the Danbury Baptists were fearful that this new President was going to make them change their method of worship, which was controversial in his day, and so they wrote him asking him to address this. President Jefferson immediately wrote back to assure them. In that letter, he wrote,

 “I contemplate with sovereign reverence the act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

Past Democrat Presidents may have agreed with Gingrich. It was Harry S. Truman, who said,

 

“We believe that all men are created equal because they are created in the image of God.”

 

And it was President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who claimed,

 

“Rules are not necessarily sacred, but principles are!”

 

My favorite quote, though, comes from President Ronald Reagan,(R) who said,

 

“If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under!”

 

The coming 2008 election is the most important one we will ever face as we will be making the decision as to what kind of country we intend to leave for our children or grandchildren to inherit. Will it be a Godless, Socialist democracy with high taxes causing fewer jobs while those who do work will have to not only support their own families but also take care of those who refuse to work or are not legal citizens? Or will we leave them the great Republic Americans have been building since 1776 with freedom for all to pursue happiness as promised by our Constitution. Our nation is now teetering on a political cusp ready to slide down to the left or the right. Your 2008 votes will decide the future fate of this country and what those ready to inherit this nation will have to live with. Once the votes are counted, there will be no turning back. 2009 will start eight years of the following:

 

1) To maintain a nation under God or to continue to completely separate church and state, thus to maintain faith or move to being a secularist nation;

 

2) To stay as a Republic or be converted to a European-type Democracy;

 

3) To keep Capitalism or accept Socialism;

 

4) Keep lower taxes with more jobs or higher taxes with fewer jobs available as a result.;

 

5) To have a Constructional or a Legislative Supreme Court;

 

6) To continue our current emotional and political “Cultural War” or to, once again, unite as the true United States of America!

 

How you vote in 2008 will answer which of the above our next generation will inherit!

 

If anyone else has information on past Democratic Presidents that caused problems in our country during their term.. Please feel free to post them..!

 

How Enron Worked the President

Are You Ready?
How Enron Worked the President!

 

 

 

(This is an interesting bit of information that you don't hear much about.)

1.Enron's chairman did meet with the president and the vice president in the Oval Office.

2.Enron gave $420,000 to the president's party over three years.

3.It donated $100,000 to the president's inauguration festivities.

4.The Enron chairman stayed at the White House 11 times.

5.The corporation had access to the administration at its highest level and even enlisted the Commerce and State Departments to grease deals for it.

6.The taxpayer-supported Export-Import Bank subsidized Enron for more than $600 million in just one transaction.
Scandalous!!

(Look below ..... )

 

 

 

BUT...the president under whom all this happened WAS NOT George W. Bush.

SURPRISE!

 

It was President Bill Clinton!

No surprise! And do you think Hillary didn't know?

Pass this on so the whole Country will know. The Media Won't!

ARE WE REALLY READY FOR MRS. CLINTON?

To Be a Good Liberal Democrat:

1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical documented changes in the earth’s climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV’s.

6. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

7. You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

8. You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

9. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

10. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make The Passion of the Christ for financial gain only.

11. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

12. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

13. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and A.G. Bell.

14. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

15. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

16. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried is because the right people haven’t been in charge.

17. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

18. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

19. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States.

20. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy.

21. You have to believe that it’s okay to give Federal workers off on Christmas Day but it’s not okay to say “Merry Christmas.”

 *** Democratic President Grover Cleveland in 1887 expressed the philosophy of the American people when he declared, “Though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.” Too bad modern-day liberals, with their moral blind spot and their lack of economic understanding, have led and are still trying to lead our nation in the opposite direction.

Joe Mariani

Liberal "Rules" for Arguing
June 10, 2003 By Joe Mariani

During the past year, I have spent countless hours trying to have rational debates about the various issues surrounding Iraq with Liberals on various message boards all over the Web. I've wondered over and over why they all seem to follow certain patterns. I've been trying to codify the rules that they seem to use, to increase my ability to identify the tactics they're using. When I identify which rule they're following, they invariably reply with strings of invective, proving that they know exactly what they're doing.

#1: Attack Your Opponent
If you feel that your opponent is trying to use facts to your disadvantage, attack him or her personally. Call your opponent names, insult his ancestry, imply that he performs improbable sex acts with animals or his own mother -- or both. If you can arouse his anger, you will have him on familiar ground where he can be beat. Your aim is to make your opponent stop using those pesky facts and figures to win the argument -- everyone knows arguments are supposed to be emotional, not cold and rational, so he's doing it wrong to start with. Names guaranteed to upset an opponent with a conservative bent are Nazi, Dittohead (meaning he's a fan of Rush Limbaugh), and Sheep. Spell "Republican" and "America" with a K in them, to suggest that your opponent is a member of the KKK -- but if they mention that Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a Klansman, accuse your opponent of making an ad hominem attack! Make sure to claim that your opponent is either a dupe, is brainwashed, or is perhaps working for the government. If at all possible, make personal attacks on President Bush at the same time; that usually forces people to try and defend him.

#2: Switch Your Arguments
If you feel that your are beginning to lose an argument, change it. Switch sides altogether if you have to. For instance, if you are arguing that there are no biological or chemical weapons in Iraq, and your opponent quotes one of the many UN reports that state there definitely were banned weapons there, suddenly change your argument to "of course, there were, the US gave them to Saddam". Never mind the fact that you were just saying they didn't exist -- the purpose is to confuse your opponent and keep him from winning the argument. And in the above instance, if your opponent shows records from the CDC proving that Iraq requested medical samples through the World Health Organisation to combat anthrax and botulism, switch your argument BACK AGAIN and claim that Saddam destroyed the WMD he made form the samples after kicking out the inspectors in 1998, ignoring your earlier arguments that there never was any, and then that the US provided it. Logic is for losers! Consistency is for conservatives! If your opponent gives up the argument, loudly proclaim a victory!

#3: Raise The Bar
When your opponent presents you with proof of anything -- UN records of WMD stockpiles, Amnesty International records of humanitarian crimes, eyewitness accounts of rape, torture, murder, etc -- state that it's not enough to convince you. Tell your opponent that his so- called "proof" doesn't mean anything at all. Insist that anything from only one source doesn't count. Force him or her to go back and search for more proof... and more, and still more. Eventually, your opponent will grow tired of trying to convince you with mere facts and figures, and either give up or get angry -- and then you know you've got him! You can tell everyone that your opponent lost because his or her proof was "laughable".

#4: Attack The Source
When your opponent presents you with those pesky facts, there's only one way to beat him -- attack the source. Refuse to give credence to anything reported by the Weekly Standard, or NewsMax, even if your opponent's facts come from another source as well. Any news outlet even slightly to the right of the New York Times, the LA Times, CBS, ABC, NPR and Time is immediately suspect. Put down FOX news channel and anyone that refers to it -- ignore the fact that they have reported the same stories as every other network. The fact that your opponent uses any of those obviously biased sources automatically proves him wrong, a brainwashed tool, a sheep, etc (see rule #1). If he gives you information from a web site, attack that site as being biased, or right-wing. If he attacks your sources as being left-wing, scoff at that argument -- you know that "left wing" and "correct" are the same thing. Quotes from any liberal source (even a non-journalist's web page or blog) are automatically correct, while any conservative source is OBVIOUSLY distorting the facts to make an ideological point.

#5: Blame America First/Moral Equivalency
It's very important, at all times, to remember that America is the REAL bad guy here, everywhere, and for all time. If your opponent shows facts about Saddam's humanitarian offenses, match them with claims of America's own "atrocities". Although your opponent will claim there is no comparison between the two, continue to claim, for instance, that Saddam's 30- year record of using rape, murder, torture and mutilation on prisoners merely accused of crimes is the EXACT SAME THING as Texas administering the death penalty after due process of law. Argue that because America has not always been absolutely perfect, Americans have no right to judge any other country, no matter what it does, even though the Geneva Convention did not exist until after WWII. Stay focussed on your vision of an evil America ruled by corporate greed, evil America slobbering to kill the innocents in other countries, evil America ruthlessly building an empire, and evil America only pretending to be benevolent and generous to other countries. Never give credence to your opponent's arguments that America rebuilt countries like France, Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, Grenada, etc... it was obviously a ruse of some kind! Always seek to put the worst possible interpretation on everything America does or ever has done, or any statement by any member of the Administration. Remember that America exists only to dominate the entire world, like a James Bond supervillain. For reference, watch as many Oliver Stone movies as possible. Remember that American soldiers always act exactly like the soldiers in Platoon.

For more Liberal rules of Arguing:

http://www.useless-knowledge.com/columnists/joemari
ani/article24.html

Arm yourselves, Knowledge is power......

Please note, My Political party is Moderate Independent.

The Liberal Agenda or Communist Agenda?


Quote: Originally posted by From the ArmchairThe word "Liberal" originally described honorable and principled men who held to a philosophy of government that advocated Constitutional Republicanism. Constitutional Republicanism is a type of government almost unknown to most of the world. America was originally a Constitutional Republic. A Constitutional Republic defined is characterized by a very small government with limits on its powers of taxation and whose other powers are strictly limited by rigorously enforced Constitutional edicts. The honorable old Liberals of the 19th century would certainly not recognize the "liberals" of today. Modern Liberals promote, advocate, and enforce the centralization of all political power into an all powerful central government.

Some thoughts about modern liberals:

At the most basic level, the Liberal is anti-God. The Liberal attempts to use government to eliminate all moral consequences for immoral behavior. The Liberal imagines that freedom from moral consequence can be secured by a collectivist, totalitarian state.

Liberals use moralistic platitudes and catchy phrases like "social justice" and "The Brotherhood of Man" to appeal to the naive masses who are duped into believing that the ultimate goals of Liberals are genuinely good..

The fundamental power struggle of Liberals may be classified as the individual versus the collective. The Liberal supports the collective in every contest against the individual. Liberals hate Individualism because it demands moral responsibility. Liberals support collectivism because they hope to eliminate the need for moral responsibility.

The U.S. Constitution and specifically the support for rugged individualism which is evident in the Bill of Rights, is the enemy of the Liberal. The Liberal despises the United States because it is the premier protector and promoter of individualism in the world.

In the mind of a Liberal, all institutions and concerns schools, environment, courts, etc. - serve no relevant purpose other than the promotion of collectivism.

To a Liberal, abortion becomes necessary to guarantee sexual freedom and eliminate moral consequence.

Any religion or religious person who believes or teaches that there are moral consequences for sin, is the enemy of Liberalism and must be oppressed. Thus for the collectivist Liberal bent on imposing socialism upon a nation, Christianity is the number one enemy above all other enemies. Christianity must be eliminated..

Strong families are one of the greatest threats to the final goals of Liberalism. The total disintegration of the American family in recent decades among some ethnic communities has occurred as a direct result of the design and intention of Liberals.

Private ownership of guns is the single greatest symbol of individual power, and therefore is despised by Liberals.

The Liberal despises national sovereignty. Why? Because the best protection of individual freedoms is found in small decentralized governments.

The Liberal promotes the growth of multi-national and international governments such as the European Union and the United Nations because these organizations advance the cause of socialism and seek to destroy the very individualism that is best protected by sovereign states.

The Liberal fears any hint of individualism in any part of the world, and is obsessed with the centralized control of all human activity and thought. Thus the Liberal constantly seeks total control over all forms of media.

"Multi-culturalism" is the liberal code word for a single, oppressive, collectivist culture.

Liberals speak often of tolerance, but they only tolerate Liberals and Liberal ideas.

The Liberal seeks to criminalize any speech that promotes morality or individualism as "hate speech." Thus we see Liberal Judges and Liberal Courts outlawing the Bible and gutting the free speech provisions of the first amendment of the constitution. Liberal Judges are now declaring that the Bible's proscriptions against homosexuality are illegal "hate speech" and scripture is now in the process of being outlawed from any appearance in public discourse or the public square.

The Liberal's only method of debate is to appeal to the emotions of uneducated and illogical persons. Liberals seek to insult and discredit anyone who dares to disagree with them, especially in the college classroom. Why? Because the facts of logic and history do not support the agenda they are seeking to advance.

When possible, Liberals oppress anyone who questions their beliefs.

Liberals despise all innocence - especially the innocence of a child. Thus Hollywood Liberals seek to steal the innocence of our children as early as possible and the public schools assist them in this goal.

Liberals seek to sexualize our children, eliminate age of consent laws and promote the normalization of pedophilia, all in the pursuit of sexual freedom.

The Liberal typically chooses a career in a field that produces nothing of value. A Liberal will look for employment in field such as public education, an employee of local, county, state or federal government, an "activist," a lawyer, or a bureaucrat in a tax free foundation or an NGO devoted to advancing Liberal goals, etc.

Liberal do-good programs enrich Liberals and do little to actually help the poor.

Liberals are not obsessed with sex, but with promiscuity. Promoting promiscuity among the masses is the primary mission of the Liberals who control the Hollywood, Television and print media monopoly. Why? Because Liberals know that the twin pillars that support conservatism are family values and faith in God. By promoting promiscuity Liberals know that they are simultaneously attacking both of the main support pillars of rugged individualism.

Liberals say that they despise marriage and family because they are "patriarchal institutions" that oppress women and children. But the real reason they despise marriage and family values is because these institutions oppose, disapprove and limit promiscuity thus undermining one of the principal supports for Liberalism.

Liberals seek to control public schools, and force all children into them, in order to foster promiscuity and instill collectivist ideology into the minds and hearts of our children.

Liberals are obsessed with demonstrating their putative "moral superiority." Thus even though they live their lives without really helping anyone, the political activism they engage in is dedicated to convincing themselves that they are truly good people. Liberals are driven by the need to validate the unspoken assertion that "I care more than you do," which is ironic in the extreme since none of the government programs liberals have designed can be shown to have an overall positive influence in our society.

Whenever a Liberal expresses concern "for the children," invariably they are using and targeting children to expand their own power, promote promiscuity, advance collectivism and enlarge their personal income at the expense of the taxpayer.

Liberals are elitists who exempt themselves from the oppressive rules they impose on the general population.

Liberals howl if a homosexual transvestite or convicted felon is even slightly offended, but they openly bash Christians.

Liberals claim to be against violence, but make excuses for Liberals like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Castro who murder and torture political dissidents. Liberals claim to be against violence, but they seek to disarm individuals and render them powerless before the thugs, thieves and murderer's who rule the inner cities.

Liberals have enormous compassion for criminal predators, but little for the victims.

In the Liberal world, all problems stem from individualism, and all solutions are collective.

Its a real eye opener to see what The Real Liberal Agena is. If you say your a liberal, but do not believe in or follow most of the views stated above. Your still a member of a party that does. Remember knowlege is power, so arm yourselves...