Quote of the Day

The Coral Reef Alliance believes outgoing President George W. Bush has created his legacy as a President who has done more to protect the environment of the seas than any other President. Somehow, I doubt if former President Ronald Reagan would agree with their assessment.

BlogAds is an Anti-Conservative Owned Business

I haven’t had a good fight in a while, so, I decided to bring something up on this Blog.

Many of you know, that I use BlogAds on this Blog for Advertising. You’ll also notice that not many people have used the service for their advertising needs. I think I might have an idea why.

I was nosing around over on the official BlogsAds Blog and quite frankly, I was quite horrified to what is on that “Company Blog“. There is a great deal of Anti-Conservative, Pro-Obama screed over their Blog.

You can see examples of what I am referring to by going Here, Here, Here and Here.

What I find utterly amazing is the fact that Conservatives even use this service at all. I mean, I am part of the Conservative Hive on BlogAds.

My question is this, how is it, that Conservatives are using a Blog Advertising service who’s owner, (I presume that is who wrote those entries) partakes in the bashing the Republican Party and Conservative values in General?

Quite frankly, I’m sickened by what I read over on that Blog, the owner of BlogAds ought to ashamed of himself and should either remove the postings of Political Nature or close the business down, or at best only accept Liberal Advertising, because quite frankly, taking the money of Conservatives and bashing them on a Company website or Blog is totally hypocritical in this writers opinion.

I am almost sure that the owner of Blogads will most likely delete my account, as a result of bringing this to light. I am sure I will see an e-mail shortly tell me to get lost. But I will not pull this entry. Business owners who partake in this sort of Anti-Conservative rhetoric ought to be exposed and ran out of business.

Trackposted to Nuke’s, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Woman Honor Thyself, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, The Pink Flamingo, Democrat=Socialist, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Cartoons of the Day

Underdogma?
Underdogma?

More at www.diversitylane.com

Or blog at diversitylane.wordpress.com

Obamassiah?
Obamassiah?

More at Baloo’s Cartoon Blog

The Late Night Music Express Presents… Johnny Cash

As a rule, I detest country music. Especially that “Young Country” horse shit that Nashville is hellbent on passing off as the real thing. Although, I must confess that I have an odd love for the old school, “Classic Country”.

One the people whom I have the uttermost respect for; is Johnny Cash. His message is timeless, that voice; no one could ever replace him.

Johnny’s life was, shall we say; interesting. His drug addiction, his fight to get sober, his remarriage, his everything.

One of the biggest tragedies is that because of Johnny’s personal life and problems, one of the sweetest things that is often overlooked, and that was his positive message that appeared in much of his later music, and in some of his earlier work too.

Johnny Cash also for me was the embodiment of the Southern Conservative Christian or if you will, Baptist way. With all of it’s hangups, hypocrisy and nuances.  I do not mean that as a slam either, it is hard to put into words the feelings I get when I listen to Johnny’s music. You know, that lump in the throat kind of nostalgia. Put simply, Johnny Cash is the sound of America, The Sound of Appalachia, I could go on here; but I think you know what I mean.

Another thing that I really admired about Johnny was that he was one the very few, that came down off the “I’m better than you” country music mountain in the 1960’s and sat down, broke bread and talked with the counter culture of the hippy generation. Instead of an snide attitude towards them, he had the nicest attitude towards them, he did something that not many people would; he sat and listened to them. He also made music with Bob Dylan, something that just did not happen in that era. The Conservative political world could learn much from Johnny Cash.  I think that the world would be much better served if those in politics; bloggers, pundits, and the politicians themselves, would listen to one another, instead of hating, yelling and fighting amongst one another.

Besides, who the hell else could stand on a stage with a backing band and say the Words. “My Name is Sue! How do you do? NOW YOU GONNA DIE!” and have everyone in the audience not have a problem believing that the ol’ boy means business?

We might not have Johnny Cash anymore, but we do have the music as one hell of a great legacy.

Okay enough of the yammering here. Here we go with a few of Johnny’s songs, that I like.

Man in Black:

Boy Named Sue:

God’s gonna cut you down:

Trackposted to , The Pink Flamingo, A Newt One/ American Truth Warriors, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Leaning Straight Up, The World According to Carl, and DragonLady’s World, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Toyota is feeling the pinch too.

So much for that stupid  Neo-Con line saying that the slump in auto sales is the automakers fault.

Via the New York Times:

TOKYO — Toyota Motor will idle its plants in Japan for 11 days in February and March to reduce output in the face of steeply declining global vehicle sales, the company said Tuesday.

The Japanese auto giant said the suspension would affect production at all 12 of its directly operated domestic plants, which include four vehicle assembly plants and also factories that make transmissions, engines and other parts. The closings are in addition to a three-day shutdown this month at these plants that Toyota had already announced.

The move is unusual for a company that just a few months ago seemed unable to keep up with voracious global demand for its fuel-efficient vehicles. But even strong players like Toyota have failed to escape the drastic slowdown in the global auto industry.

The company said it would idle the plants to reduce stocks of unsold vehicles amid a relentless slide in sales, particularly in the United States, its biggest market. Last month, Toyota’s sales there dropped 37 percent, a larger decline than at its struggling American rivals General Motors and Ford.

Plunging sales and a stronger Japanese yen, which reduces the yen value of overseas profits, forced Toyota to forecast last month its first annual loss in 70 years at its vehicle-making operations.

Toyota did not say how many vehicles would be affected by the suspension announced Tuesday. The company said its four domestic assembly plants produced 1.5 million vehicles in 2007, the most recent year for which the company has figures. Toyota-brand cars are also made by other companies in the Toyota group.

The company had already announced that it would shut down truck production at two United States plants for three months

Its American rivals — General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler — have also idled plants across North America in response to the slowdown.

For once, I am in agreement with a Liberal, and yes, it is the same knuckle-headed liberal that insulted Conservatives. Hey, I am one that praises when it’s due and bitches when it’s due too; At least I’m fair. 😉 😀 😛

Matthew Yglesias Weighs in:

This is the conceptual problem with efforts to “save” the car industry through bailouts or union busting or whatever you like. One assumes demand for cars will get higher than it is right now, but the industry has a whole just has more capacity to build cars than there is demand for new cars. Which is fine. When you look across the developed world and try to take stock of the medium- and long-run problems facing the OECD nations there’s just no way you’re going to reach the conclusion that an automobile shortage is a big concern. But obviously it’s not fine for the companies that make cars. There’s going to be a need for some shrinkage.

Yeah, I know, most likely some of the Conservatives who are basically scraping my blog for content are going to try and deride me as a fake conservative, because I stick up for the middle class and because I happen to be the son of retired General Motors Worker and U.A.W. member. Well, I got two words; screw you and the rest of the asshole Madison Ave. Conservatives. 😡

Anyhow, I happen to agree with Matthew here, I live here in the Detroit Area. If the auto industry dies, so does this area. That will cause my parents to suffer, they need the health insurance, as they are both diabetic and the amount of medications that they take is staggering.  Anyhow, this article above disproves and basically strikes down the “Meme” that was going around in the Conservative Blogosphere that the issues with the auto industry was the fault of the automakers. Which I totally dismissed as abject bullshit of the highest order. It was the fault of President Clinton for putting pressure on the loan companies to give those toxic subprime loans to those who were considered high risk. That is what started this whole thing. Of course, equal blame can be given to the Republican Congress of 2003 for not changing the laws, after all, they were warned by the Bush White House to do something; and they did nothing at all.

Best thing they could do, was have a hearing, of which the CEO of Freddie Mac pulled the race card, and congress backed off. So, all the blaming of the Auto Companies was nothing more than a feeble attempt by the Republicans at scapegoating the wrong damned people.

Here’s hoping that Japan’s auto industry totally collapses and people, both American and otherwise, have to buy American products, for a change!

this is just flipping wrong!

I don’t like to post stuff like this. But this is just wrong:

Justified Force or An Execution?
Justified Force or An Execution? - Click the Picture to watch!

More on the Story at Contra Costa Times

What you think? Did the police use excessive force? Does this prove we live in a police state? Are police officers using too much force? Feedback is welcomed.

Trackposted to Leaning Straight Up, third world county, and DragonLady’s World, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

(Via Lew Rockwell Blog)

Rep. Ron Paul on the Israeli Gaza Conflict

I must admit, the man speaks the truth. I don’t agree with one point however. To me, it does not matter how many missiles Hamas fired into Israel, one missile is one too many. But the rest, I pretty much agree with.

WTF?: Starting to really wonder about Lew Rockwell's Blog

I am not posting this to start a fight or anything. But when I see crap like this right here. I start to wonder just what the hell is becoming of Lew Rockwell’s Blog and more importantly, The Libertarian Party as a damned whole.

Not to overdramatize anything, but when I see stuff like this:

As usual, US-appoved fighters are called soldiers, and US-demonized fighters are called gunmen. Let’s have some equality: call them all gunmen. It hints at the real nature of the state, as “a gang of thieves writ large,” in Rothbard’s phrase.

I start wonder where Lew’s priorities are. I mean, allowing stuff like that, is just totally unacceptable to me.

But wait there’s more…

There’s This:

Or are we afraid that the doo-dads we will see pictured flying through space won’t be ours, won’t have “USA! USA!” stenciled on them, but rather Chinese characters few of us can read?

How Novel. Anti-American rhetoric, from a Libertarian no less.

But there’s even more too….

There’s this little nugget here:

Piatak is a supporter of the Detroit bailout bill. His “cool logic” explains why it is a good idea to tax the shirts off the backs of working class Americans outside of Detroit and give the money to automobile industry plutocrats, union bosses, and their terminally inefficient, inept, lazy, and uncompetitive, unionized work force. Rewarding failure and massively subsidizing losing businesses is apparently Takimag’s idea of “cool logic.”

You know, I have to agree with Tom Piatak here; I honestly wonder what the real motives of the Libertarians are anymore. I mean, can you get anymore Anti-American than this?  A while back, Republican Representative Michelle Bachmann got into a little trouble for saying that Democrats should be investigated for Anti-American beliefs.  Well, I sort of agree with Michelle, except I don’t think it is just Democrats anymore. I think that it is Liberals and Libertarians, I think that we should haul Lew Rockwell and everyone of his contributing writers and Bloggers up to the Senate and have an Anti-American activies investigation.

Do not misunderstand me. I am for the avoidance of military conflict, if at all possible. But when I read on a well-known Libertarian Blog things of this nature, I have to honestly ask myself; why are these people even living in this country, if they dislike it so much?  Whatever happened to civic pride? Whatever happened to the respect of the flag, the Nation and the values it represents?

While I realize that our Nation is not a perfect one, I do not believe that gives one to a license to trash it to the point of sounding like a communist apologist.

As I said in the title and in the beginning, I am really starting to wonder about Libertarians.

Guest Voice: Social Issues Symbolism by Jack Hunter

When president-elect Barack Obama chose evangelical leader Rick Warren to lead a prayer at his inauguration the cultural Left threw the predictable fits. Said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, “this decision further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans,” referring to the recently passed anti-gay marriage referendum, Proposition 8 in California. Said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, “by inviting Rick Warren to your inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table.” Added Democratic political consultant Chad Griffith “Rick Warren needs to realize that he is further dividing us at a time when the country needs to come together.”

In light of the Rick Warren controversy, such “coming together” rhetoric, so often mouthed by champions of “diversity” has one again proven to be a farce. For a true “coming together” of any sort on social issues, one might expect political opponents to either agree-to-disagree, yet still join and work together where they can, or for both sides to at least concede some principles as a compromise. In this case, as in most cases, the champions of diversity simply do not want an evangelical of Warren’s stripe to even be allowed a seat at the table. And while Warren hasn’t budged from his stance on gay marriage, neither will the Left anytime soon. It seems that the oft-desired “coming together” means not any new, warm embrace, but unconditional surrender, where only conservatives are always expected to wave the white flag.

The rise of social issues in American politics has as much to do with campaign strategies as the issues themselves. Gay marriage has become for the Democrats what abortion has long been for Republicans – issues that are better left unresolved because they are too useful in controlling certain voters. Any liberal or moderate Republican worried about shoring up his evangelical base can do so by mouthing just the right amount of pro-life rhetoric during his campaign, knowing full-well he has no intention of seriously revisiting the subject after the election. Just ask John McCain. To woo the cultural Left, the tiniest illustration by Democrats that they are at least favorable to gay-marriage is enough to garner those votes, even if it’s practically invisible on their actual agenda. Just ask Barack Obama.

Social issues like gay marriage and abortion remain trivialities not because they aren’t important – but because neither are likely to be solved precisely because neither party benefits from doing so. Why do mainstream Republicans or Democrats not demand states’ rights solutions, where individual states would be free to legalize or outlaw gay marriage or abortion according to the popular will? Because neither party really wants any real solutions. The purpose of a Republican supporting something like the Defense of Marriage Act is not to protect marriage per se, but to protect your office by signaling to voters that you stand on the right side of an issue that you and your successors hope never goes away. Likewise, in standing against the Defense of Marriage Act, Democrats benefit for the exact opposite reason.

Rick Warren’s invocation at Obama’s inauguration will not be a brighter, sadder or even different new day in the culture wars – but a symbolic gesture by the president-elect whose very rise to power has been more symbolic than substantive. Leftists who believe Warren’s mere presence at the inauguration represents anything tragic are as naïve as those on the Right who might believe it represents promise. And in both satisfying and enraging both sides of the social issues fence by inviting Warren to his swearing-in, the president-elect may indeed be introducing a new symbolic style, if only to cover-up the same old lack of substance.

When president-elect Barack Obama chose evangelical leader Rick Warren to lead a prayer at his inauguration the cultural Left threw the predictable fits. Said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way, “this decision further elevates someone who has in recent weeks actively promoted legalized discrimination and denigrated the lives and relationships of millions of Americans,” referring to the recently passed anti-gay marriage referendum, Proposition 8 in California. Said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, “by inviting Rick Warren to your inauguration, you have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans have a place at your table.” Added Democratic political consultant Chad Griffith “Rick Warren needs to realize that he is further dividing us at a time when the country needs to come together.”

In light of the Rick Warren controversy, such “coming together” rhetoric, so often mouthed by champions of “diversity” has one again proven to be a farce. For a true “coming together” of any sort on social issues, one might expect political opponents to either agree-to-disagree, yet still join and work together where they can, or for both sides to at least concede some principles as a compromise. In this case, as in most cases, the champions of diversity simply do not want an evangelical of Warren’s stripe to even be allowed a seat at the table. And while Warren hasn’t budged from his stance on gay marriage, neither will the Left anytime soon. It seems that the oft-desired “coming together” means not any new, warm embrace, but unconditional surrender, where only conservatives are always expected to wave the white flag.

The rise of social issues in American politics has as much to do with campaign strategies as the issues themselves. Gay marriage has become for the Democrats what abortion has long been for Republicans – issues that are better left unresolved because they are too useful in controlling certain voters. Any liberal or moderate Republican worried about shoring up his evangelical base can do so by mouthing just the right amount of pro-life rhetoric during his campaign, knowing full-well he has no intention of seriously revisiting the subject after the election. Just ask John McCain. To woo the cultural Left, the tiniest illustration by Democrats that they are at least favorable to gay-marriage is enough to garner those votes, even if it’s practically invisible on their actual agenda. Just ask Barack Obama.

Social issues like gay marriage and abortion remain trivialities not because they aren’t important – but because neither are likely to be solved precisely because neither party benefits from doing so. Why do mainstream Republicans or Democrats not demand states’ rights solutions, where individual states would be free to legalize or outlaw gay marriage or abortion according to the popular will? Because neither party really wants any real solutions. The purpose of a Republican supporting something like the Defense of Marriage Act is not to protect marriage per se, but to protect your office by signaling to voters that you stand on the right side of an issue that you and your successors hope never goes away. Likewise, in standing against the Defense of Marriage Act, Democrats benefit for the exact opposite reason.

Rick Warren’s invocation at Obama’s inauguration will not be a brighter, sadder or even different new day in the culture wars – but a symbolic gesture by the president-elect whose very rise to power has been more symbolic than substantive. Leftists who believe Warren’s mere presence at the inauguration represents anything tragic are as naïve as those on the Right who might believe it represents promise. And in both satisfying and enraging both sides of the social issues fence by inviting Warren to his swearing-in, the president-elect may indeed be introducing a new symbolic style, if only to cover-up the same old lack of substance.

Jack Hunter Blogs at The Southern Avenger and Taki’s Magazine