Baazill's Blog

So Republican's are the bible thumpers.  The "Christian" party.  Jesus was all about helping people, but Republican's are all about helping people as long as it doesn't effect them.  The bible talks about redistribution of wealth, hmmm.  Sounds alot like Socialism.  Weird.  I'm not a big fan of Socialism, but I'm curious as to why the party that stands on a pulpit and claims to be God's party, is selective about what part of God's word they choose to follow.

So who is God's party?  Who knows?  God hasn't talked to anyone in thousands of years.  Hell, even Mother Theresa said she hadn't felt God's presence in over 50 years.

Putting God into the equation is stupid cause everyone on both sides of the isle contradict themselves politically.

Ok, I just listened to McCain's speech and I have to say I was somewhat impressed.  However, he is taking quite a firm stand with Russia.  No, I do know that Putin is a PoS, and I know he wants all of the old Soviet Union territories back.  And it would be really great if we could stand up to him.  But our military is completely decimated.  We couldn't invade Yellowstone Park if we had to.  What good is it going to do us to have our leader mouthing off when he has nothing to back it up?

At this rate, we'll all be speaking Russian or Chinese in 10 years.  McCain was right, God Help US.....if he gets elected!

So I'm seeing all this flap about requiring a picture ID to vote and I'm saying to myself "Self, are these friggin people serious?"  I'm talking about the folks who are objecting to this.  Since the time I was 16 years old, I have had to have a picture ID for almost everything, even at the bank.  When I was in the military, I renewed my Driver's License via mail.  This was back before they kept your picture in the computer.  They sent me a license with no picture on it, but guess what?!?  IT WASN'T VALID UNLESS ACCOMPANIED BY ANOTHER PICTURE ID!!!!!  Which in this case was my military ID.

The people who are objecting to this need a swift smack in the back of the head.

 

Ok, so I've been following some trends for a while here to see if what I'm thinking is on the right track or not.  I'm pretty sure it is, so here goes.

Prices are not rising.  The reason that the cost of everything has gone up is that the U.S. Dollar is sinking internationally.  It seems to me that the Fed has been on a tear of cutting interest rates, which sounds really good.  But in the process of cutting interest rates, the value of our dollar is going into the crapper.

I know that most people won't understand this next statement, I'm not an economist either, but I'm going to say it anyway.  Maybe the fed should re-raise the rates.  Get them back to some kind of normal level.  Maybe people should learn to tighten their belts.  We, as a country, have thrived on over-indulgence.  It's been our moniker for years.

I would like to see the President bite the bullet.  Go on TV and tell people "Look, here's the deal.  We are kicking the rates back up.  Yes, it is going to be really tough going for a while, but everything will eventually be ok.  If we don't get the dollar strong again on the international market, the results will be more catastrophic than if we keep going like we are."

If he did that, I might at least have some respect for the man.  The truth of the matter is, we are digging our own hole, and it just keeps getting deeper.

Here's one for you paid for it.

Scenario:  Parents get divorced, and mom keeps the kids.  Dad is required to carry health insurance on the kids.  I've got no problem with that at all.

Now, here's the kicker.  The mom can then get on Medicaid, AND put the children on medicaid, making dad's insurance the secondary.  Now this I have a problem with.

If there is private insurance available, and the state is going to let covered children be on Medicaid anyway, the private insurance should be the primary.  Why should the taxpayers of Illinois pay for something I am already paying for.

Personally, I think that if kids are covered under private insurance, they shouldn't be part of the medicaid system at all.  This is abuse of the system in my eyes.

Maybe it's just me, I hate hate hate hate hate the thought of my kids being a burden on the taxpayers when I am fully capable of, and do, provide for them.

This is more of a response to Bubba since comments were disabled.

I get what you are saying about Conservative=Republican and Democrat=Liberal.  So what about the rest of us that can't identify with either party.  There are a lot of things I'm conservative about, and there are a lot of things that I am liberal about.  So where does that leave people like me in this system that pretty much requires us to identify with one label.

If I decide to vote democrat, does that make me a raging liberal because I'll still disagree with 50% of what their policies?  If I decide to vote Republican, does that make me a raging conservative because I'll still disagree with 50% of their policies?

Should people like me then just not vote since their is no viable option for us?

The two party system that we have is severely broken and disenfranchises a large portion of the population because we are not "just Republican" or "just Democrat".

Ok, as I've said many times before, I still don't know who I'm supporting yet.  That being said, I'm all for facts being brought out appropriately, in the correct context, without all of the BOOGEDY.  So I found this article on Anderson Cooper's blog at CNN, written by Roland Martin.  I think it's worth a read to get a better picture of some of the things that this preacher said.  I'm not defending anyone, but to be fair, I think it's appropriate to research and get the whole picture of something instead of taking someone's (especially the media's) word on anything.  I know that Martin is part of the media, but just add this to your thinking when mulling this over.  I've pasted the article in.  Here is the link in case it all doesn't get pasted.  http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-b
ehind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon/

The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s 9/11 sermon Posted: 10:09 AM ET

As this whole sordid episode regarding the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has played out over the last week, I wanted to understand what he ACTUALLY said in this speech. I’ve been saying all week on CNN that context is important, and I just wanted to know what the heck is going on.

I have now actually listened to the sermon Rev. Wright gave after September 11 titled, “The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall.” It was delivered on Sept. 16, 2001.

One of the most controversial statements in this sermon was when he mentioned “chickens coming home to roost.” He was actually quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan’s terrorism task force, who was speaking on FOX News. That’s what he told the congregation.

He was quoting Peck as saying that America’s foreign policy has put the nation in peril:

“We took this country by terror away from the Sioux, the Apache, Arikara, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism.

“We took Africans away from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism.

“We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel.

“We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenage and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard working fathers.

“We bombed Qaddafi’s home, and killed his child. Blessed are they who bash your children’s head against the rock.

“We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to pay back for the attack on our embassy, killed hundreds of hard working people, mothers and fathers who left home to go that day not knowing that they’d never get back home.

“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.

“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff that we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.

“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y’all, not a black militant. Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said the people we have wounded don’t have the military capability we have. But they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them. And we need to come to grips with that.”

He went on to describe seeing the photos of the aftermath of 9/11 because he was in Newark, N.J., when the planes struck. After turning on the TV and seeing the second plane slam into one of the twin towers, he spoke passionately about what if you never got a chance to say hello to your family again.

“What is the state of your family?” he asked.

And then he told his congregation that he loved them and asked the church to tell each other they loved themselves.

His sermon thesis:

1. This is a time for self-examination of ourselves and our families.

2. This is a time for social transformation (then he went on to say they won’t put me on PBS or national cable for what I’m about to say. Talk about prophetic!)

“We have got to change the way we have been doing things as a society,” he said.

Wright then said we can’t stop messing over people and thinking they can’t touch us. He said we may need to declare war on racism, injustice, and greed, instead of war on other countries.

“Maybe we need to declare war on AIDS. In five minutes the Congress found $40 billion to rebuild New York and the families that died in sudden death, do you think we can find the money to make medicine available for people who are dying a slow death? Maybe we need to declare war on the nation’s healthcare system that leaves the nation’s poor with no health coverage? Maybe we need to declare war on the mishandled educational system and provide quality education for everybody, every citizen, based on their ability to learn, not their ability to pay. This is a time for social transformation.”

3. This is time to tell God thank you for all that he has provided and that he gave him and others another chance to do His will.

By the way, nowhere in this sermon did he said “God damn America.” I’m not sure which sermon that came from.

This doesn’t explain anything away, nor does it absolve Wright of using the N-word, but what it does do is add an accurate perspective to this conversation.

The point that I have always made as a journalist is that our job is to seek the truth, and not the partial truth.

I am also listening to the other sermons delivered by Rev. Wright that have been the subject of controversy.

And let me be clear: Where I believe he was wrong and not justified in what he said based upon the facts, I will say so. But where the facts support his argument, that will also be said.

So stay tuned.

- Roland S. Martin, CNN Contributor

from now on.  Great googly-moogly, has anyone else seen this new White House Press secretary. She is friggin smokin hot.  What's up with that?  Now I'm interested in Presidential drivel again!!!

Just curious,

What is the "Pro-LIfe" stance on fertility clinics, invitro-fertilization, etc?

Yeah, I called it Polack Day.  I'm a Polack, so what.

This is the one day a year, I feel like we (the Polacks) can actually say something, so here it goes.

Ya know, we sit here, day after day, and relate ourselves with the White Caucasion crowd.  That's what we check on our job applications.  But how many other polacks see that look when an interviewer or anyone else tries to say our name?  I've seen it, I'm sure alot of people have seen it.  But what do we do, we generally laugh it off.  Hell, half the time, we have better Polish jokes than non-Polish people do.

So my question is, why do all of these other groups that have been persecuted through history get so much more consideration than we do?  Probably because we've accepted the stereotype and worked our asses off to overcome it.  No, we were "enslaved".  But we were scheduled for extermination.  Which one is worse?  I guess that's a matter of opinion. 

Maybe if other "opressed" people put their nose to the grindstone and worked hard instead of bitching about how hard they have it because of their heritage, they might find the world a little easier to deal with.

I'm sure there are going to be alot of people who blast me for saying my people, the Polacks, have been just as persecuted throughout history as the blacks and the jews.

To the jews, I love you guys, I really do.  You guys were first on Hitler's list and we were second.  Actually, we were first, but Hitler figured out we weren't much of a challenge and left us till later.  But anyway, I can relate, and I do fell your pain.

To the blacks, well, I look back at your history and all I can say is, at least there was not mission to completely exterminate ya'll.  At least you were thought enough of to be kept around, though I'm not condoning slavery.  Be thankful you weren't labeled for extermination.

Ok, I just wanted to take a minute and talk about how we are all commenting and posting on these boards.  I think this is a great forum, and I think there are some great people here.  I really enjoy some of the back and forth between me and bubba right wing, mike from IL, and many others.  No, I'm not singling you guys out for anything, just can't remember a whole bunch of names off the top of my head.

But what I wanted to say is that, to all of the people, there's something you need to understand when reading both posts and comments; there isn't a whole lot of room to get out everything you want to say in the most articulate and meaningful way.  What I am saying is that when someone is posting they are trying to make what they have to say fit in small space, so it's condensed, and not always in the best way.  I know I'm guilty of it.  Many times, I have written something, went back and read it and was like wow, that was way harsh, or I could see how the meaning of what I was trying to say could be misconstrued.

Some of the comments to posts are along the nature of "well, that's a good idea, but how you don't explain how you would do it" or "just like a {insert political slander here}, no plan to do what your saying."  In answer to that, just let me say, there are some of us who are very opinionated and have our own ideas.  Some of us could probably right a book about some of the topics we are passionate about.  It's hard to convey ideas completely, though, in a forum such as this.

So, to sum up, what I'm really trying to get at is that the mean-ness, rudeness and name-calling (and yes, I'm sure I'm guilty of it too) isn't getting anyone anywhere.  Us posters could probably do a better job thinking about what we are writing as well to better get our point across.

The debate is over, and I just wanted to share a couple of thoughts.  Obviously, given my previous post, I think Obama blew Hillary away.  I keep hearing from post debate analysis right now about how similar these two candidates are, but I see things completely different. 

1.  Presence.  Obama has a much more presidential "presence" than Hillary does.  Throughout the debate, there was a stark contrast in their demeanor.  Though he showed moments of lightheartedness, Obama stayed focus, serious and presented himself as very "Presidential", whereas Hillary kept a very fake smile on her face through most of the debate and really went a lot further to turning me away from her.  I believe that Obama is serious and passionate about helping people.  I believe Hillary is more interested in staying in the spotlight.

2.  Foreign Policy.  I think Obama scored big time on the issue of whether the President should embrace discussions with Cuba.  Obama has it right on.  The President should take a more forward role in foreign relations.  A meeting with the President should not be seen as a reward.  What I think is that the United States has spent years telling the world that we are the greatest country on the planet, and quite frankly, the rest of the world is tired of hearing it.  The President of the United States is not lord of the world that everyone on the planet should bow before, and I think Obama realizes that.  Hillary doesn't.

3.  Immigration.  They were probably about even I guess.  My opinion has always been that building a physical fence is rediculous, that more border patrol is the way to go, and they both seem to agree with that.  Realistically, I guess Obama is right that we are never going to be able to deport 12 million people.  I, personally would like to, so I don't agree with either one of them.

4.  Healthcare.  I think Hillary really latched onto this issue and tried to make a point of it, though, fundamentally, there isn't a whole lot of difference between their two plans.  I don't know enough about the economics of their plans to speak intelligently, so I'll just call that a wash.

I know these are just a few points, but I think these were the highlights.  Overall, I think Obama came off a heck of a lot better than Hillary did. 

or is Hillary getting bent over the table and SPANKED in tonite's debate?

The simple fact that she has kept that stupid, fake looking grin on her face all debate just makes me want to puke.

I haven't decided who to vote for yet, but I gotta say, I'm really leaning towards Obama.

I cannot believe all of the rhetoric coming from our leaders about Castro stepping down.  The chance for change in Cuba is still a distant dream.  If our "Leaders" would do a little research on Fidel's successor, they would learn that Raoul is just like, if not worse than Fidel.

There will be no change in Cuba any time soon.  Even if Raoul (or however you spell it) wanted to change things, I don't think he would until Fidel is dead. 

The Cuban government also has the support of the Venezuelan whack job too, let's not forget.  I'm sorry, I just don't see anything changing.

Or maybe, just maybe our president will invade Cuba later this year too.  Sure why not, he can invade Cuba in November, just to get warmed up, then invade Iran in December, just in time to hand an even bigger mess over to the next Pres.