George Bush, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Bad All the Way Around

If this wasn't so disastrous it might be funny. Do you really think one is better than the other? You're crazy if you answer to the affirmative.













I as you know by now remain well entrenched in conservatism and find myself somewhere to the philosophical right of Attila the Hun. If I had any fame or journalistic recognition at all the pundits would call me a neocon's neocon. Belief in a value system and applying it to your political decisions is one thing and marching lockstep with one party or another for the sole purpose of maintaining party unity is foolish. I am not a George W. Bush fan nor am I a particular supporter of Dick Cheney and his Halliburton empire. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan and the attempted destruction of the Taliban and the Al-Qaida training camps housed within the poppy plant's homeland. I even supported the administration regarding the invasion of Iraq based on our intelligence estimates combined with those researched and supposedly validated by the British Empire. Bush's war detractors make an error not in opposing the war itself but in calling for an immediate or nearly immediate withdrawl. Even the Democrats if pressed on the issue admit that a Vietnam-style withdrawl would prove catastrophic to the entire Middle East and give Iran, Russia, and China added bravato if future tensions arise with them. We stay until it's stabilized or until the Islamic communities in the region prove to all of us once and for all that their value system is flawed and based on a guttural 5th century mentality. I am afraid the latter will always hold true. Anyone for turning the whole damn sand box back to glass? That would be a sigh of relief.

Bush's policy or perhaps Bush's luck in policy has prevented another 9/11 type of attack on our homeland. We have to give credit where credit is due. Beyond that, George has disappointed diehard conservatives like me beyond measure. Our current spending would give Tip O'Neill a massive erection and he's been dead for years. Democrats still gripe about the education system but no president has thrown more tax dollars at public education than Bush. Democrats don't want to tackle the real issues of personal responsibility rather than promoting moral relativism. Problems in the public school system start at home miles away from the classrooms. Bush is bankrupting us. Every industry in the country receives giant subsidies. You name it and it gets money. Big oil, corporate farming, poorly run airlines, and even mismanaged financial institutions like Bear Stearns get taxpayer bailouts. How do I sign up for one of those?

Those of us on the hard right view spending like this. Taxes are to be paid to provide for national security and an infrastructure that accomodates capitalism by ensuring the building blocks are in place to facilitate a free market economy. In other words we want a mighty military to protect us from foreign lunatics like those in Iran, China, Syria, and Russia. We believe in a proactive rather than reactive strategy when it comes to protecting our assets and well being in the world. Barack and Hillary, well, not so much. We believe that things like roads, airports, bridges, and other technologies that promote an efficiency in the course of doing business is what makes America's businesses and workers succeed. Take a majority of entitlements and pork barrel spending not directly related to the above and flush them with the kitty litter. Throw in some tax dollars for a modest federal law enforcement presence to uphold the Constitution and a revamped and less imposing list of federal statutes and voila we have a productive country with a surplus. In general economic terms George W. Bush doesn't speak for me. Give me the freedom promised in the Constitution and less government intrusion. If there is a problem at home let my state figure it out rather than imposing more federal regulations. Simple really is productive.

Now let's take on the views of dumb and dumber. I mean Hillary and Barack. BIG GOVERNMENT is better. The government knows what's best for you. Take Hillary's health care proposal. Your freedom is eroded before your very eyes. You have to have my health care. It is law that GOVERNMENT takes your money for a program you have no choice in. Scary. Choice equals freedom and any lack thereof sways us precipitously towards socialism. Barack's comments about us "rednecks" clinging to our guns and religion and belief in national border security make me wonder if he thinks personal freedoms and values are overrated. Maybe he believes his control and initiatives save us because after all we really can longer make decisions for ourselves. Can't you see it coming or does his toothy smile induce the cessation of neurons in your brain? Personal freedom MUST trump government intervention or we're all lost and lost for good. It is scary to know that liberals like Clinton and Obama have built giant constituencies because they've convinced people that personal responsibility and work ethic no longer apply. Trust me says Barack, I'll take care of you. No thanks Barack, I'll take care of myself and provide for my own like the framers intended it to be.

In summation, of the three boobs talked about here today one is no better than the other two. They simply have a different method and set of calculations to bilk us and dumb us down. Just remember, personal freedoms can only be maintained through our opposition to undue government influence and an adherence to our own responsibility for ourselves and our actions.

Barack and Hillary woo Montana Democratic Faithful in Butte, Missoula

The Democratic Party hosted both of their candidates for the office of president in Butte yesterday to the cheers of thousands of supporters. Barack Obama included an earlier stop in Missoula Saturday morning. On the positive side the spectacle brought Montana national recognition and did create its own historical context because it included both candidates that currently engage in verbal fistfighting desperate to obtain the Democratic nomination. I think it's also kind of neat that as far as the Democratic primary process goes, Montana closes the primary season as it's the last one to close its polls on June 3rd.

From news reports I've obtained both candidates stayed on message. George Bush is bad and government will take control and heal your wounds if I'm elected. Fair enough; those have been the talking points in stump speeches since the Iowa caucuses. Barack continues a masterful charm offensive while enthusiastic crowds roar in approval even if his message contains little in concrete detail and relies heavily on glittering generalities. Hillary takes the stage like the mad little woman she is; she's still upset that no one but she and Bill understand that she's entitled as a Clinton to have the office of president delivered to her much like the monarchy in England. Hillary obviously stares at the nomination much like Sir Edmund Hillary (no she wasn't named after him, she misspoke) stared at Mount Everest while standing at its base. Even in Montana I feel the winds of change blowing. The state could vote in the Democratic category this fall and hasn't done so since swaying for Bill Clinton in 1992. Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee even though Hillary will pull out all the stops before finally if ever conceding defeat. A vicious political machine like the Clintons maintain won't sink of its own accord. In good old Montana terms, Hillary is a raccoon in a creek being closely pursued by bloodhound Barack Obama. I've seen a coon push a hound's head under the water in an attempt to drown it. I am thankful that all the infighting will benefit John McCain this fall.

Montana voters maintain an independent streak and don't usually adhere to their parties in lock step fashion and thankfully that makes us unique. Most Montanans I know, Democrats included, generally maintain somewhat of a conservative outlook on social issues but may drift left on economic and other issues. We have a Democratic governor and two senators. Our single representative is true blue conservative through and through and his success or failure in reelection this fall will serve as an accurate indicator in gauging if the state in its entirety has moved decidedly left. Senator Jon Tester defeated long time incumbent Republican Conrad Burns in the last election based in no small part on a smear campaign alleging close ties between Burns and convicted lobbyist Conrad Burns. Whether it was time for Burns to go or not, Tester is lucky to be in office after being elected on false pretenses.

I would have loved to travel to Butte to see both Hillary and Barack speak to the thronging masses. However I'd already scheduled some time to shampoo my plants and I simply had to prioritize. When I found out it cost $40.00 to purchase a ticket for entry I decided that money could be better spent on driveway de-icer and some items from the dollar store. I still find myself chapped to know how many of the blue collar common folks fall in line with both Clinton and Obama. That whole representation of the common man is a train load of crap big enough to fertilize the Mojave. Bill and Hillary earned $109,000,000.00 in the last several years and they still won't divulge donor records from his presidential library because trust me, they don't want you to know who's on there. Hillary absolutely bashes corporate America in true Socialist fashion but how in the hell do we think Bill makes his big bucks? What do you think his money is made from? He's an "adviser" and "consultant" to corporate titans in Dubai. I wonder if there's any oil money associated with Dubai in the MIDDLE EAST. I'll let you decide. I hope it makes the supporters of Clinton happy to know that after making all that money off "corporate" interests (yes, Hillary's book publishers are corporate too) they still bilk the taxpayer for hundreds of thousands of dollars on secret service details and perks related to Bill's disservice in office.

Barack Obama's position relative to Hillary's is a little more tenuous when it comes to the general election against McCain. Barack's involvement with a racist religious organization, corrupt real estate mogul Tony Rezko, and a man once convicted for trying to blow up federal buildings may cause him some problems come November. Couple that with his relative inexperience in just about every category of leadership and I think it may develop into a perfect storm for him. His refusal to lay out black and white (there's been plenty of black versus white) details of his policy plans and more importantly how he plans to pay for them further adds to the intrigue. He's been labeled as the most liberal senator in the country. Even with his frenzied support now among his Democratic supporters, independents and Republicans may find themselves just as energized this fall to come out swinging and I mean swinging hard. He has mentioned nothing of substance to convince me he is little more than a populist demagogue that delivers eloquent speeches of questionable substance from within the confines of an empty suit. Even though the liberal mainstream media including the disasters of NBC, MSNBC, and CNN remain in the tank for him, the truth may in fact set him free. It may set him free from the constraints of winning the presidency.

One news report that troubled me came from the Missoula rally. As the reporter so poignantly set the mood, a supporter remained in the stands after Barack left the stage and wept. Yes, I said wept. I've cried before but not over an unproven politician that says nothing that hasn't been said at thousands of high school pep rallies across the country. It reminds of that scene from the hilarious airline spoof movie "Airplane." A woman finds out her flight is in trouble while strapped into her seat and starts panicking and wailing uncontrollably. She is driving everyone absolutely nuts and there is a line of people in the aisle wielding everything from pipes, baseball bats, and brass knuckles all too willing to quiet her unnecessary outbursts. If I'd been in Missoula after the rally, I may have been one of those people.

Have a great day.

The Pregnant Man Story: How Low Can It Go?

I just happened to be asleep in my chair the other day and when I woke from my snoring slumber this is what I saw on the television screen a few feet away. I am neither a fan or drooling supporter of demagogue Oprah Winfrey in any way, shape, or form but I did watch the show if only for reasons of morbid fascination. It was through bad luck only the television found itself tuned to the CBS frequency. We must preface the high points of this article with an underlying theme that holds true under most scientific testing and analysis. Stupid is as stupid does. I'm pretty sure I learned that same theory in biology and church. Who knew? Okay, this image is just flat-ass creepy and that is only the beginning of this bizarre and appalling set of circumstances. Let's run through the facts before I begin chastising this person with inappropriate and politically insensitive sarcasm.

First we should clarify that this is not a pregnant man at all. This is a photograph of Thomas Beatie formerly known as Tracy when he was a girl growing up in Hawaii. Before she became a he there were beauty pageants and boyfriends. How would you like to be one of those guys? You're at home having a beer with your buddies and Oprah comes on. Hey Bill, I used to date him. After throwing up for hours I picture these guys playing Russian roulette with a .357 magnum and bottle of Chivas Regal. At the very least we're talking about hours of painful psychiatric therapy and strong prescription medications. Yes, he is pregnant because he is really a she. Beatie is a transgender male. Although born a female and living as a female for most of his/her life, he noted that when he woke in the mornings as a female he felt like a man. So I hypothesize that he ran to Home Depot, bought a circular saw, and playfully engaged in a double masectomy masking the pain with several vodka and testosterone cocktails. Then he/she visited one of those adult playthings stores and purchased an appropriate rubbery phallus and glued it to a generally appropriate area behind the zippered gates. Some needle and thread and voila that pretty much sews this case up. (I couldn't help it.) That is truly interesting. Now we're back to having the right to act on our feelings regardless of the consequences. I've wanted to get up many times and head over to my neighbor's house with a four foot section of cast iron pipe and beat him and his property senseless when a party kept me up most of the night. The point is I didn't act on that impulse. Why is this any different? I would have hurt my neighbor and this pregnancy will certainly damage the growing child for life.

Beatie was quoted as saying being pregnant as a male doesn't define who he is. It defines you're a freak. End of that story. During Beatie's "transition" he chose to keep his internal female reproductive organs because he thought he may want a child but apparently not in his natural form of a biological female. How selfish and morally inept was that decision? It travels the same path as the argument I have with homosexuals adopting and raising children. If all established norms find themselves eviscerated under theories of moral equivalence, where do we timidly and tentatively form any baseline of decency even if only infintismal? Beatie is married to a middle aged woman with two grown daughters of her own. Her voice is deeper and mannerisms seem quite masculine if you're keeping score at home. Homosexuals and this transgender couple claim that their lifestyle is somehow the result of some biologic progression. It is naturally buried within an individual's DNA or so say the promoters of gaydom. Homosexuals won't define their actions as a lifestyle choice because they claim biology is overriding social norms. If biology is at the root of homosexuality and transgender science, why don't homosexuals agree that they simply can't have children because it falls beyond the borders of the natural science fence they put themselves behind? It is not natural or biologically possible for same sex couples to have children. Remember when gays hung their hats on the study that noted scientists believed some male sheep were gay? I could always tell because they were the ones at the feed trough wearing pink leg warmers. What if biology and personal choice spiraled out of control? What if everyone and everything became inclined naturally or otherwise to pursue same sex relationships. All species of flora and fauna become extinct. My point is that their argument is as ridiculous as what I've just noted. Same sex relationships and the desire for children violate the most basic of natural principles yet most fighting in the political arena for gay rights claim it is a God-given right to have your cake and eat it too.

I'm wondering how long it takes a scientist or doctor living in any old American town to skip down the street to a retarded neighbor's home. Some medical study will pay for the use of this unwitting person to breed a chimpanzee or gorilla. I wonder how long before Oprah aired that episode. Do you see my point? Maybe you have a person you know that wants to marry a goat or have sexual relations in public with his 1983 Buick Skylark. How can we accept one form of supposed biologic relationship based on progression and not others? I don't see how the train won't just steamroll off the tracks. Oprah noted in her interview with Beatie and his/her wife that this is a "new definition of what diversity means for everybody." Not for me Oprah. I am not filled with the absolute hubris that Oprah is nor will I cast such generalized statements in that glib fashion. As far as I'm concerned, if Beatie wants to have a baby as a transgender male he can just play the "natural" game to the end. He must deliver the baby as a male would if a male could. Let's see how Thomas/Tracy Beatie handles a rectal delivery. I imagine it would be something like passing a bowling ball or coffee maker. Maybe after that being pregnant won't hold the same nonsensical allure it does now. Instead of making high pitched squealing appearances on Oprah he'll be the lifelong spokesperson for Preparation H. It's just that silly.

Apparently we're traveling into uncharted territory. The lines are so blurry I'm afraid that any act can now be achieved regardless of personal accountability or social acceptance. The religion of science now replaces the very foundations we've built civilization on. There are no more norms and traditional values based on Christian principles. I quite think George Washington or John Adams would shutter uncontrollably. Those in my non-progressive conservative camp are now the established minority and our persecution will follow. Mark my words.