A comparison of The Obamneys

From the "End Of The American Dream" website....Someone named Michael has put together the definitive list comparing and contrasting The Obamneys. 

Some of these, from a Libertarian point of view, are horrific. In other cases, you've gotta wonder what Michael was getting worked up about. For instance, #25 is iffy.  Both Obamneys slam Free Trade when addressing an audience of the economically illiterate, but often do a few things to support rational trade and exchange. #33, the abortion issue, is IMHO, best left up to mothers and doctors. #34 is nobody's business but The Boy Scouts, as long as they aren't receiving tax dollars. All in all, though, this is a good effort.

GARY JOHNSON FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES !! THE ONLY WAY TO "WASTE" YOUR VOTE IS TO BE OPPOSED TO THE MESS BELOW, AND CONTINUE VOTING FOR IT !!!!

The following are 40 ways that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are essentially the same candidate....
1. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported TARP.
2. Mitt Romney supported Barack Obama's "economic stimulus" packages.
3. Mitt Romney says that Barack Obama's bailout of the auto industry was actually his idea.
4. Neither candidate supports immediately balancing the federal budget.
5. They both believe in big government and they both have a track record of being big spenders while in office.
6. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both fully support the Federal Reserve.
7. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are both on record as saying that the president should not question the "independence" of the Federal Reserve.
8. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both said that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did a good job during the last financial crisis.
9. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both felt that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke deserved to be renominated to a second term.
10. Both candidates oppose a full audit of the Federal Reserve.
11. Both candidates are on record as saying that U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has done a good job.
12. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both been big promoters of universal health care.
13. Mitt Romney was the one who developed the plan that Obamacare was later based upon.
14. Wall Street absolutely showers both candidates with campaign contributions.
15. Neither candidate wants to eliminate the income tax or the IRS.
16. Both candidates want to keep personal income tax rates at the exact same levels for the vast majority of Americans.
17. Both candidates are "open" to the idea of imposing a Value Added Tax on the American people.
18. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the TSA is doing a great job.
19. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported the NDAA.
20. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported the renewal of the Patriot Act.
21. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the federal government should be able to indefinitely detain American citizens that are considered to be terrorists.
22. Both candidates believe that American citizens suspected of being terrorists can be killed by the president without a trial.
23. Barack Obama has not closed Guantanamo Bay like he promised to do, and Mitt Romney actually wants to double the number of prisoners held there.
24. Both candidates support the practice of "extraordinary rendition".
25. They both support the job-killing "free trade" agenda of the global elite.
26. They both accuse each other of shipping jobs out of the country and both of them are right.
27. Both candidates are extremely soft on illegal immigration.
28. Neither candidate has any military experience. This is the first time that this has happened in a U.S. election since 1944.
29. Both candidates earned a degree from Harvard University.
30. They both believe in the theory of man-made global warming.
31. Mitt Romney has said that he will support a "cap and trade" carbon tax scheme (like the one Barack Obama wants) as long as the entire globe goes along with it.
32. Both candidates have a very long record of supporting strict gun control measures.
33. Both candidates have been pro-abortion most of their careers. Mitt Romney's "conversion" to the pro-life cause has been questioned by many. In fact, Mitt Romney has made millions on Bain Capital's investment in a company called "Stericycle" that incinerates aborted babies collected from family planning clinics.
34. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the Boy Scout ban on openly gay troop leaders is wrong.
35. They both believe that a "two state solution" will bring lasting peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
36. Both candidates have a history of nominating extremely liberal judges.
37. Like Barack Obama, Mitt Romney also plans to add "signing statements" to bills when he signs them into law.
38. They both have a horrible record when it comes to job creation.
39. Both candidates believe that the president has the power to take the country to war without getting the approval of the U.S. Congress.
40. Both candidates plan to continue running up more government debt even though the U.S. government is already 16 trillion dollars in debt.

FDR+BHO = SOL

"Like FDR, President Obama inherited a nation in economic crisis. Let us not forget, however, that Roosevelt’s policies converted the crisis into a decade-long full-blown depression. Why anyone would seek to emulate that experience is beyond me." - Alan Blinder, in a letter to the Wall Street Journal

I don't believe we have any boots on our throats yet, but....

....this is kinda cool to think about. 

Rupert Murdoch attacked by pie assassin - Who will be the next victim?

It looks like Rupert Murdoch's media empire is infested with reporters who illegally hack into phones and emails. 
Any reporter doing this in the U.S. should be locked up, and the key should be thrown away. 
Here's a video of a protester trying to hit Murdoch with a pie during some testimony before Parliament.  Murdoch's wife intervenes before the pie-chunker can get too close.


 
In the U.S., we're supposed to be protected from warrantless wiretaps by the Fourth Amendment:

The wording is straightfoward.  Unless George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Karl Rove have a warrant, they don't have any business going through your papers or "effects".  "Effects" would be your email or your cell phone. 

But during the Bush administration, we went into a blind panic and surrendered our rights to some people who wanted to go through our stuff without a warrant.  It was all for our own protection and safety. 

And it continues.  Here's the Wall Street Journal on Obama's "evolving" stance on listening to your conversations:

....we're beginning to wonder if the (Obama) White House has put David Addington, Mr. Cheney's chief legal aide, on retainer. The practical effect is to prevent the courts from reviewing the legality of the warrantless wiretapping program that Mr. Obama repeatedly claimed to find so heinous -- at least before taking office. Justice, by the way, is making the same state secrets argument in a separate lawsuit involving rendition and a Boeing subsidiary.

Hide the children, but we agree with Mr. Obama that the President has inherent Article II Constitutional powers that neither the judiciary nor statutes like FISA can impinge upon. The FISA appeals court said as much in a decision released in January, as did Attorney General Eric Holder during his confirmation hearings. It's reassuring to know the Administration is refusing to compromise core executive-branch prerogatives, especially on war powers.

....Then again, we are relearning that the "Imperial Presidency" is only imperial when the President is a Republican. Democrats who spent years denouncing George Bush for "spying on Americans" and "illegal wiretaps" are now conspicuously silent. Yet these same liberals are going ballistic about the Bush-era legal memos released this week. Cognitive dissonance is the polite explanation, and we wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Holder released them precisely to distract liberal attention from the Al-Haramain case.

Hit the link to read the whole thing. 

So....  who would you rather have illegally listening to your phone calls and reading your emails?  Rupert Murdoch or Barack Obama? 

And is Michelle Obama prepared to step between Barack and a pie? 

The pic of the Obama Pie came from here. 

Ok, whose turn is it this year to be the "responsible, small government party"?

This is from Weasel Zippers.  A summary of the 2006 vote to raise the debt ceiling. 
Please note how many small government Republican senators voted to put us further into debt. 

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress — 2nd Session

As compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res.47 )
Vote Number: 54 Vote Date: March 16, 2006, 11:17 AM

A cynic might claim that our two political factions enjoy taking turns. 

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies." - Barack Obama, 2006

And so it begins....

For the few die-hards who think there's a difference between the Republicrats and the Demoblicans, go here.    Please.  Hit the link.  And don't even think about acting surprised by what you read. 
This means you, Harper !!  :)

As long as we keep doing what we're doing, we're going to keep getting what we've been getting:  debt, wars, needless regulation, bureaucracy, half the world's prisoners, violence on the border, Barack Obama regulating bedroom behavior, increasingly worthless currency, import quotas, high school graduates who've never read a book, and entitlements from hell. 

The Republicans have worked hand in hand with their co-dependents to raise the debt floor ceiling before the current move to put in a new debt floor ceiling 70 times (so far). 
Leopards don't change their spots.  They do what they do.  Don't be distracted by all the hand-wringing and scenery-chewing.  It is as scripted as a production of Hamlet. 

Just enjoy watching them get your grandchildren further and further into debt. 

The Fix Is In

Ron Paul is now hitting the airwaves with this video rant about the debt ceiling.
I'm afraid it is too late. Boehner and Obama have met in private, and that's enough to guarantee that the fix is in.
When time permits, go to Vegas and try to place a bet that the government WILL raise the debt ceiling.
They'll laugh you all the way to Miami. Nobody in his right mind would take that action.

The new anti-Obama bumperstickers

Don Surber, a blogger whose typing I usually love, has posted some of the new anti-Obama bumperstickers. 
Some of them are funny, some are kinda harsh even by my jaded standards, and a few of them raise more questions than they answer. 
Mr. Surber blogs from a more or less Republican point of view.  Just for the sake of argument, let's assume that these bumperstickers will be found on Republican bumpers. 
Here's the first one.  Let's call it "ObamaZombies". 

The idea behind this one is that Obama's remaining supporters are an unthinking, brain-dead group.  Fair enough.  Unless you're a defense contractor, a federal employee, or a gay soldier (not that there's anything wrong with that), things are probably worse for you than they were two years ago. 

But wait a second....You can go here and learn that a Tea Party spokesperson is claiming that the Tea Party will support any Republican nominee against Barack Obama.  Any Republican?  Seriously?  Donald Trump or Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee?  Rick Freakin' Santorum?  Who are the brain-dead zombies here? 

Let's look at some of the other bumperstickers: 

1.  If this one is a reference to the birth certificate controversy, it is lame.  The man has produced a legit birth certificate  End of story. 
If this is a reference to Obama's asking "What would Belgium do?" when confronted with economic problems, the Republicans should examine the mote in their own collective eye.  They've voted for almost as many subsidies, price supports and corporate welfare schemes as the evil scheming socialists on the other side of the aisle. 

2. I totally agree. Nobody owes you crap. Let's end ethanol supports today. How about it, Senator Grassley (R-Iowa)?

3.   100% ANTI-OBAMA?  Well, it's good to have you in the Libertarian Party !!!!   Obama supports the War On Drugs and the Libertarians don't.  Obama is opposed to Gay and Lesbian marriage, and the Libertarians aren't. 

4.   If you look at the spending sprees of Bush Major, Bush Minor, and Ronald Reagan, this one will make you downright giggly.  Our current debt was caused by both factions of our government reaching across the aisle in a spirit of bi-partisan cooperation to work together and get things done, i.e. - screw you over.  Yes we can ! 

5.   Yes, we've all had enough.  We've had enough expensive wars, to use just one obvious example.  We don't want new wars, though.  We want the good ol' kind, like the ones against Iraq and Afghanistan, led by Republicans who will always wear a flag lapel pin.  No more new ones, though.  We've had enough. 

6.   This all depends on the next president, doesn't it?  The Republicans really might nominate a Global Warmist like Mitt Romney, who will probably continue the green giveaways.  Or a theocrat like Mike Huckabee or Michelle Bachmann.  How much longer are we going to support nominees because of their Republican or Democrat label?  Which party struck the match that Obama used as justification for burning down the house?   

7.   This one is kind of funny.  Mr. Hope'n'Change Nobel-winner has found new wars, bombed new countries, kept up the illegal wiretaps, carried on the rendition policies, and Gitmo is still open for business.  If we put in a Republican on January 20th, I'm going to buy one of these.  The corporate giveaways will continue, the military-industrial complex will continue to grow, and the debt ceiling will get raised a few more times.  Hide and watch for even more of the same. 

8.  Jimmy Carter was a deficit hawk compared to Reagan, Bush, and Bush.   Lordy, I'm tired of pointing this out. 

9.   This is another funny one.  I kinda like it.  Obama plays a lot of golf and he takes a lot of vacations.  What the hell do you want him to do?  Create more stimulus packages, bank bailouts, wars, and economic recovery plans?  If someone else could put The Aggie through college, I'd volunteer to caddy for Obama all day every day, if that's what it takes to keep Obama (or the next Republican nominee) from going to work on any more of the nation's problems. 
Please, please, please just leave us alone.  Stay out of the economy.  Stop trying to create jobs.  Please. 

10.   Or how about "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Tractor"?  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Combine".  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Bombs".  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Child's Jail Cell".  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Husband's Substance Abuse Counselor".  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Tank".  "Honk If I'm Paying For Your Drug War". 
All of these are worthy bumperstickers.  May they spread throughout the nation.  How about it, Republicans?

11.   Of course it's all hype.  The next president will be elected because of hype.  In the libertarian view of things, electing a president shouldn't involve much hype.  If an election requires hype, then the government has grown too large. 

12.   This one is greatness.  It's perfect.  So as an alternative to ObamaCare, please give me a choice of who I can go to for medical care, drugs, or anything else that doesn't harm someone else.  If I want to go to a low-cost doctor or nurse, in the form of someone who didn't complete med school, is it anyone's business but mine?  Are the Republicans going to allow me to go to Ray Lewis to get stitches and a tetanus shot?  (He runs our wood shop, and is a former Marine medic.) 
It currently costs around a billion dollars to lawyer-proof a new medication.  Let me sign something stating that I want sue the supplier, and then allow me to try any new medication that I choose. 
I don't think this will ever happen.  It would piss off the trial lawyers too much.  And the Republicrats and Demoblicans are owned by the trial lawyers. 

13.   For those of us with low expectations, and who are aware that presidents are just like the rest of us (sometimes lazy, sinful, lying, grasping, Weiner-texting, and fallible) human beings, we're never disappointed or bummed out by presidential behavior. 
Our next president will not meet expectations.  That's why he should have very little power.  We shouldn't trust him, or Congress, any further than we can throw them. 

14.   See commentary on #13. 

15.   And voting for someone just because he's a Republican is just as dumb as voting for someone just because he's a Democrat.  You don't get a prize for guessing the winner, people. 

16.   This one is too big for a bumpersticker.  I don't know why Surber included it.  For those reading this in Europe and Asia, we have a series of commercials in the U.S. featuring a guy who dresses in a suit covered with dollar signs.  He sells a book about how to get money from government.  I don't know if it includes a section on selling them border fences, bombs, ethanol, soybeans, helicopters, and machine guns.  I don't know if the book has any info on boondoggles like George Bush's TARP program. 

17.   I can't argue with this one.  But doesn't it make you consider the need for another party to be represented on this scoreboard? 

18.   Yep.  He blows.  So did Nixon, Carter and Bush Jr.  So did LBJ.  Ford didn't have enough sense to stop inflation (all you have to do is quit printing money).  One could argue that the majority of Democrat and Republican presidents have sucked. 
Let's consider some other alternatives, alternatives that aren't so entangled with lobbyists, giveaways, and the status quo.  The Libertarian Party awaits. 

19.   Oh for the love of God, what do we have here?  The only thing missing is Pro-Marriage and Pro-Flag.  Is there anyone out there who believes that, say, Newt Gingrich spends a lot of time with God? 

20.   This one, considering the failure of Obama's "Shovel-Ready" projects, is just downright funny. 

21.   I don't like this one, even as someone who dishes out more than his fair share of snarkiness.  We don't have stupid voters; the current governing factions allow nothing but stupid choices and we've grown accustomed to it. 

22.   I don't like this one either.  The black slang seems kind of racist.  Plus, the Republican party serves up "small government" Kool-Aid in massive vats and buckets and pipelines and supertankers while doing nothing, absolutely nothing, to shrink the size of government. 

23.   Nah.  That would be Richard M. Nixon or FDR.  Nixon implemented wage and price controls that were outrageous enough to cause my political forefathers to form the Libertarian Party.  Then he started the National Endowment For The Arts. 
FDR planted the seeds that of most of the programs that got us 14 trillion in debt.  He outlawed private gold holdings.  He locked Japanese citizens into internment camps. 

24.  Well, yeah. 

25.   I'm not going to comment on this one.  I'm just going to follow it with a chart showing increases in the national debt by president. 

Now THAT is your brain on drugs. 

If you really want a smaller government, less debt, and more personal freedom, please consider the Libertarian Party in the 2012 elections. 

How about this for a bumpersticker? 

A history of Rand Paul's failed filibuster against The Patriot Act

I'm going to get out the winch, the chain hoist and the halter. 
It's time to drag the dead horse out of the shrubbery for another beating. 

There is no difference between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party. 

There are some individual outliers, but the goals of the two organizations are identical.  They continue driving the national car down the same road.  They stop at different gas stations, they frequent different chain restaurants and hotels.  The road map does not change. 

Senator Rand Paul is an exception. 
Remember back in 2008 and earlier, when the Unconstitutional Spying On Americans Act Patriot Act was reviled by almost every Democrat politician in D.C.? 

Rand Paul tried to filibuster the renewal of this vile piece of totalitarian crap. 

He failed.  Why?  Because of Senator Harry Reid. 

Here's a timeline, courtesy of Young Americans For Liberty.  Hit the link to see the videos.



2/3:

• Rep. Ron Paul says in a video update that the Congress plans to extend some of the worst clauses of the PATRIOT Act as “quietly as possible.”

2/9:

• Sen. Rand Paul posts a video and a statement stating his strong opposition to the extension and applauding the house for initially voting it down.

2/14:

• The House passes a ten month extension, sends it to the Senate.

2/15:

• Sen. Paul writes a "Dear Colleague" letter explaining to other members of Congress his concerns with the extension.
• Sen. Paul threatens to filibuster the bill, so Sen. Reid makes a deal with Sen. Paul to pass a 90 day extension and promises to have at least a week of debate and an open amendment process on the bill before the extension expires.
• The Senate passes a 90 day extension 86-12, sends it to the House.

2/17:

• The House passes the 90 day extension 279-143.

86 days pass and the PATRIOT Act is once again taken up by the Senate.

5/23:

• Senate invokes cloture on another extension 74-8.
• Sen. Mike Lee tweets he could not vote due to weather delay, but that he would have voted "no."
• Sen. Paul speaks on the floor in opposition, introduces 8 amendments.
• Sen. Paul tells reporters he will "drag [the debate] out" if he doesn't get the debate and votes he was promised.

5/24:

• Sen. Paul stages a 7-hour fillibuster on the Senate floor.
• Sen. Reid speaks on the floor, going back on his promises to have an open amendment process and lumping the PATRIOT Act extension into a small business bill.
• Sen. Paul issues a statement criticizing Sen. Reid for his deceptive tactics.

5/25:

• Sen. Paul speaks again about the need for honest debate on the PATRIOT Act extension.
• Sen. Mike Lee speaks in support of Sen. Paul.
• Sen. Reid takes the floor and launches baseless accusations at Sen. Paul, claiming that he wants to put guns in the hands of terrorists.
• Sen. Paul responds, calls Sen. Reid's claims offensive and insulting, and defies Sen. Reid by calling for a vote on 3 of his 8 amendments. Sen. Reid objects and prevents roll call votes on the amendments from happening.
• Sen. Paul appears on Freedom Watch to explain his opposition to the bill.

5/26:

• The Senate votes 79-18 to move forward with the extension.
• Slate reports that Republicans are blocking Sen. Paul's efforts.
• A White House official accuses Sen. Paul of threatening national security.
• The Senate debates and votes on two of Sen. Paul's amendments.
• The PATRIOT Act passes the Senate 72-23 and is signed by President Obama minutes before it is set to expire.

That's why we won't see the end of the Patriot Act within our lifetimes.  The fix is in. 
You can vote for Republicans until your arm withers.  They won't repeal ObamaCare.  The fix is in. 
Please consider the Libertarian Party in 2012. 

Seven, no wait, six or five, no, just four quotes on the incredible shrinking Republican budget cuts

Here are seven quotes on the incredible shrinking Republican budget cuts....actually, there are just four, but no one seems to be paying to real numbers these days. 

“Only in Washington can a budget that spends more than it did the year before, with a larger deficit, be portrayed as ‘cutting.’” - Rand Paul

The picture already emerging is of legislation financed with a lot of one-time savings and cuts that officially "score" as savings to pay for spending elsewhere, but that often have little to no actual impact on the deficit. As a result of the legerdemain, Obama was able to reverse many of the cuts passed by House Republicans in February when the chamber passed a bill slashing this year's budget by more than $60 billion.


...Instead, the cuts that actually will make it into law are far tamer, including cuts to earmarks, unspent census money, leftover federal construction funding, and $2.5 billion from the most recent renewal of highway programs that can't be spent because of restrictions set by other legislation. Another $3.5 billion comes from unused spending authority from a program providing health care to children of lower-income families. - Andrew Taylor, Associated Press

The numbers just keep getting smaller, don’t they? Republicans started the year demanding $100 billion in cuts. But it quickly turned out that when they said $100 billion, they were just talking hypothetically. Instead, they meant $100 billion on an annualized basis. The next we heard, Republicans were aiming to trim $61 billion. And not one penny less! Eventually, they agreed to a deal that they claimed cut $38 billion. But of that $38 billion, it turns out, the real cuts only add up to about $14 billion. Any bets on how many days before the cuts disappear entirely? - Peter Suderman, Reason Magazine

I do not grudge our loyal, brave people, who were ready to do their duty no matter what the cost, who never flinched under the strain of last week - I do not grudge them the natural, spontaneous outburst of joy and relief when they learned that budget cuts the hard ordeal would no longer be required of them at the moment; but they should know the truth. They should know that there has been gross neglect and deficiency in our defences; they should know that we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone in our history, when the whole equilibrium of The United States Of America  Europe has been deranged, and that the terrible words have for the time being been pronounced against John Boehner the Western democracies:


"Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting."    - Winston Churchill

The picture of John Boehner came from ImpeachJohnBoehner.com

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

Stolen from Michael Shanklin's Facebook page. 

Unh., you see, unh....all that unh...talk about Republican spending cuts was unhhh...sorta hypothetical

And so it begins....Here's The New York Holy Times:

WASHINGTON — Many people knowledgeable about the federal budget said House Republicans could not keep their campaign promise to cut $100 billion from domestic spending in a single year. Now it appears that Republicans agree.


As they prepare to take power on Wednesday, Republican leaders are scaling back that number by as much as half, aides say, because the current fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, will be nearly half over before spending cuts could become law.

While House Republicans were never expected to succeed in enacting cuts of that scale, given opposition in the Senate from the Democratic majority and some Republicans, and from President Obama, a House vote would put potentially vulnerable Republican lawmakers on record supporting deep reductions of up to 30 percent in education, research, law enforcement, transportation and more.

Now aides say that the $100 billion figure was hypothetical, and that the objective is to get annual spending for programs other than those for the military, veterans and domestic security back to the levels of 2008, before Democrats approved stimulus spending to end the recession.

The picture of Republican campaign promises came from here. 

Predictions for the new Contract With America

The Republicans are about to unveil a new "Contract With America".  The 1990's contract has gotten some credit for the Newt Gingrich Republican Revolution, which was about as revolutionary as a decision to change crack dealers. 
Remember all the hype about cutting government spending?  Of the departments and programs that the Republicans pledged to eliminate, their combined budgets had grown by 13% by the year 2000. 

Since their previous Bait'n'Switch was so succesful, here are some predictions for the contents (or at least the results) of the new Republican Contract With America.

1) To enhance our image as the defenders of something or another, we will continue to harrass gays and lesbians in the military, and defend Japan, Germany, South Korea, Italy, Bulgaria, etc. 
2) To ensure that we have other enemies to fight, we will do everything in our power to fight marijuana legalization.  The prison lobby, prison guards, parole & probation officers, and the piss test industry all need jobs too. 
3) Because they are such easy targets, we will keep the Departments of Energy and Education in place for the next 8 years. 
4) Because there is so much money in it for politically-connected companies and donors, we will buy into the Anthropogenic Global Warming Global Climate Disruption myth and start investing in windmills, green stuff, and perpetual motion machines. 
5) We will guarantee that subsidies continue to flow to mega-corporations, like the $600 million dollar gift we give BP every year for throwing some ethanol into their fossil fuels.  There's something vaguely "green" about what Enron is doing, and that's supposed to be good. 
6) We will fight to defend your rights, your property, and your home.  Unless, of course, your property or home is in a great spot for a sports arena or a new shopping center. 
7) Dammit, we are going to end personal welfare.  With those savings, we are going to beat the Democrats in handing out corporate welfare. 
8) We pledge to fight the Ground Zero Mosque with everything we've got.  While you are distracted by our performance, we will push through thousands of earmarks for our campaign donors. 
9) We will never, ever, ever audit the Federal Reserve. 
10) Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and ObamaCare® are all safe with us.  We haven't repealed anything since Prohibition.  Wait a minute....the Democrats did that.  We continue to talk tough, but do nothing. 

Disagree with any of the above?  Hide and watch what they do. 
The Libertarian party awaits ! 

You can't always get what you want. You get what you need.

I was listening to one of the Republican radio stations yesterday, and they were interviewing a Ron Paul disciple who....well, let's just say that this particular Paulista didn't have much media savvy. 

The conversation went something like this:

Republican Host:  Ron Paul's campaign spent more money to earn fewer electoral votes than any other campaign in history. 

Paulista:  That unh....may be true.  But unh....Ron Paul is the only one bringing these types of....unh.....things to the unhhhhtention of the Unhhhhmerican people.

Republican Host:  Like what things?

Paulista:  Things like....unhh....there aren't two different....unh....political parties, just two factions within the same big government group. 

Republican Host (outraged):  So tell me, how many Republicans voted for Obamacare?  How many Republicans voted for the Wall Street "reform" bill?  None !  None !  None !  How can you say that there is no real difference between the Republicans and the Democrats ?????

Paulista:  Unhhhh......

I didn't try to listen any more after that because the screaming was too loud.  (I was doing the screaming.) 

The appropriate answer to this question, of course, is the answer that Ron Paul would have probably given.  "How many Republicans voted for TARP?  How many Republicans voted for Porkulus?  How many Republicans voted to bail out the banks and Wall Street?" 

Host:  Unhhhh.....Enough Republicans from "safe" districts voted for them for the bills to pass? 

And then Ron Paul would have probably said "And how many Republican votes were needed to pass Obamacare and the Wall Street reform farce?"

Host:  Unhhhh....None? 

They don't always get what they want.  They get what they need. 
Speaking of which, here's the funeral scene from The Big Chill.