Saturday, June 13, 2009


In an effort to deflect criticism of their ongoing program to bankrupt the entire nation, the Democratic leadership has labeled Congressional Republicans as the "party of no." The Democrats would have been correct had they checked their spelling. It is not "no" that defines the Congressional Republicans but rather "know."

Let the guitar boy help the spelling-challenged Democrats understand what the bedrock of the Republican Party -- conservatives -- instinctively know.

We know that stimulating the economy and getting America growing again begins with tax cuts across the board, including payroll, corporate and individual taxes.

We know that prosperity can not be brought about by taxing, borrowing and spending trillions of dollars. We know that leveraging the future tax dollars of our children and grandchildren is immoral, unethical, and should be illegal.

We know the economic producers cannot be punished without also punishing the working class. We know that bad economic decisions roll downhill quickly. We are surprised that everyone doesn't seem to either know this or care.

We know that GM and Chrysler will ultimately fail because they are now being run by the federal government and the labor unions. We know they are hopeless. We know that the people who brought us the U.S. Postal Service and the Internal Revenue Code are incapable of managing a three-car funeral in the desert.

We know energy independence includes drilling off-shore and building many new nuclear power plants. We know that "cap-and-trade" is nothing more than a tax that will punish those who can least afford it.

We know that bailing out failing businesses with tax dollars is not what our founding fathers had in mind.

We know that more gun control laws will not reduce violence but will instead create more victims. We know that more guns equal less crime.

We know more government programs, requirements, agencies and employees are not the answer. Instead, like all Americans of reasonable intellect, we know President Reagan was correct when he said that government was the problem, not the solution.

We know that we have adequate immigration laws but lack the political will to enforce them in order to enhance political power.

We know that judges should interpret the law, not make law. We know that judges should be impartial, not empathetic to any group based on race, creed or sex.

We know that throwing more money at a social problem does not correct the problem, but often exacerbates it. We know that Democrats have shoveled hundreds of billions of our tax dollars at various social and cultural problems not with the intent of solving the problems, but to attract votes.

We know political correctness is a euphemism for "brain dead" and that all crime is a hate crime. We know we don't need special criminal laws to protect certain people.

We know that too many young people do not graduate from high school, and the reason is because too many of their parents do not value education. We know that more money for education is not the answer.

We know our worst enemies are violent Muslims who hate America for our freedoms and Western values. We also know that we cannot negotiate with them and that defeating them decisively is our only hope.

We know that compromising our values, beliefs, and ideals under the smog of "getting along" may satisfy Democrats and some lukewarm Republicans, but we know this is a losing strategy.

These are things we know to be true. Why do Democrats say "no" to "know"?


Eman said...

Bill, thanks so much for your comment.

You know, I quote lots of folks here, and when I do, it does not mean I hold them in highest esteem or think they are roll models for my life or anyone else’s. But when people say things that are just extraordinarily wrong or extraordinarily right, I like to bring them to the forefront on my blog.

Now, I won’t be posting your comment because of the language you used, or maybe that was Ted’s words, excuse me. You just have a nasty habit of saying things that have zero truth to them, such as me having Ted for a roll model. There are things I like about him, I even met him twice when I was in high school. And yeah, he paints with a very wide brush. He’s not restrained or subtle. I think he’s a great defender of rights given by the people who made this country great.

Is he a Godly man? No.

But then again, I let you post here, and I in no way find you Godly.

Once again you focus on destroying the messenger and totally missing the message, which is pure Clintonian. It’s getting to the point where I really won’t qualify your comments with a response. Why? Because you like to attack me and make things personal. You and that Dio-genius love to make personal attacks and that is why people stop listening to you. In short, your act is old, unctuous and unsolicited because I have not reciprocated. I have been apologetic, outgoing, understanding and for the most part benevolent. Your thoughtless rhetoric and malicious intent are beginning to be repeated so often here you undermine your credibility and lose any sense of objectivity or class.

But that’s you, and far be it for me to tell you what to do.

No ones done that to you since boot camp I’m sure.

Diogenes said...

Hey, try pounding this home:

You're a lying scumbag.

Eman said...

I have found that when people use such language, they often are trying to bring the people they are speaking to down to their level.

Sorry, not going there.

I've Been there before.

Not going back.