Mad Puppy

Just One Day's Headlines... Is It All Over?

2012-02-22T17:05:48Z

Obama's tax rate on dividends to soar to 44.8%...

Retirees to get hammered

Percentage of Americans who pay no tax hits 49.5

Tax revenue plunges in UK after 50% rate implemented

SATISFACTION WITH COUNTRY WORST SINCE CARTER

U.S. troops now in 4 African countries

Iran threatens pre-emptive action

Carney: Obama Didn't Turn Down The Keystone Pipeline...

OIL HITS $106...

White House seeks to deflect blame

US hints at help for Syrian rebels

Obama to shut down immigration enforcement program

And there were many more...

Is it any wonder that things are going to shit?

This administration IS doing exactly what it wants: it hates the U.S. as the only world power; it hates successful people and wants to punish them for being so; it wants the poor and "downtrodden" raised up at any expense, even those who won't or can't; it wants ALL the power and money in Washington, run by the socialists that Obama loves... bastards...

And the still amazing part: a huge percentage of Americans want it that way, they want the freebies, they want a law for every damn thing THEY hate, and no laws that affect them.

Maybe it IS all over...

What IS So Hard About Following The Constitution?

2012-01-17T20:36:02Z

Some guy decided to respond to comments on this video with the headline "Newt Destroys Ron Paul's Foreign Policy". The guy is responding, basically, to the charge that libertarians are nothing more than anarchists and are kooks and some more of the usual bullshit. He writes back:

"Your statements are entirely wrong. And please learn the difference between Libertarian and libertarian. No, libertarians do not all believe in anarchy and no government at all. We believe in a strict reading of the Constitution, and the Rights of the States. Within certain limits, a state can actually do a lot of the conservative/liberal big gov’t projects that neocons and liberals like. They just can’t do it at the federal level. And likewise, I can choose to move to a different state that fits my philosophy of liberty, and you may do likewise. If a state wants to ban abortion or ban gay marriage or any other number of things the right (or left) love, then I’m all for it. I will argue with every breath to let that state do it. But I will vociferously argue equally that if the Constitution doesn’t give the federal gov’t that power, then the Fed has no business in it, and according to the 10th Amendment it is up to the states to decide themselves.

As for being pacificts or peace-niks or anti-military, that is also false. Again, libertarians recognize the need for a military for defense of our citizenry, as laid out clearly in the Constitution. We also recognize the need for war at times, usually due to an attack upon us, but ALWAYS with a declaration of war from Congress. Again, as laid forth in the rules for governing our country that we call the Constitution. We don’t believe in being the world’s policemen. That may be your idea of “providing for the defense” but it’s not mine. You realize that Congress hasn’t actually declared war since WW2? Yet there is no doubt we have sent our troops abroad to engage in combat. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq x2, and numerous other smaller engagements… not once has war been declared. Congress just “authorizes” the President to send troops… and we end up in open conflict for 10+ years. Does that sound constitutional?

What is so hard about following the Constitution as written?

The GOP and most Republicans give a lot of lip service to “small constitutional government”, but it’s a bunch of crap. You are no different from the Democrats when it comes to small government. You can cry about the left’s regulatory adventurism, but the right loves regulation just as much. The right and left just disagree on the CONTENT of the regulation, not the volume of it. And if that’s how you all feel, then be my guest… to each his own… but don’t tell me you are for small government in the same breath. The fact is, you aren’t… neither is Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum (especially Santorum), and Perry is probably somewhere in the middle."

Its only the founding document, after all...

What IS So Hard About Followiing The Constitution?

2012-01-17T20:31:52Z

... to comments on this video with the headline "Newt Destroys Ron Paul's Foreign Policy". The guy is responding, basically, to the charge that libertarians are nothing more than anarchists and are kooks and some more of the usual bullshit. He writes back:

"Your statements are entirely wrong. And please learn the difference between Libertarian and libertarian. No, libertarians do not all believe in anarchy and no government at all. We believe in a strict reading of the Constitution, and the Rights of the States. Within certain limits, a state can actually do a lot of the conservative/liberal big gov’t projects that neocons and liberals like. They just can’t do it at the federal level. And likewise, I can choose to move to a different state that fits my philosophy of liberty, and you may do likewise. If a state wants to ban abortion or ban gay marriage or any other number of things the right (or left) love, then I’m all for it. I will argue with every breath to let that state do it. But I will vociferously argue equally that if the Constitution doesn’t give the federal gov’t that power, then the fed has no business in it, and according to the 10th Amendment it is up to the states to decide themselves.

As for being pacificts or peace-niks or anti-military, that is also false. Again, libertarians recognize the need for a military for defense of our citizenry, as laid out clearly in the Constitution. We also recognize the need for war at times, usually due to an attack upon us, but ALWAYS with a decleration of war from Congress. Again, as laid forth in the rules for governing our country that we call the Constitution. We don’t believe in being the world’s policemen. That may be your idea of “providing for the defense” but it’s not mine. You realize that Congress hasn’t actually declared war since WW2? Yet there is no doubt we have sent our troops abroad to engage in combat. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq x2, and numerous other smaller engagements… not once has war been declared. Congress just “authorizes” the President to send troops… and we end up in open conflict for 10+ years. Does that sound constitutional?

What is so hard about following the Constitution as written?

The GOP and most Republicans give a lot of lip service to “small constitutional government”, but it’s a bunch of crap. You are no different from the Democrats when it comes to small government. You can cry about the left’s regulatory adventurism, but the right loves regulation just as much. The right and left just disagree on the CONTENT of the regulation, not the volume of it. And if that’s how you all feel, then be my guest… to each his own… but don’t tell me you are for small government in the same breath. The fact is, you aren’t… neither is Romney, Gingrich, or Santorum (especially Santorum), and Perry is probably somewhere in the middle."

Its only the founding document, after all...

15 Great Truths

2012-01-17T16:02:38Z

These came to me in an email, thought I would share them:

GREAT TRUTHS

1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress.

-- John Adams

2. If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.

-- Mark Twain

3. Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself.

-- Mark Twain

4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.

-- Winston Churchill

5. A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.

-- George Bernard Shaw

6. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

-- P.J. O'Rourke, Civil Libertarian

7. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

-- Ronald Reagan (1986)

8. I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.

-- Will Rogers

9. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free!

-- P.J. O'Rourke

10. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.

-- Voltaire (1764)

11. No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.

-- Mark Twain (1866)

12. Talk is cheap...except when Congress does it.

-- Anonymous

13. The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.

-- Ronald Reagan

14. What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.

-- Edward Langley, Artist (1928-1995)

15. A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.

-- Thomas Jefferson

FIVE BEST SENTENCES

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for...another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation!

BONUS:

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
-- Ronald Reagan

Who Are The Real Free-Marketeers?

2012-01-10T19:46:30Z

It doesn't appear to be any of the Republican candidates, at least as far as it goes on attacking Romney for being a part of Bain.

But, for Republicans to be attacking a Republican for winning in the free market and for turning companies around so they make a profit (without public subsidy) is a sad sight.

Who are the real capitalists out there? The true free-market people? The true conservatives?

And, Newt, you've become a disappointment to me in the last 2 weeks. Instead of being Newt you now sound like your handlers want you to sound - which sucks.

Just one of many articles...

UPDATE:

More here and here

The Ultimate Consumer Protection by Ron Paul

2012-01-09T17:28:20Z

From Ron Paul's latest Straight Talk:

This week, partisan games in Washington reached a fevered pitch as Congress acted to prevent recess appointments, yet the administration made them anyway. Congress has been gaveling into session for less a minute every three days for the express purpose of technically staying in session. The 40 second "pro forma" sessions may strike supporters of the President as obstructionist, but Congress was using its clear constitutional authority and playing by the rules. Frustrated, the President simply disregarded the Constitution, and appointed Richard Cordray as head of the new Consumer Financial Protection Board, and Sharon Block, Richard Griffin, and Terence Flynn to the National Labor Relations Board anyway.

Playing fast and loose with the Constitution only gets worse with every administration. Because of the dangerous precedents being set, both parties would be wise to defend constitutional bounds, no matter who crosses the line. Defending a constitutional overstep always comes back to haunt them once power changes hands.

The Obama administration expressed extreme frustration with the Senate's refusal to confirm its nominees. The truth is, for better or worse, these are the cards the voters have dealt Washington. The Constitution, with its system of checks and balances, not only allows for gridlock, it practically guarantees some degree of it. The Founders knew that gridlock can be a very good thing. If nothing can be agreed upon in Washington, harm to the country is limited. Considering the Obama administration's ideas of what caused our problems, and how to solve them, the wisdom of the founders certainly shines through today.

According to the administration, the new Consumer Financial Protection Board is an absolute necessity. Another bureaucracy, with more rules and red tape and paperwork and procedures is supposed to protect the people from bad actors in the marketplace. On the contrary, the answer was staring us in the face in late 2008 when these bad banks and corporations threatened to go belly-up. The laws of economics were working to remove corrupt companies from the market forever, to never abuse or defraud another customer or depositor or shareholder again. Bankruptcy is the ultimate consumer protection, and what did Washington do? It protected the banks instead, and created more bureaucrats.

This is exactly why constitutionally-inflicted gridlock should be respected. But instead it is clearer than ever that we are now a nation ruled by men, not laws. This nation needs to respect the Constitution again. No exceptions. The oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution is still in effect when checks and balances get in the way of a political agenda. If not, it has no meaning at all.

It's Simple

2012-01-09T15:05:36Z

Ya Think?

2012-01-05T20:16:18Z

Obama sucks as president - period; I don't have the time nor inclination to run through all the reasons again. Meanwhile, the Republican elites want the moderate Romney because in spite of all their rhetoric they don't really want to cut the government because THEY want to run it with all its perks, and the conservatives want to dictate who you can do what with, too.

THAT'S why someone like Ron Paul makes headway with a lot of people, because he is neither. But its all over when a guy that talks individual freedom, less Big Brother-ism, personal liberty, an end to never-ending war, and government financial responsibility is ridiculed by both major parties and a good portion of the citizenry.

Then this article appears:

Jake Tapper: Romney ‘probably’ the elitist left-wing media favorite
Here's the article

Ron Paul DOES have a few quirks... but he's not all the (negative adjectives) that the other crooks-in-waiting are

Come On, Libertarians...

2011-12-14T17:18:21Z

My (sometimes) brethren of the Libertarian persuasion can be just as stupid as conservatives and liberals, especially when it comes to the military. Some of the guys at Lew Rockwell's blog are just idiots, especially considering how smart, intelligent, and thoughtful they think they are.

One guy, doesn't matter what the story is, is totally anti-military personnel, every time, all the time. Calling them terrorists. Hey, Vance, hey Kramer, the soldiers follow orders from their superiors who follow them from the politicians. You guys seem to think that everyone who is in uniform is there to kill as many people as they can, commit atrocities whenever they want, blow people up including innocent bystanders at every opportunity, and are just plain evil. That's just fucking stupid.

Are there a few bad apples? Yes, just like there are a few bad apple bloggers, philosophers, and writers or whatever you guys profess to be. But for the most part, soldiers are there to protect and defend. They are told what to do and where to go do it by civilians - politicians... perhaps you military/history geniuses can come up with the last time the MILITARY started a war all by themselves, but I can't. ALL wars, that I am aware of, started with politicians, of almost every stripe, going after something that they shouldn't have.

You want to bemoan war and killing - that's great. But at least get the blame squarely on the shoulders of those responsible for starting the damn war in the first place. It ain't the soldiers.

December 7th

2011-12-07T21:20:20Z

Like virtually every other kid in the public - and private, I'm sure - schools, I was taught how the evil Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and killed a whole lot of American soldiers and citizens. They did. However, seldom has any history leading up to the attacks been taught. Pat Buchanan writes an interesting article dealing with that very history, and you can read it here.

Super patriots are still convinced it was all Japan's fault. Many libertarians, though, want to blame the U.S. totally for putting Japan in the fix they were in and saying Roosevelt was praying for a way to get us in the war. I think that FDR did want us in, and that is the main point behind Buchanan's article, which is based on a book of Herbert Hoover's notes.

But like most things, there is more than one side to the story, usually many. After all, Japan was already on a mission to score more land and resources. FDR certainly gave them an extra push, a reason to lash back at us for freezing assets and other actions and backing them into a corner.

In any event, a lot of good men and women died that day. And regardless of whoever at the upper levels of both governments screwed up - or deliberately pushed - us into that war, those dead need to be remembered with honor. Their government, like so many other times, put its citizens in harms way, whether with good intentions or bad. They still were there to defend their country and risk there lives - and sometimes pay the ultimate price - and that is a debt we can never forget nor ignore.

Astronomers Discover Biggest Black Hole Ever

2011-12-06T17:45:32Z

Good Riddance, Dickhead (pun intended)

2011-11-29T16:17:51Z

Retiring, not running for re-election, whatever. More than anyone, along with Chris Dodd, the architects of the housing bubble burst and unlimited political corruption.

GTFO

Five Lessons For America From The European Fiscal Crisis

2011-11-17T17:06:37Z

From Cato and Daniel J. Mitchell, here

Taking Executive Orders Too Far

2011-11-07T16:01:12Z

From Ron Paul's Straight Talk:

These are frustrating times for the President. Having been swept into office with a seemingly strong mandate, he enjoyed a Congress controlled by members of his own party for the first two years of his term. However, midterm elections brought gridlock and a close division of power between the two parties. With a crucial re-election campaign coming up, there is desperation in the president’s desire to "do something" in spite of his severely weakened mandate.

Getting something done is proving to be a monumental task. This may be news to the supposed constitutional scholar who is now our president, but if the political process seems inconvenient to the implementation of his agenda, that is not a flaw in the system. It was designed that way. The drafters of the Constitution intended the default action of government to be inaction. Hopefully, this means actions taken by the government are necessary and proper. If federal laws or executive actions can’t be agreed upon constitutionally- which is to say legally- such laws or actions should be rejected.

The vision of the founders was to set up a government that would remain small and unobtrusive via a system of checks and balances. That it has taken our government so long to get this big speaks well of the original design. The founders also knew the overwhelming nature of governments was to amass power and grow. The Constitution was to serve as the brakes on the freight train of government.

But the Obama administration, like so many administrations in the 20th century, chooses to ignore the Constitution entirely. The increasingly broad use and scope of the Executive Orders is a prime example. Executive Orders are meant to be a way for the president to direct executive agencies on the implementation of congressionally approved legislation. It has become increasingly common for them to be misused in ways that are contradictory to congressional intent, or to bypass Congress altogether in enacting political agendas. The current administration has unabashedly stated that Congress's unwillingness to pass the president's jobs bill means that the president will act unilaterally to enact provisions of it piecemeal through Executive Order. Obama explicitly threatens to bypass Congress, thus aggregating the power to make and enforce laws in the executive. This clearly erodes the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. It brings the modern presidency dangerously close to an elective dictatorship.

Of course, the most dangerous and costly overstepping of executive authority is going to war without a congressional declaration. Congress has been sadly complicit in this usurpation by ceding much of its war-making authority to the executive because it wants to avoid taking responsibility for major war decisions, but that is part of our job in Congress! If the President cannot present to Congress and the people a convincingly strong case for going to war, then perhaps we should keep the nation at peace, rather than risk our men and women's lives for ill-defined reasons!

This administration certainly was not the first to behave in ways that have defied the Constitution to overstep its bounds. Sadly, previous administrations have set precedents that the current administration is only building upon. It is time for Congress to reassert itself and its constitutional role so that future administrations cannot continue on this dangerous path.

Always The Left's Pet Project

2011-11-02T16:10:21Z

Its high speed rail to places that no one wants to go to or get from. And now California's attempt to bring it to the proletariat has tripled in price - and won't be ready until 2033.

These leftists still don't care that they are running out of your money to spend on pieces of shit stuff..

Can't Hear The Obama Anti-War Protestors

2011-10-31T18:34:31Z

That's because it is typical leftist hypocrisy. I get tired of "if this was Bush" but its just plain true. Now our Kenyan(?) president sends troops next door to Uganda and not a peep of protest. He was given the Nobel Peace Prize and he keeps fighting the war in Afghanistan, now says he took the "lead" in Libya, and then send troops to Uganda. Some peace prize winner - which, of course, he did ZERO to earn anyway.

"The president's new Afrika Korps demonstrates how the "Defense" Department only rarely does defense these days. Most money goes for offense --intervening hither and yon for reasons having nothing to do with protecting America or Americans. With a world filled with various guerrilla bands, separatist factions, and terrorist groups, the potential for more wars is almost infinite.

The world would be a better place if evil was eradicated. But war has proved to be a very poor humanitarian tool. The Obama administration should be pulling U.S. troops out of wars, not intervening in more conflicts."

From The American Spectator...

But its more a Washington problem. Obama just happens to be prez...

The Looters Take Over First Place

2011-10-26T17:20:17Z

Yes, indeed, life IS good in the capital of corporate cronyism. From Cato and Bloomberg News:

"Beltway Earnings Make U.S. Capital Richer Than Silicon Valley." According to the latest Census figures, Washington, D.C. is now the wealthiest metropolitan area in the United States."

The looters now make more than the producers. Washington produces nothing except restrictions. The modern day Robin Hood takes from everyone (taxes, contributions, etc.) and gives to themselves.

From the article:
"Unequal wealth can be a just result of free and fair exchange, where talented Americans reap rewards from providing goods and services their fellow citizens greatly value — as in the case of Steve Jobs—in which case, there's no injustice to remedy.

Or it can be the result of "predation by political elites," in which case, it's the predation that should be tackled directly, Wilkinson argues, so "the fire is the problem, not the alarm."

That the hometown of the political class has passed the home of the creative class in wealth and influence is genuine cause for alarm. Washington, D.C. is the capital of Crony Capitalism — and it's only growing richer. That inequality is worth worrying about."

Looters and moochers, and Democrats are only a little bit worse than the Republicans...

More Housing Bullshit From Obama

2011-10-25T17:29:24Z

Its just election campaign time so The One is trotting out all the wonderful things he's going to do, even the ones that are actually meaningless...

"In other words, this is exactly the same kind of Cash for Clunkers approach that Barack Obama has taken with economic policy all along, He will spend tens of billions of dollars to play the string out a little longer without actually changing conditions in the market."

This new attempt at pretending to "fix" the housing market is more crap. Here's the article...

Obamageddon

2011-10-25T14:57:34Z

He wanted to change America. Well, no President has changed it more. But just not America, look at the whole world: everything from Libya going Islam, the economy, wars continue, Occupy Wall Street - mostly those who voted for The One - European Union going down the tubes, housing market takes another price dump, and headline after headline of negative crap happening everywhere.

But he is The One! How could this be? The world's ocean levels were supposed to abate, people were supposed to love one another, EVERYONE was supposed to get along because The Messiah had come to bridge the gaps of black and white, the haves and the havenots, the U.S. and the world!

Bullshit. It was always total bullshit. This man, this Socialist, this whatever religion and philosophy and political mongrel that he is has almost ruined the world. And he's had plenty of help from Democorrupts of every stripe.

Its called Obamageddon... and its here for a long time

Total F'n Idiot

2011-10-20T18:10:55Z

I, of course, am talking about Harry the Moron Reid. Here, judge this quote all by yourself:

“The massive layoffs we’ve had in America today are of course rooted in the last administration," Reid said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “It's very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine; it's the public-sector jobs where we've lost huge numbers, and that's what this legislation is all about."

Really, Harry? You are already the stupidest, most corrupted... just a total fucking idiot!!! God, the only way you can be the head dude - or even in the damn Senate - is to be in someone's back pocket. You and Pelosi are total embarrassments - or typical politicians as there is no difference.

Here's the rest of the article... IDIOT