Random Thoughts And Comments

While I’m sitting here waiting for our server to reboot (God, technology stinks), I thought it might be a good time to clear the air with some random thoughts and comments.

Especially after last nights final (thank God) debate, Joe became a repeat household name. Will there be a run now on newborn babies being named Joe? How about Trig? Then again, we may have some on the far left who had been considering naming their son Joe and decided instead to have an abortion because last night’s Joe appears to be an evil capitalist.

~~~~~~~~~

McCain’s effort at the debate last night reminded me of something that happened during my high school years. I was on the ski team and we had a Saturday race. For those unfamiliar with alpine ski racing, the object is to go from start to finish by passing between sets of poles in the fastest time. This requires quite a bit of concentration as those sets of poles (gates) come at the skier in rapid succession. Today there are only red and blue gates. Back when I was in high school, for a slalom event, there were red, blue and yellow.

One of my teammates, who after the day was over, earned the nickname of Hollywood Howe (Howe of course being his last name.) That day his father was filming the race with his new 8mm(?) movie camera. While Hollywood Howe was attempting to negotiate the maze of bamboo poles, when he reached the point of the course where his father was filming, he turned in the direction of the camera and waved. Doing so he missed the next two gates and became disqualified.

This was John McCain last night. He forced some issues to get his attacks in on Barack Obama but many of them were handed to him or perhaps served up like huge softballs aching to be blasted out of the park.

McCain was much like Hollywood Howe. He got in his initial licks and seemed quite pleased with himself that he could do it, but he was never able to finish the course and pick up a time to be competitive. He started his attack but just never knew how to “eloquently” finish it off. In short, he probably came across to some as quite amateurish. That will teach him to try to say anything meaningful during a debate.

~~~~~~~

Have you noticed how popular it is to call something what it isn’t. For example, Barack Obama talks incessantly about his tax cuts for 95% of the people. Aside from the fact that 95% of the people don’t pay taxes, it isn’t a tax cut. It’s a redistribution. It’s also social welfare because those earning little enough income that won’t pay any income tax, will now get a check from the government, stolen from the working man. That’s social welfare also known as socialism. It will destroy us.

If you’d like a good lesson on how to name something what it isn’t, simply visit the Congressional websites and read down through the list of bills passed or proposed. They are deceptive and misleading and done so with a purpose - to trick you and I into believing the bill is something it’s not.

~~~~~~~

Blindly and ignorantly, Congress voted to send a whole bunch of money to Henry Paulson. Let’s not forget that important little fact. Henry Paulson, being described in some circles as the man without a country, was handed a bagful of cash. He’s dishing this out to the nine biggest banks in the country so they can loan it to other banks. Our brain trust in Washington (the same that got us into this mess) says that one of our big problems is banks don’t have cash and can’t or won’t loan money to other banks making it impossible for you or I to borrow money. Is this true? Are you having any problem borrowing money? My banks got all kinds of money and are eager to loan it.

So let’s pretend this is true, that banks can’t lend money because they don’t have any. So Paulson digs into his newly found Christmas bonus and begins doling out the money - I’m sure done in such a way that his buddies don’t come first. And the banks immediately begin lending money, helping us to get back on track, right? Wrong! Their hoarding the money! Duh!

That won’t work, the idiots who suggested it won’t work and so let’s let the same morons think up another scheme and probably put more cash into the pockets of the crooks who got us into this mess to begin with.

There will come a point when we will have to ask an honest question. Who is dumber? Those idiots or us for allowing it to continue.

~~~~~~~

I was listening to a radio show the other night. I’m not going to say who it was because I’m not 100% sure who to credit the comments to. They asked this question: If you were witnessing something dying before your eyes, would you stand and do nothing about it?

The host then went on to describe the death of America and it seems nobody is doing anything about it. America is now a socialist (for lack of a better description) country now and it appears in search of a Marxists dictator leader. The same commentator was recalling reading Aldous Huxley. Many years ago Huxley wrote that in time the Soviet Union would become more like the United States and the United States would become more like the Soviet Union.

~~~~~~~

I once scoffed at an older brother of mine when I asked him if had done his duty and voted. He replied, “There’s nobody I want to elect and I refuse to vote for someone because they are the lesser of evils.”

Little did I know then that in 2008 I would be honestly staring down the barrel of the same dilemma. For me the comparison between Obama and McCain is worse than troubling. I find nothing in anything that Obama says as something I would agree with and very little from McCain either, yet I find Barack Obama extremely dangerous and dishonest and that is the only reason I will vote for McCain.

~~~~~~~

I’ve heard asked many times why people can’t see that Obama has all these troubling associations in his past. I’ve thought that myself and I think I might have come up with as good an answer as I’ve heard.

Recall the impeachment proceedings of Bill Clinton. The man was accused of lying under oath, this all a result of, among other things, having oral sex in the Oval Office.

We remember that the House impeached him but the Senate refused to and therefore Slick Willie lived to have oral sex again. Some were outraged and others, perhaps the majority, thought it was all ridiculous and that we should leave Clinton alone. Why?

My explanation then was twofold. One, Clinton lied and studies then clearly showed the vast majority, especially the younger generation, saw nothing wrong with lying to achieve personal goals, i.e. cheating on tests etc.

Two, I believe a large number of Americans, both male and female, have probably undertaken similar sexual activities within the workplace, not necessarily the White House and probably considered Clinton’s escapade something they would like to have a shot at. We know now as we did then that sex isn’t really sex unless it’s intercourse with someone you actually care enough about to have a “relationship”. In other words, sex is a recreation.

In short, people didn’t want Bill Clinton to get in trouble for what he did because in seeing that happen, they see themselves.

Now we have Barack Obama running for President of the United States. If it is true that people aren’t interested in Obama’s ties with Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, ACORN, Rev. Wright, etc. etc., it’s because they once again see themselves.

Think for a moment who is leading this country. The majority were in their prime during the Vietnam War area when defiance and radicalism were born and reared its ugly head in this country. How many of you participated in this “movement” to some degree growing up? How many of you grew up? How many, like Ayers, did not?

People see themselves in Barack Obama, the radical, the activist and if they can live with themselves, they can live with Obama as their president. Anything but George Bush!

~~~~~~~

I will end my Random Thoughts and Comments with a question for you to consider, one that is quite personal and not one that I am necessarily looking for an answer to.

I have had this question in my mind for a long time now as I’m sure most of you have to. I’ve asked it and discussed it with some close family and friends but never in any public forum such as this one.

What prompted me to ask it here was Ann Coulter’s article today in Town Hall. Her article tackles the problems of polls and the repeated inaccuracies that seem to favor the democrats (depending on how you look at this.)

She travels back through recent history, when polls were being used, and shows a pattern in which just prior to the elections, polls in general show a much different trend than what actually results from the election. In other words, the polls historically have shown democrats to have bigger supporters than republicans. Here’s one example she cites:

In 1980, Ronald Reagan beat Carter by nearly 10 points, 51 percent to 41 percent. In a Gallup Poll released days before the election on Oct. 27, it was Carter who led Reagan 45 percent to 42 percent.

In 1984, Reagan walloped Walter Mondale 58.8 percent to 40 percent, — the largest electoral landslide in U.S. history. But on Oct. 15, The New York Daily News published a poll showing Mondale with only a 4-point deficit to Reagan, 45 percent to 41 percent.

Why the discrepancy? I can only guess but we can’t disregard the fact that when an individual enters a polling booth, what they do there is private. Who they vote for is their own business and nobody needs to know. Isn’t American great, at least for now?

Obviously, in looking at Coulter’s figures, something appears to have changed from the time people answered the polls and they entered the polling booth - or the polls were skewed (another discussion).

This brings me back to my question. Quite some time ago, I began searching my own heart and sole. It became obvious that in this presidential election, people were going to have to consider voting for either a woman or a black man or both, first time in American history. Would either of these choices influence my decision on who I would vote for? The answer is no!

Now, here’s my question. When people enter the privacy of the polling booth this November 4th, will they vote differently in private than what they have publicly announced because it is a black man on the ballot?

Tom Remington

Check Out Related Articles

• Obama Name Drops Jesus Christ More Than Bush Did
• Is Obama Blatantly Manipulating The Courts With His Selection Of Sotomayor?
• When You Disagree With Wildlilfe Management, Call It “Flawed Science”
• Random Thoughts And Comments
• Random Thoughts And Comments
• Slick Willie Supports New Effort To Ban Guns……Again!
• Change We Can Believe…….Hey, Wait A Minute!
• Black Bear Blog’s Top 10 Stories Of 2008 - Author’s Choice
• Random Christmas Eve Thoughts
• Why Are People Buying Up Guns?

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!