Tuesday, September 6, 2011

More Union Goons



First things first. "Lets take these son of a bitches out." Son of a bitches? I think you meant "Lets take these sons of bitches out." Learn some grammar. Thats number one. Look, I realize he was trying to get the crowd fired up, and I don't think he meant that he literally wanted to take out the tea party. I could be wrong. I also do not see how the tea party is at war with working people. In a nutshell the tea party stands for lower taxes, an end to wasteful government spending, and less intrusion into the lives of the American people. I would venture to say that labor unions are at war with working people.

Sunday, September 4, 2011

Pinheads and Patriots


So I decided to to a book review today.  I just finished reading Bill O'Reilly's "Pinheads and Patriots."  I will start off by saying this is a great book.   The book is mostly an analysis of Obama's presidency thus far.  O'Reilly was very fair to the president- even to the point where I thought at times he was being way too soft on him.  A few of the things the book discusses are Obamacare, foreign policy under Obama, and some of the President's questionable associations (Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Van Jones...you get the point).  My favorite part of P&P was the section where O'Reilly examines several past presidents and designates them a pinhead or a patriot.  I give it an 7 out of 10.

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

What a fraud

Al Gore is once again playing on the emotions of those who might happen to be listening to him. All I have to say is what a fraud. To compare the global warming debate to the civil rights struggle just makes him look insensitive to say the least. On one hand you have people questioning a theory that is at best questionable and on the other hand you have people brutally attacking and discriminating against people because of their skin color. I fail to see the comparison.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Jerome Ersland: A TRUE HERO!

Many of you have heard of Jerome Ersland, the pharmacist who was bogusly charged with First Degree Murder in the shooting death of Antwun Parker.  Parker along with his accomplice, Jevontai Ingram, went to the Reliable Discount Pharmacy around closing time, when they knew naroctics and money would be most accessable, because this is when they counted their money and took an inventory of narcotics they had on hand.  Though the doors had already been locked, they were let in, because one of the employees thought they just needed to drop off a perscription.  When these two thugs were let in is when all hell broke loose.  Ingram put a board in the door to ensure that they would be able to leave and not be trapped inside.  Too bad for them, they didn't account for Mr. Ersland being armed.  Ersland quickly went for his weapon as soon as Ingram started waving his. Ingram took off once shots were fired, leaving his accomplice Antwun Parker laying in the floor of the pharmacy.  Ersland followed Ingram outside and then soon after came back in and shot Parker five times in the chest.  What cannot be seen by the surveillance is what if any movements Parker was making at the time Mr. Ersland walked back into the pharmacy.  This is where the dillema lies.  Was he incapacitated or not or does it even matter?  Oklahoma County D.A. David Prater is apparently so sure that Parker was no longer even a percieved threat when Mr. Ersland went back into the store and shot him again, that he has decided to charge him with FIRST DEGREE MURDER!

Just so we're clear, here's the Oklahoma statute on First Degree Murder (I excluded parts C, D, and E to save space, as they deal with death resulting from child abuse, murder for hire, and murder of law enforcement officers):

§21-701.7. Murder in the first degree.

A. A person commits murder in the first degree when that person unlawfully and with malice aforethought causes the death of another human being. Malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a human being, which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof.

B. A person also commits the crime of murder in the first degree, regardless of malice, when that person or any other person takes the life of a human being during, or if the death of a human being results from, the commission or attempted commission of murder of another person, shooting or discharge of a firearm or crossbow with intent to kill, intentional discharge of a firearm or other deadly weapon into any dwelling or building as provided in Section 1289.17A of this title, forcible rape, robbery with a dangerous weapon, kidnapping, escape from lawful custody, eluding an officer, first degree burglary, first degree arson, unlawful distributing or dispensing of controlled dangerous substances, or trafficking in illegal drugs.

Now which one of these applies to Mr. Ersland?  Can't be malice aforethought, after all Mr. Ersland was not the instigator of the situation and therefore did not kill Antwun Parker premeditatedly.  Oh ok, now that I read section B I see where the D.A. is coming from.  Since Mr. Ersland killed Parker during the commission of a robbery, that is where they are coming up with the First Degree Murder charge.  Wait a sec though....ERSLAND WAS THE ONE BEING ROBBED!!!!  Nobody would have died if Parker and Ingram would not have decided to rob this man's pharmacy.  Where this incompetent D.A. gets off charging Mr. Ersland with murder is far beyond me.  Furthermore, I am baffled at the fact that the jury even had to deliberate on this, much less deliberate for three hours and come back with a guilty verdict. Now this man will spend the rest of his life in prison because two thugs attempted to rob him and he fought back. You can bet your last dollar that if someone tried to rob me I would do the exact same thing. I can guarantee this will be appealed and hopefully this verdict will be thrown out. That would be the right thing to do.



Wednesday, May 18, 2011

The Morality of Profit


Very interesting video.  Raises several excellent points, one of them being the misuse of the term "giving back." Argues that people such as Bill Gates who are so big on "giving back" are actually not giving back at all.  To give back you have to take something.  Generally speaking, people earn their wealth rather than taking it by immoral or illegal means.  Also, money is not finite; in other words wealth can be created and is not just moved around.

Friday, May 13, 2011

Jared Blankenship: Reclaiming America

I really like this guy. I was reading through the Amarillo Globe News website a couple months ago and found out about him. He is from Hereford, TX which is just up the road from where I grew up. I wish he had more publicity, because I think he would do great. So he has no political experience, you say? Good. That is just what we need.  This guy has actually run a business.  That is more than we can say about the community organizer that is sitting in office now. I think we are all sick and tired of politicians bending over for special interests and votes. We need someone whose sole motivation for running is to return America to its founding principles.
Check out his campaign page here

Thursday, May 5, 2011

SHOW ME THE PHOTO!

Why is it that we are pussyfooting around with this bin Laden issue? We can't see the photos of bin Laden's body because it might incite violence. Are you freaking kidding me!? These people already have a complete disregard for human life and are actively looking to kill Americans whether or not we release a photo of bin Laden's corpse. Lets think back to Daniel Pearl, shall we? He was the journalist from the Wall Street Journal who was kidnapped back in 2002. If you will remember, after his kidnapping, his captors made a propoganda video of him basically denouncing US foreign policy. At the end of the video they cut his throat and eventually behead him. Now I haven't seen the video, because I have no desire to watch someone lose their head. I just dont understand why our government doesn't grow a pair! The enemy would never in a million years give us the same respect that our President is giving them. The same President that was quick to demand the release of so called "prisoner abuse" photos that were taken at Abu Ghraib! There is only one legitimate reason I can come up with to not release the picture, and that is to keep children from seeing it.
Then we have the burial issue. Where do I start? Am I the only one outraged that we gave this mass murderer terrorist a "proper" muslim burial? I would just as soon wipe the bastard off with a pork loin instead of a sponge and then kick him with my boot off the edge of the ship! After all, these people will kill you and bury you in a mass grave, probably that they have previously used for a latrine, and would never think twice about it.