This girl flipped out and went into a rant about how she wasn’t going to go because Hooters degrades woman.  The rant continued  with her points also against strip clubs and prostitution.  How these institutions shouldn’t exist.

Time had passed and this liberal girl got upset again because some news about the abortion issue.  (Obviously, she was pro-choice.)  I set her up in a trap and the conversation went something like this:

Me: So ultimately it is up to a woman if she wants to have an abortion?

LG: Yes

Me: Therefore, her body is her own property?

LG:  Yes

Me: So she is the one who ultimately decides who she wants to have sex with as well?

LG: Yes

Me: On her own terms?  No one can determine that including the government?

LG: Correct!

Me: So if a woman has ultimate control over her body, and with whom she decides to share it with, and also on her terms therefore: if she wants to have sex with an individual for the exchange of money that is okay?

She gave me a glare which basically suggested to me that she would love to see bodily harm done to me.

Anyway, I continued, “I guess that would also apply working in strips clubs or even as a waitress at Hooters.”

She stormed out the room.

The reason why I bring up this old story is because sometimes we may have certain beliefs pertaining to our rights, but on some issues we fall into the hypocrisy trap.

I will never suggest that prostitution is proper.  However as a person that respects property rights, I can’t see where the government has the authority to make it illegal. If a woman decides to have sex with another individual for either personal pleasure or for an exchange of money, how are her individual rights being violated?

This case about the Mosque in New York is along the same lines.   Majority of Americans oppose this being built, but there really isn’t an argument the government can make to stop it.  Property rights and the First Amendment protects those who want to build this Mosque.

I was dismayed when I watched a YouTube video from FOX discussing this issue.  They had a liberal political science professor going up against a conservative radio talk show host.  The professor argued for the Mosque to be built while the radio host held the opposing point of view.  I got annoyed that neither of them really mentioned the Constitutionality of the issue.

Last weekend, This Week on ABC showed a poll that a majority of Americans didn’t like this Mosque, BUT a majority of Americans also understood they had the right to build it.  The latter rarely being mentioned in the media as well.

Again like prostitution, this becomes a property rights issue.  The owners of the land wants to build a Mosque there.  It is their right.  Would there be this outcry if a Christian Church, a Jewish Synagogue, or even a Hindu Temple was going to be built there?

I seriously doubt it.  It is Unconstitutional to allow one group to build a place of worship on their land while denying a different faith.  Either you respect the First Amendment or you don’t.  You respect property rights or you don’t.

This is especially true when dealing with issues that people may feel uncomfortable about such as prostitution or building a Mosque close to Ground Zero.

There is another argument to be made on this issue that I have not seen ANYONE in the media make.  We are not going to win the War on Terror by military might.  We have to demonstrate that our values are correct and just.  A system that Freedom and Liberty still wins when even it is unpopular.

Even after all the pain, anger and frustration of a post 9/11 world, a Mosque can be built close to Ground Zero will send a message world wide that the United States does value Liberty and Freedom.

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Gay Marriage and Other Things
• Wow, The Supreme Court Ruled 8-1
• Bernanke On Fire, Where’s the gasoline?

Related items

• What Does Scott Brown’s win mean?
• Rising Tides: Part 1-The Joker
• Bernanke On Fire, Where’s the gasoline?
• Wow, The Supreme Court Ruled 8-1
• HR 1207 Has 222 Cosponsors! A Majority!

Share on Facebook

In his book The Family of Secrets, Russ Baker makes a very compelling argument that Dan Rather was set up by the Bush Administration.  Rather’s story about Bush’s questionable service in the Texas National Guard was later dismissed since Rather’s source wasn’t reliable.

Baker’s point is that the Rather’s story about Bush’s record is true, but having it reported and then having the chief source discredited.   The story will now be tarnish and the reputation of the person running with the story.

Also, reporters will not want to research the story themselves.  They will either believe it has no legs, or don’t want to suffer the same fate as Dan Rather.

I attended a couple of Anti-Bush/Anti-War rallies when Bush was still in office.  I do lean conservative on many issues, but I feel these wars are wrong.  I also had many problems with the Bush Administration.  The passing of the “War Commissions Act” spurred me on to start this podcast.

While attending these rallies, I noticed many signs that painted President Bush in a bad light.  Pictures of Bush wearing the infamous Hitler moustache.  Signs proclaiming Bush as a fascist.  As many problems I had with Bush, there were a few signs that were below the belt.  (Funny, but below the belt.)

However, members on the right called those who opposed these wars and/or Bush as being  “Unpatriotic.”  I don’t consider those I met at these events or myself as “Unpatriotic.”  I consider them as “Patriots.”

On November 22, 2008, Ragman and I attended the “End the Fed” rally in Houston, Texas.  Remember, Obama had just been elected President but has not been sworn in yet.

At this rally, I notice signs were more Anti-Pelosi than Obama.  I seem to recall two signs that even mentioned Obama.  However, this rally grew from two sources: Ron Paul’s campaign (He spoke at this event) and the “Banker Bailout” bill that just passed.

I have argued against the liberal claim that the Tea Party movement is strictly an “Anti-Obama” movement.  There is no doubt that President Obama’s polices have poured a lot of gasoline on the flame.  However, I feel history will show that it was the “Banker Bailout Bill” was the original match.  (A bill that both Obama and McCain supported)

Since Obama has taken office, Ragman and I have attended various Tea Party events .  Yes, we have seen many signs that do not place President Obama in a good light.  Not much unlike, the many signs I noticed at the Anti-Bush rallies mentioned earlier.

Some liberals have claimed the Obama as the infamous Joker picture was racist.  However, these same liberals had no issue with a picture of President Bush in the Joker makeup on a national magazine cover.  Could the better explanation be that these artists are not racists and thought that these Presidents are just clowns?

Again, the same liberals claiming the Obama signs portraying him as either a socialist or fascist are also racist.  Yet again, they had no issues with similar signs of Bush at their rallies.

As someone who has attended Tea Party events, I don’t consider these people (or myself) as racist.  I consider them Patriots.

Now for the heart of the story…

Recently, the NAACP chastised the Tea Parties for the “racist elements” within their fold.  The Tea Party has fired back saying they should get their own house in order.  Also,  why hasn’t the NAACP condemn the actions of the Black Panthers in Philadelphia back on election day of 2008? Or how the Obama Administration is handling the case?

Whites don’t have a monopoly on racism.  If you have a group of any size, you will have racists in their group.  I don’t care what race is the majority of the crowd.

The news has been a buzz ever since the edited version of Shirley Sherrod’s speech hit the conservative blogger’s website.  What was seen was part of the speech appeared very racist.  This coming right after the NAACP’s bashing of the Tea Parties.  So of course, conservatives went nuts. (The timing here is very interesting.)

We have learned since that the speech had been edited.  What was posted was taken out of context and her whole speech was about her mistake and reconciling her actions.  However, the White House and Dept. of Commerce quickly pulled the trigger on Ms. Sherrod without investigating the incident themselves.

Now both conservatives and liberals have egg on their faces.

As FDR once said, “There are no coincidents in politics.”  I think we have been “Dan Rathered” by someone.  There are some questions here that needs to be asked and I don’t see the national media are asking.

1) How did this conservative blog get this speech?  Not like conservative bloggers were hanging out at NAACP’s speeches from twenty years ago?

2) Who edited the speech?  The bloggers or the “person” who gave them the video?

3) Why was the White House and Dept. of Commerce so quickly to fire Ms. Sherrod without doing a full investigation or asking her about the speech?

The true nature of the speech now has been reveal and justly, the liberals are upset.

So you have this one “racial” event so closely after the NAACP’s attack on the Tea Party.    The conservatives go bananas followed up by the liberals.  The racial tension in the country raises…   Operation Successful!

I saw today on my Facebook; a widget with a picture of Sherrod asking me to “like” something: President Obama needs to say “NO” to Fox News.  I think this illustrates my point.

While we as individuals and the media are bickering amongst ourselves, Congress is pushing a very awful banking reform bill that will only benefit the major bankers.  It does nothing about the economic problems that started in 2008: Fannie and Freddie, derivatives, and the Federal Reserve.  It actually gives the Federal Reserve more power.  The Texas Bankers Association blasted the bill stating it only consolidates power among the largest banks while hurting state and local banks.

Also, this even pushes the BP story back. How well is the cap really working? Funny how Lindsey Lohan’s jailing manages to seep up to the top of the media stories.

If the national media isn’t going to be asking the necessary questions, then it comes to us. The bloggers/podcasters need to make sure the proper questions are asked and things are brought into context.  We can’t make the mistake as that conservative blogger website did regardless of who is at fault in this Sherrod story.

This whole event again is dividing us instead of bringing us together.  Recently, Ron Paul and Barney Frank appeared on CNN together pushing a bill they agree on.  This is what the establish fears: the left and right finding issues we agree on and doing something about it.

Again, we need to avoid these traps that will only divide us.

We can’t let Lady Liberty down…

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Mosques and Prostitution: Issues of Private Property?

Related items

• Obama = Bush???
• Imagine
• Second attempt at bailout bill passes both Senate and House, with added sweetners
• Obama’s Truth Squad
• A View From the Fence Show 8: Party Conventions, upcoming election and voice messages

Share on Facebook

Related items

• Show 38: Stealing (Borrowing) from Lew
• Show 36:Nullification
• Show 35: Multi Topic Show
• Show 34: Copenhagen Treaty Discussion
• Show 33: Conservative Uprising

Share on Facebook

Related items

• Obama = Bush???
• Show 37: Elections
• Open Email to the Southern Poverty Law Center
• What Does Scott Brown’s win mean?
• Letter to US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

Share on Facebook

Lambo goes into detail of recent problems in producing shows.  However, he obtained permission to rebroadcast a podcast from “The Lew Rockwell Show.”  Lew Rockwell is a well noted Libertarian who interviewed Naomi Wolf, a Progressive.  This interview is a must listen for anyone who has an interest in politics.  (Those who are not, should listen as well.)  A great example of where Progressives and Libertarians actually agree on many issues.

Also, here are links for Lew Rockwell and Naomi Wolf.  Please, check out these very interesting individuals.  They are doing great work…

Naomi Wolf: (Personal Website)

The End of America (Book)

The End of America (Documentary)

The Beauty Myth (Book)

Give Me Liberty (Book)

Lew Rockwell: (Personal Website)

The Left, The Right, and The State (Book)

Speaking of Liberty (Book)

Ludwig von Mises Institute Website

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• The Left Fell into the Climate Morass by Lew Rockwell

Related items

• Show 36:Nullification
• Show 35: Multi Topic Show
• Show 39: Arizona Immigration Controversy
• Show 37: Elections
• Show 34: Copenhagen Treaty Discussion

Share on Facebook

I have wondered why more of the Left have not complained more about Obama continuing a lot of Bush’s agenda.  Stewart does a great job pointing these out.  The recent story where the Speaker of the House recently got called out by liberals during one of her speeches is a good sign.  I hope the left has finally has waking up to the hypocrisy  by the leadership of their party in Washington DC.

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• AD-BP Security Keeping People Off Public Beaches

Related items

• Webs Being Weaved
• Jon Stewart on Bush making a case for Iraq War vs Economic Bailout
• Troubling Story for the 4th of July!
• Show 37: Elections
• Open Email to the Southern Poverty Law Center

Share on Facebook

This is a public beach, and BP doesn’t have any right to keep anyone off the beach.  I am glad that the reporter did contact the Sheriff’s office and forced BP Security to stand down.

The video also suggests that the security had intimated the workers not to talk to the media.  I know from my own job that I am not suppose to talk to the media if an issue were to occur. I am to refer them to the our media office.

I can’t really speak about the workers in this case.  However, it would have been interesting to see what would happen if one of them did.  Personally, I feel the main security guard should be at least fined for denying the reporter his rights to the public beach.

Share on Facebook

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Gay Marriage and Other Things
• Rising Tides: Part 1-The Joker

Related items

• Troubling Story for the 4th of July!
• Show 38: Stealing (Borrowing) from Lew
• Obama = Bush???
• Show 36:Nullification
• Open Email to the Southern Poverty Law Center

Share on Facebook

What do you think?

Related items

• Show 38: Stealing (Borrowing) from Lew
• Show 35: Multi Topic Show
• Show 39: Arizona Immigration Controversy
• Show 37: Elections
• Show 34: Copenhagen Treaty Discussion

Share on Facebook

I can assure you that I am in no means full of hate.  Anger towards the Federal Government that no longer recognizes the chains of the Constitution?  Yes, very much so.

Bush passed the Patriot Acts and now Obama is pushing for this health care bill that according to Jefferson and Madison:  neither are Constitutional.

I suspect the “truth” here is that your organization needs to find “Hate Groups” for your funding to survive.   Everyone needs to be a racist or full of hate for you to exist.  I do see a conflict of interest here.

Yes, no doubt there is a lot of anger out in the general public.  Could you consider that this anger is generated by the actions of the Government (starting around the banker bailouts) and not of any racial origin?  Of course you would not!  You can’t admit the anger is a justified one.

I do hope in time, people will realize it is organization like yours that actually causes more racial extremism than solves, funding to vanish and your organization to disappear into the sands of time.

People who looked at this item also looked at…

• Show 36:Nullification
• Imagine
• Letter to US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse
• A View From the Fence Show 1: First show
• Troubling Story for the 4th of July!

Related items

• Troubling Story for the 4th of July!
• Obama = Bush???
• Show 37: Elections
• What Does Scott Brown’s win mean?
• Letter to US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse

Share on Facebook