Our court system may not be perfect, but one of long cherished and held legal traditions is the assumption of innocence until proven guilty. Well, if President Obama has his way that will change in a major and significant way.

Obama also planned to ask Congress to crack down on tax havens and implement a major shift in the way courts view guilt. Under Obama’s proposal, Americans would have to prove they were not breaking U.S. tax laws by sending money to banks that don’t cooperate with tax officials. It essentially would reverse the long-held assumption of innocence in U.S. courts.

Read More →

Hello and good morning to everybody!

I have no work today because of bad weather, so I get to stay home and…bash President Obama!

Okay, I want Obama supporters to come up with a good explanation of why Obama is going to break a pledge on avoiding “earmarks” in the spending bill.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will break a campaign pledge and sign a budget bill laden with millions in lawmakers’ pet projects, administration officials said. LINK

How come is it okay for Democrats to “overlook” Obama’s broken pledges, but not Bush’s?

Let’s face it, what do you call Obama promising one thing, while not doing it at all? I have just one word for that type of action, and let us say it altogether:

We all knew that the moment Obama was elected as the 44th President, there would be some serious setbacks on abortion front.  Well, here is the latest setback for abortion opponents, Obama administration will announce next week its going to rescind Bush abortion rule.  It provides some job protections for doctors and nurses who have moral qualms on abortion (and birth control).

Read More →

How many of us knew one day we would fight two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Let’s face it, if we never thought that one day we would witness a massive economic collapse on Wall Street, then it is indeed a safe bet to say that future is unpredictable. So, it’s always safe to err on the side of caution.

It’s easy to cut down the size of our armed forces, but it’s never easy to build up to new levels rapidly should a need arise in a major conflict. I’m sure Romans never thought that one day their empire would die a slow dying death, or that their armies would be annihilated for good. Beware of dangers of cutting down the size only to recognize finally the true danger once our enemies quickly build up to levels where it’ll be tough for us to beat them short of using nuclear weapons.

Read More →

Today in news, a rancher in Arizona is being sued for actually enforcing the law by illegals who, what else, are trying to across the border illegally.  The Mexican nationals are suing Roger Barnett for 32 million dollars, because they were held captive at gunpoint by Barnett with his big dog.  Barnett began to round up illegals trespassing on his property since 1998, shortly after they killed his calves, destroyed his property, and broke into his home.

Read More →

Read More →

A positive thing about President Obama?  Who in his right mind would say this?  Normally, most conservatives on this site would say no.  And I am a conservative just like most of you are.  However, I am unique among conservatives due to the fact I am Deaf.  I turned conservative just a little over 10 years ago the moment I became a born-again Christian.  But like every other thing in this world, it has both positives and negatives.

Well, I am here to talk about one specific negative in relation to the Deaf and closed-captioning.  I like Redstate, and some other conservative websites as well.  They’re fun to read and quite informative.  I love to read what other conservatives, who are certainly better writers than I am, have to say on a number of important issues pertaining to US and international politics.  But I have to say this: every time a video clip is posted, there is no closed-captioning feature available at all.

Please bear with me for a moment.  Go over to GOP website and look through multimedia stuff, and tell me if there is closed-captioning available on every video clip you can find.  In fact, why don’t you check out House Republican leader John Boehner’s weekly radio address, and see if closed-captioning is provided here.  That’s right, it’s not provided at all.  Now, please hold your nose and click on the Democratic Party’s website, then click on President Obama’s weekly radio address.  Make sure you click on the clip itself, it will open a new window to YouTube.com, which is a larger version of the same weekly radio address, but it provides closed-captioning feature.

Now, do you see the problem here?  As a Deaf person, I must admit that President Obama has just won me over, never mind the fact his ideas and values are all out of alignment with conservative principles.  To be sure, I would never support President Obama in any meaningful way, but stop and think about it.  There is no good estimate of how many deaf and hard of hearing people live in America, but it is probable to say about 1% of US population is part of this category, which translates into about 3 or less million people (for a more in-depth analysis, here is the link).  It is true not all of them are born deaf like me, many become deaf later in their lives.  However, it is safe to say many deaf and hard of hearing people depend on closed-captioning to understand the speeches, dialogs, and sounds on TV, movies, and Internet.

The Democratic Party and President Obama is trying to reach every segment of our society in order to gain numbers and add some to their bases of support.  Can anybody tell me why GOP isn’t doing that?  Please don’t tell me it’s partly due out of ignorance and negligence, I don’t buy it.  There is really no excuse for this kind of thing.  While it is true ancedotically that the deaf and hard of hearing population tend to support Democrats in great numbers, we could make some inroads with this group if we only bothered to listen and provide some services to them.

Look, when I argue with liberal supporters who are Deaf just like me, they often retort that as long Democratic Party provides closed-captioning services and is more receptive to Deaf and hard of hearing issues.  Then what I can say to them?  I can argue with them on economics, military, social programs, and a lot of stuff, but they will always trump me over the issue of who provides the most services, especially in the realm of communicating the ideas or messages to every segment of US population, not just to “normal” and “hearing” people only.

Look, I know, this is probably a minor issue at most, and might not change the thinking of most of the Deaf and hard of hearing people who usually support Democratic Party and President Obama as well.  But if GOP could show it’s on an equal footing with Democrats and demonstrate an equal amount of attention to people like me and others, then perhaps it can also sway some of undecideds over the issue of who is most receptive to the Deaf and hard of hearing concerns.  In fact, I know one Deaf person, a young black man, who routinely votes Republican, but was frustrated by GOP’s inability to provide closed-captioning and other services in its messages.  When President Obama announced he was running for president, at first, this Deaf man was relcutant to support him.  But after checking up on every presidential candidate, he fell in love with President Obama.  Why?  Because President Obama and his team went out of their way to provide services like closed-captioning in every speech he made.  GOP lost this Deaf man’s vote, because it failed to meet his basic requirement — to understand every speech given and anything else that GOP might have wanted to communicate through TV, radio, or Internet.

I’m hoping that Redstate, conservatives, GOP, and well…just about everybody understand this issue, and how communication remains the top tool in reaching out to everyone, no matter who you are or what political beliefs you hold.  Is GOP up to the challenge of accomplishing this task?  I sure hope so.  GOP won’t lose my vote, because while I might feel frustrated, as a born-again Christian, I have to be patient and yearn for a more perfect body, which I shall receive at my death or Rapture.  At least that’s what the Bible teaches, but I can’t say the same thing for other deaf and hard of hearing people who have different views.

Thanks fo reading this lengthy dairy.  Maybe this won’t get a lot of hits, but I feel it’s an important issue that I have to express my feelings in a written dairy.  I know I’m not a great writer, but i hope this dairy gets the message out on the point and…loudly, if I may say so…

Ever since President Obama’s executive order to close the facility at the Guantanamo Bay within the end of year, the debate on where to send detainees continues on.  Recently, Republican Rep. Bill Young proposed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that Alcatraz, which is in her district, be reopened.

Naturally, Pelosi shrugged off such suggestions, she said that:

Perhaps he’s not visited Alcatraz,” Pelosi said of Young while displaying little sense of humor. “Alcatraz is a tourist attraction. It’s a prison that is now sort of like a — it’s a national park.”

To this statement, the only thing I can respond is by stating that yes, Gitmo facility is indeed a tourist attraction and a national park.  Why?  Because it attracts terrorists who happened to be tourists with tour guidance provided by the armed forces of United States!  And it’s a national park, because terrorists (who are now tourists) are enjoying their walks in a park all paid at the United States’ expense.  It’s a wonderful package for such tourists, as they don’t have to pay for anything.

Thus, Alcatraz can be a wonderful tourist attraction for terrorists, they get to enjoy the California weather and even have bodyguards all paid at Uncle Sam’s expense.  Moreover, they get to breathe liberal atmosphere that’s truly refreshing when compared with well…you know what I am talking about, right?

But on the other hand, it’s expensive to move all those tourists, so it’s really best for everybody if the Gitmo facility remains open.  Wouldn’t you think so?

The. Best. Line. Ever.

And this was what the black lady said to the reporter when asked what line of President Obama’s inaugural speech touched her heart the most.

You see, this black lady came from Chicago, so she paid lots of money just so that she could show up in cold weather and witness this historical day. And she couldn’t remember the best line of President Obama’s inaugural speech. Unbelievable.

I suppose this is what we can expect of President Obama for the next four years. Wouldn’t you say so?

I am not great at writing blogs, so here goes nothing….

America is a big country, so it’s a real must for most people to have a decent car.  We love to drive.  I should know, because I love to drive.  I live in Silver Spring, Maryland and I’m no stranger to riding on Metro buses and subway rails, but I’ll take driving over riding public transportation anytime and anyday.  I just like to have my personal space.  I don’t want to get up and sit on a public bus, only to smell smoking and somebody whose stench clearly indicates he hasn’t showered in days.  But I guess that’s about to change.

How?  You know how it is always with liberals quipping that we have to raise gasoline taxes in order to force us to buy or drive a more fuel-efficient car.  We need to raise gasoline taxes, because oil resources are dwindling and more conserving is needed.  Maybe you hear an occasional statement that gasoline taxes should be raised so that more money can be put into researching alternate energy sources or repairing roads.  We’re supposed to love taxes, because it’s the only thing that’s keeping our civilization alive and thriving, or so say liberals.

But tell me, what happens when everybody is driving a fuel-efficient car?  What happens to gasoline taxes?  Wouldn’t that mean revenues in gasoline taxes might decline significantly as you get more miles out of gas?  Yes, it may mean that.  You see, some Democrats and liberals are starting to worry about that, and they don’t like it when taxes don’t work out so well.  Thus, they must find a way to put more taxes on us, whom they have castigated as a bunch of nothing more than Joe the Plumbers.

Oregon (and other states) is experimenting with mileage taxes. It means you get to be taxed a mile as you drive your car. I have no idea how one can mathematically calculate how one pays in gasoline taxes on the same mileage as one is paying on mileage taxes. But I imagine an average American drives 12,000 miles a year. If this average American only pumps gas once a week, and gasoline tax is maybe 50 cents per gallon. If his car’s tank holds 10 gallons, that means he pays $5 in gasoline taxes per week. Since a year consists of 52 weeks, so you take $5 and multiply 52, and you come up with $250 in gasoline taxes yearly.

On the other hand, say if you’re going to pay in mileage taxes, it’s more likely you’ll be taxed a few pennies on every mile you drive. Leaving aside all legal technicalities like what happens when you drive out of state, let’s say you pay 5 cents per mile. And you drive 12,000 miles per year. How much do you pay in mileage taxes? $600. You multiply 5 cents by 12,000 miles, and that’s how much you come up with — six hundred dollars. That’s four hundred more than regular gasoline taxes. And who is to say that mileage taxes won’t be raised more every year?

And ironically, some liberals are now afraid that we won’t buy better fuel-efficient cars simply because we don’t like paying more taxes in any form or shape. So, if one wants to force us to pay more in gasoline taxes if that means weaning us off oil and less fuel-efficient cars, I get it. I don’t like it, but I get it, okay? But I don’t get it when somebody comes up with an idea of finding a way to tax us more if we drive a better fuel-efficient car! If one is driven away from regular cars to more exotic cars with better fuel-efficiency rates, then what happens one is driven away from BOTH types of cars?

You know how it is we often say that in politics, America truly gets what she deserves when she elects leaders like Democrats and President-elect Obama? It’s true. We get leaders we rightfully deserve, good or bad. Heaven forbid we find ways to reduce tax burdens on ordinary Joe the Plumbers, because that would mean the end of world for many social elites and Democratic leaders.

Maybe it’s time for us to buy a bike and do it old-fashioned way….using raw human power to travel to another place. But I wouldn’t put it past those idiots to find a way to tax our human legs or bikes…

UPDATE: I’ve updated my blog entry, but it’s not done yet. I want to discuss the analysis I’ve done on Virginia a bit more in depth. But I guess that will have to wait tomorrow, as I have church service tonight. But I’ve uploaded my spreadsheet in excel sheet and sources with links provided.

I am on a brief break as I type this blog. It’s something I always wanted to bring up, but could never find time to do it. Today, I’ve decided to force myself to type this brief blog, and hoping to update it as soon as I have data available, which is left at home.

The reason I wanted to do this blog is I did a short, amateurish research on how Obama won Virginia. To be truthful, I was in shock as I watched on news that Obama barely won Virginia and other states. I had always thought Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana and Ohio all would go for McCain, if for no reason other than the fact many of counties in those states went red in 2000 and 2004. As it turns out, it’s not quite the same case this year.

I was hoping that somebody more experienced than I am in researching this type of case would provide some rundown on statistics and other facts on how Obama successfully turned such states from red to blue. So far, it has not happened yet, thus I’ve decided to take upon myself to do it, because I think it’s important to study those cases in preparation for 2012, making sure GOP presidential candidate would not repeat the mistakes made on part of McCain campaign.

Of course, every election year is unique, and every candidate is unique, in which each has different strengths and weaknesses. But every candidate must work hard to win states, and some states aren’t just worth campaigning in, like California, with near 100% certainty, would always go blue regardless of how good a GOP presidential candidate is. Despite economic troubles, I always figured this would be the same scenario, with a close McCain victory.

Read More →

It is amazing that how much influence and power money has over every nation from its time immemorial in humankind’s recorded history. The money does funny things to our character and guides a nation’s politics from within and outside, as well. It can be either good or bad. Indeed, money can be a great indicator of how healthy a nation’s economy is truthfully and what sort of politics will it establish.

Read More →

Good morning everybody.

I’m on a quick break, and I came across this interesting article on FoxNews website. Here’s the link:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,426764,00.html

It would appear that Democrats are letting the drilling ban to expire next week, though with some new drilling legislation pending. Nevertheless, for months now, GOP has been pounding Democrats hard on the energy issue, and we’re starting to see the fruits of GOP attacks on the energy issue. Indeed, this is a great victory for GOPl, though the battle isn’t over yet.

GOP’s victory notwithstanding, one thing I am greatly concerned is that Pelosi could use this expiring ban as a sort of leverage with White House in order to force White House concessions on the bailout plan. Therefore, I am left with a greatly nagging question: Is White House going to trade energy independence for bailing out Wall Street firms or vice versa? Is it even a plausible possibility that White House might give in to Pelosi’s gamble?

Maybe Pelosi gambit will fail anyway as I don’t think Congress has enough time to resolve the bailout plan and enact new drilling legislation before it adjures for recess. So, it maybe that White House could have no choice but to let stock market suffer some painful turmoils, simply because Pelosi and others have chosen to play games with White House.

I’d like to have both the bailout plan passed without additional tacks on it, and let every state with potential offshore drillings to work out details on its own without additional federal interference. But I have a feeling we’re not going to have that ideal scenario become a reality. Oh well, life isn’t fair, right? Yeah right.

Recently on Comcast news, I saw a headline that says the Tenn. Church shooter’s motive to kill church-worshippers was because the church took liberal stances.

This is indeed a sad day for all of us. Nobody deserves to be shot and left dead in cold blood. It’s called murder, period. What this shooter did is horribly wrong, no question about it.

He has only himself to blame for all trouble he’s in now.

Let’s make it clear to everybody that while we are conservatives, we have no desire to take out our anger on anybody, no matter how liberal they are, or whether they truly deserved it. This evil man deserves to have death penalty slammed on his head.

As much I despise liberals, I also acknowledge they’re still human beings, and should be treated accordingly.

Again, I am reminded of a famous biblical verse, which I think applies perfectly here.

Romans 12:18-21, KJV: If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

My condolences to victims’ families, they will need all comfort they can get from each other and God, as well.

It’s been known that Obama proposes tax cuts on those people who are making $150,000 or less. But he wants to raise taxes on the rich, those who make $250,000 or more. He is hoping to have it cut both ways: making the middle class happy by tax cuts and taxing the rich to death.

Obama believes this will spark bottom-up economic growth, but like most of his views, he usually gets it wrong.

Let’s get something here straightened out first before continuing with this blog: making $250,000 is no chickenfeed. It’s a lot of money, in fact, it’s a luxury not enjoyed by large segments of this world’s population. As it may be, however, it’s utterly ridiculous to cast down those who are wealthy enough to enjoy luxurious lifestyles.

The rich are, in my view, neither our friends nor foes. Even so, we do need the rich to provide us with sources of venture capital, jobs, corporations, stocks, and other things. We work for the rich, and the rich works for us, as well! How is the rich working for us? By providing us with goods and services that nobody else could afford to provide. When the rich is taxed heavily, it leaves little investment into our economy.

However, Obama is saying certain things that’s not necessarily true.

Read on.

Read More →

During Obama’s foreign trip to Great Britain, where he visited London, he had an interesting conversation with the Tory leader, David Cameron. It was overheard by some reporters due to a boom microphone picking it up.

Have you often heard from Obama how he feels that he is capable of making good judgment calls? Obama contends that though inexperienced, what matters the most is his capability to execute good judgment calls. You can hear it in his voice when he gave the grand speech in the front of Victory Column. He feels he has a lot of confidence in himself and his hopechange philosophy will inspire others to do good to each other.

He believes that global warming, redistribution of wealth, the fight against racism, a more open immigration policy, and a whole host of other issues put forth are more than just stances to him. He sees himself as making the right judgment calls on those important issues.

And, my friend, is what so frightening about him and his unorthodox, liberal philosophy.

Moreover, what truly scares me the most is that in this overheard conversation Obama was making a point that others have been trying to pound the message home. Obama needs to listen to others more knowledgeable on certain issues than himself is. And yet, Obama is blind to all kinds of advice, namely his dangerous thinking that it’s high time to pull out of Iraq immediately, despite the fact that a lot of people are starting to see this war as the one that’s winnable.

READ THE BELOW FOLD TO SEE WHAT OBAMA SAID TO CAMERON

Read More →

I’ll go right to the point of this blog entry: it seems that the rumors of Edwards going out on a certain misadventure may turn out to be correct after all.

Read this link:

Here is the excrept from the link….

Read More →

I have a big question for Senator Obama on his foreign trip idea. I know that he’s been trying to buttress up his foreign policy credentials, as if that would do any good for him. If that is in fact his intention, then perhaps he’d like to answer my question.

What is my question for him? Easy enough. Why don’t you spend one week in Iraq (or Afghanistan) instead of just one or two days? I think you could learn a lot in one week instead of one day, wouldn’t you say so?

Obama spent an hour of his time giving a grand speech to 200,000 foreign (German) citizens who aren’t even going to influence the race he’s in, not even one iota. Is that wise use of his precious time and energy? Perhaps Obama thought so, but to each his own.

Read More →

This morning, I rode on a Metro subway rail on way to Glemont Station here in Maryland, I saw a strange poster slapped on wall next to automatic doors. This strange poster warned that if we were to stop building wind turbines, that would result in the loss of jobs. When I saw that, I just had to laugh out on inside.

We’re in middle of an energy crisis, and so many liberals (greenies as well) want America to continue trying out different alternate energy sources instead of doing the right thing: allowing domestic oil drills. Now, they try to turn the table on us by saying if we don’t try out alternate energy sources like wind turbines, that would mean no potential jobs, hence no way to simulate economy!

Read More →