Verified via Snopes.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don’t believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos’n Mate. Now I live in a “rest home” located on the western end of Pearl Harbor allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can’t figure out what country you are the president of. You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:

• “We’re no longer a Christian nation”
• “America is arrogant” – (Your wife even announced to the world, “America is mean-spirited.” Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.)

I’d say shame on the both of you but I don’t think you like America nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

After 9/11 you said, “America hasn’t lived up to her ideals.” Which ones did you mean?

1. Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British ?

2. Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War?

3. I hope you didn’t mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellahs I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around because we stand for freedom.

4. I don’t think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer,young man. Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don’t, I’ll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don’t want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts who was putting up a fight? You don’t mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don’t want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life but you’re the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you’re not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you’re thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.

You’re not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That’s not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now. And I sure as hell don’t want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Sincerely,

Harold B. Estes

I oppose all of the measures for this special election.  I’ve outlined a basic reason for each one below.  If you want more info, simply leave a comment, and I’d be glad to elaborate if appropriate.  In general, across most of the measures, these are simply a way for the legislature to get our approval on the smoke and mirrors approach they have taken to balance the CA budget.  In a series of Obamaesque style masterpieces, many of these measures simply put off the day of reckoning that is due us based on our State’s horrible penchant for spending too much money.

Measure 1A: The worst of the bunch, this measure actually approves extending the HUGE state tax increases and new taxes just approved by our legislature for up to an additional two years.  We are already the highest taxed state in America, yet they want us trick us into to ratifying their decision by getting us to vote for these taxes ourselves.  The fact that they cloak it in wording like “Rainy Day Fund” and “Stabilization Fund”  – things that certainly sound fiscally responsible to the lay person – is in my opinion nothing short of reprehensible.  Shame on you people.

Measure 1B: As much as I believe in education and want a good experience for my own children (my oldest is just about to enter kindergarten at a public school), I do not think that forcing tax payers to repay funding that was denied in this past session makes any sense at all.  The situation is horrible and everyone has had to make concessions – our schools are no exception.  There are few things that people care about as much as they care about their children – if our state spending has gotten so out of hand that we have to start sabotaging the future of our kids, maybe it is time that we take a long hard look at what we are doing with the REST of the money.  My feeling is that our children’s future is jeopardized much more by a “borrow and spend” legislature than it is by having a larger class sizes and older text books.  This is a knee-jerk response that is designed to pull at your emotions.  We SHOULD fund our schools – but it should be done in a fiscally responsible way – that is, prioritizing education OVER other things that we already spend money on.  It shouldn’t be done by simply raising taxes.  The “funny” thing is that most teachers would agree that the ultimate success of a student is due largely to parental involvement at home – yet, the net effect of what the Teacher’s Association is asking for here, is for parents to spend more time at work to pay for higher taxes.

Measure 1C: The tag line to this should be: “Because we all know increased gambling is the key to every financial crisis”. This is just more smoke and more mirrors.  The measure makes wild assumptions of future revenues and has real potential negative side effects of making this form of gambling more widely available.  Maybe the lottery system needs modernizing and maybe it doesn’t – but doing it as a band aid to State Budget reform is NOT a smart move.  If indeed the Lottery needs to be modernized, do it first in a socially responsible way and see how it turns out.  If any revenue increases appear, THEN use the money to pay off any existing debt.  This measure simply puts the cart before the horse and again is intended to deceive the public at large with something that “sounds good” but distracts us from the real problem: we spend too damn much money.

Measure 1D: This is a tough one – these politician bastards force us to choose between two classes of children.  Really?  This is the ONLY place you can find the money?  The stuff they warn us will happen if we don’t support Measure 1B is exactly what they are DOING to us here.  Even worse, it takes money out of working programs and places it back in the hands of politicians to dole out to other programs as they see fit.  That’s never a good idea.  Don’t let them justify their overspending by forcing us to choose between two sets of equally deserving children.  Find the money somewhere else!  Yes, some of the programs currently have a surplus – lets not do what Sacramento typically does and plunder the war chest so that next time there is nothing to fall back on.  In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that my daughter received a First 5 scholarship.  I loved the way that it worked – she received it for a time, and once that time was over, she no longer received funding.  It helped us put her into early schooling, but yet had a limit on what it would handle as well.  This makes sound public policy sense in my mind, and is likely the exact reason that this program actually has a surplus – it doesn’t create a chronic dependency on state aid but rather helps people make sound choices for their child’s early development.  If you would like a thoughtful dissension, read The Policy Report commentary on the measure.

Measure 1E: Another tough one, and one that I freely admit I’m not necessarily qualified to determine the value of.  Maybe we should redirect funds from the Mental Health Services Act to the state’s Early and Periodic, Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment (EPSDT) program, which would provide mental health services to children for the next two years.  I don’t really know.  What I do know however is that this type of decision shouldn’t be made in the shadow of an unbalanced budget.  Also, while the supporters of 1E say that this is a one time event and that is should never happen again, I think they are being grossly naive about that aspect.  Once a precedent is set, it is all to easy to do again.  And again.  And again, etc.  Spending on mental health services has proven effective in lowering burdens on jails, hospitals, schools and municipalities through lower homelessness.  This seems like a good investment to me.  Yet, voting for this measure will reportedly will stop further tax increases.  This I’m all in favor of – but I’d propose cuts in other areas first, like modernizing welfare.  I’d rather lower funding for people who are of sound mind and body and can do more for themselves than lower help to this group of afflicted individuals.  Again, thoughtful dissension can be found at The Policy Report.

Measure 1F: This one gave me the most pause.  On the surface it seems quite smart – freeze pay raises for the politicians if they can’t balance the budget.  Sounds smart indeed – in fact, it sounds like points that I have made before.  So, why do I oppose this?  First off, I’ll say that I don’t STRONGLY oppose it.  I think that it would do some good, but I am not certain that it wouldn’t do some harm as well.  There are a few reasons why I don’t support this measure – 1) it won’t really “stick it to the politicians” as it has been billed, 2) it will impact other people who are not responsible for actually passing the budget and 3) it doesn’t save much money.  This measure won’t impact the single most important thing that the actual politicians think about: re-election.  Also, it will make the non-law passing jobs harder to fill.  I had to think long and hard about this, but in the end, it was the minuscule amount that it would actually save that finally tipped my hand to vote against it.  Lets have REAL reform, not something that just “feels” like we got the better of Sacramento. Of course, if it passes, I won’t loose more than 5 minutes of sleep either… 

Disclaimer.  I’m going to swear a few times in this article, so if you don’t want to hear that, ya’ll can SHOO.

Go read this article at the LA Times. Yes, I’m serious.

Ok.  Did you notice how now that we have the budget passed, everyone is talking about how we can stop this from happening again?  There are a lot of ideas out there:  Maybe we can dock lawmaker’s pay, maybe we can change it so that only 55% of lawmakers have to approve a budget, maybe we can lower the amount of votes required for new taxes, etc. just to name a few.

But, what’s the ONE thing they AREN’T talking about doing?



The ONE thing they AREN’T talking about is:

STOP FUCKING SPENDING!

Ahem.

Sorry.

A few key points:

• Doing things like making it EASIER for them to pass a budget ISN’T whats needed!  The budget didn’t pass because they were spending too damn much.  Take away the power of a few to demand a balanced budget, and we’ll just be worse off.
• Docking their pay if they are late – screw that, its only a band-aid. How about making their pay performance based instead?  If the State is doing well, taxes are below a certain point and there is a surplus, they get paid out of the surplus.  If it isn’t, they don’t get paid that year.  THAT would balance the fucking budget in a week.
• Lowering the amount of votes for new taxes.  Um, excuse me, how about you STOP FUCKING SPENDING INSTEAD!?  They have clearly done SO well with the money we’ve already given them – should we really make it easier for them to get more of our money?  Like hell!

All of the “fixes” floating around in Sacramento are focused on one thing: making it easier for the lawmakers to pass a budget.   How easy or hard it is to pass the budget is NOT the problem.  The problem is that our damn legislators spend TOO MUCH MONEY.  The ideas should be focusing on how to spend LESS and balance our budget, not on making it easier for the legislators to screw us up even further.

Hey, HERE’S a thought – how about ALL government programs outside of law enforcement, transportation, utilities and schooling are now canceled and have to be reenacted?

“Well, you just couldn’t DO that!”  How can you NOT?!  The only reason the State can continue to operate today is because they simply reach deeper and deeper into our pockets with impunity.   If I can’t afford my Cable bill, I can’t have Cable anymore.  If I can’t afford to eat out, I can’t eat out.  If I can’t afford to buy new clothes, I wear what I already have.

Not the government though – they just send us further into debt, pass tax hikes, take more of our money and then piss it away.

There is no long term accountability – no one is held responsible for what they do today that screws us in the future.  That needs to change.

Eventually, those of use with the pockets have to smack the hand that we feed and demand OUR money back.  Remember, the government doesn’t have a single dollar that doesn’t come out of OUR pockets.

They should hang that sign on the front of every building in Sacramento.

While Lou Dobbs is not your average CNN Libtard, when the network allows a story like this to run, its time to take notice.

Click here to view the embedded video.

As his prior predicessors did, President Obama has now meddled with the policy on US Government funding being given to groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad.

Reagan pioneered the restriction on funds in 1984.  Clinton rescinded the rule in January of 1993 and Bush reinstated it January of 2001.  This is like party-based policy ping-pong.

While it follows party lines, I’m particularly amazed that Obama would do something so quickly that will actually HURT our economy.  There is a dire need for more dollars to be spent here in America rather than abroad.  The LAST thing we should be doing in a time of economic downturn is send more dollars overseas – especially for something as divisive as abortion services.  Our recession won’t be fixed by taking money from everyone’s pocket and sending it overseas.  And, if the pockets are already picked clean, do we really care about this so much that we are willing to go into debt for it?  Apparently Mr. Obama does.  To me, that’s messed up.  Lets saddle OUR children with debt far into the future so that other people can kill their children!

Now, I’m sure some yahoo out there is going to bring up the war in Iraq as the ultimate “sending dollars overseas” example and blame it on the last administration.  While I could debate back and forth the percentages of dollars spent on the war that come back to the US, I’ll shortcut the process and just say “Well, thank you Captain Obvious.”   Remember Obama’s campaign though?  CHANGE.  Change from partisanship, change from politics, etc.

Apparently, he didn’t mean now.

Honestly though, while I can’t really fault Obama for acting in line with his party (I mean, did you really think he was going to be any different!??), I’m quite appalled at how each President has made this an issue their very first month in office.   That’s sad.

Some people (including Biden) have said that Obama would reunite a divided America – I don’t think he is going to get far in that hope acting like this.

If I hear anything more about “pressure mounting on Israel to halt the offensive,” I’m really going to scream!  How long would you tolerate non-action from our President if Mexico started randomly bombing San Diego, El Paso or Tuscon?

Hamas is like that short annoying guy in High School who talked smack all day long and then acted surprised when someone twice his size kicked his loud-mouth ass.

I mostly feel sorry for the poor civilians in Gaza.   BUT, on the other hand, that’s kinda what you get when you vote for assholes who fire mortars from your child’s preschool.

Its true that many of them are squeezed on both sides and you can’t put it beyond Hamas to bully people into supporting them. I suppose its sort of akin to Democrats and Republicans each having their own set of armed thugs and there being very little to stop them from getting up close and personal with you on the way to the polling station.  Amazing.

Iranians Hate Obama ... Already.

What’s equally amazing is that the World loved us for approximately a month and a half before everything started being Obama’s fault.  The poor guy isn’t even in office yet, and already things are his fault.

There really is no pleasing these bastards. But, damn, that was fast…

And, expected.

His tactic turned this election into the single most expensive presidential race ever, with over a billion dollars being spent.  That’s a first for our country.

The AP reports that Mr. Obama spent nearly $720 million dollars of the $750 million he raised for his campaign.  While McCain was limited to spending only $84 million from September on (because he accepted public funds), Obama spent $315 million during the same period.  By the end of the race, he was outspending McCain at a rate of 4 to 1.

Lets put this into perspective a bit: the combined total of George W. Bush AND John Kerry’s bill for both the primary and general election back in 2004 was only $653 million, including federal public financing money.

Yes, that’s right, Obama spent more on this election than the combined total of the candidates for the last presidential election.  And, of equal significance, his total spend was well over twice that of McCain’s reported $293 million.

I wonder what would have happened if Obama had done as he had vowed and taken the public funds?  Never before in history has a presidential candidate outspent his opponent by such an overwhelming margin.

Amazing that most people continue to say that its “Fatcat Republicans” who have all the money.  Overspending doesn’t stop at just the presidential election either.  Over the last decade, the most expensive senate campaigns of each cycle, save one (Elizabeth Dole in 2002), have been waged by Democrats.

I think it is officially time the term Fatcat was changed to something more appropriate: FatCRAT.

Congratulations MTV Generation – you’ve got your man as President.  One question though – don’t you think he should have kept his word and spent half as much money campaigning and used the other $325 million supporting some of those causes ya’ll care so much about?  He STILL would have outspent McCain by nearly 10%.

Honestly though, I really would have thought that much cash would have bought more than an 8.5% margin in the results.

Oh well, at least France likes us again.

Of course, you can always access the latest information on my local Postcasa Page but you can also visit its official Plugin Page hosted at the WordPress Codex. Now that it is officially hosted there, you’ll also be able to automatically update the plugin from within Wordpress as new versions are released. Pretty cool stuff!

Dang, how I love WordPress!

In a local restaurant my server had on a “Obama 08″ tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference-just imagine the coincidence. When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need-the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I’ve decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful. At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.

I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.

-Author Unknown

If The World Could Vote - Oct 21, 2008 1:08AM PST

It used to be that people from all over the world would flock to the United States to seek a better life.  Oh wait, its still that way!  Even as screwed up as we are, people are still beating down our doors in search of what they couldn’t find in their own countries.

They left their country to come here.  I don’t have time to research this, but I’d bet that the immigration phenomenon has been stronger to the US than in any other country in the world.  Call it jingoism if you’d like, but its all the folks from the rest of the world that are voting with their feet and trying to move here.

Speaking of voting, check out how the rest of the world would vote in our election.  I touched on this in a prior rant, and this new information seems to support my original point.

87.4% of the World would vote Obama.  Has there ever been a better reason to vote McCain?

People come here because it is (was) DIFFERENT than where they were.  Some would say, BETTER.  I’ll leave that question up to the large number of immigrants to our shores, as I’m unbelievably biased on the question.

If we continue to vote they way the rest of the world does, we will be just like them.  We are headed there already.  Obama will bring us that much closer.  If the world thinks this way, chances are we should be going in the exact opposite direction.  Being a citizen of the world sounds nice, but when you come down to it, I’d pick being an American any day.

Please: Remain American.  Vote McCain!

But, according to CNN, turns out the connections ARE true.  Disturbingly true.  Watch for yourself.

This is just one more example of how Obama will say anything to get elected.  Want more examples?

• Running against Nancy Pelosi for minority leader in the Republican lead congress, Obama played himself off as a centrist and someone willing to reach across the aisle.  He did this to differentiate himself from Pelosi who, as we all know, is extremely liberal.
• Running against Hillary in the primary, Obama played himself as the liberal choice and being more with the spirit of the Democratic party than Clinton was.
• Now, during the election, he is playing himself as the centrist again, trying to appeal to voters on both sides of the fence.

So Barack, which is it?  Centrist or Liberal?  Oh, depends upon the situation, right…  In selling, we call that the “spin” – the truth is as you “spin” it.

The sad thing is that this could have been so much simpler for Obama.  All he needed to say was, “Yes, I was associated with Bill Ayers.  He and I did a lot of good work together in Chicago.  I disagree with a lot of his philosophies, and certainly deplore the violence that he espoused, but also know that the man has done a lot of good in his life.  In politics, you don’t always have the luxury of choosing who you have to work with.  A lot of times, you end up working with folks that you disagree with.  That shouldn’t come as any surprise.  Ultimately what matters though, is how you handle that situation, and how you work to get something done DESPITE your differences.  I think my record shows that we did some good things there.  I disagree with a lot of my fellow legislators as well, but I’m willing to work together to get something done.  Next question…”

Why didn’t you just say that Barack?  If it was true, I’d think that he’d just say that.

The only other options are that he was actually very aware of Ayer’s background and agreed with more of his philosophies than he disagreed with them.  Or, the last possibility is that he just didn’t CARE about them.

My opinion is that it is the latter.  Obama is human and, like most people, he will overlook a lot in the face of his own personal gain.  Obama just didn’t care about Ayer’s past.  If Ayers could help him climb the ladder of success, it really didn’t really matter who he was or what he did.  The ends simply justifies the means.  Yup, that would be in keeping with his “say whatever it takes” to win attitude.

I’d bet that the truth of the matter simply kept them from being able to see a better way to spin the issue.

Another thing that disturbs me about this new information is the realization that the majority of Obama’s limited leadership role experience primarily consists of handing out other people’s money.  Oh great.

So, there is ample proof that Obama will say anything to get elected.  His past is riddled with very unsavory characters – first Jeremiah Wright, now Bill Ayers.  And, he’s tremendously inexperienced – even more so than SarahPalin.  The experience he HAS had, he’s been responsible for spending other pepole money.

Really?  This is who half of America (maybe more???) wants as president?  What the hell is wrong with us?

I was cruising around Facebook, when a small add appeared on the side that said “Canadians Vote Obama”.  I thought – “Figures…”  Then I more fully digested what it actually said.  CANADIANS vote Obama???  WTF?

So, I cruised on over to Canada Votes Obama, to see what it was all about.  Yup, its exactly as it sounds.

They describe themselves as “passionate and lively Obama supporters,” and say “sadly, we live in Canada [SIC] but cannot vote”.   Thank goodness!

One of the people giving them feedback, says

I think that what you are doing is WICKED. I tip my hat off to you. I am presently studying in NYC and have been able to attend different political speaking engagements and watch everything unfold. It is very interesting to say the least. I think that people have to look at this on a grand scale. It is not just America voting for a president, but their decision will reverberate throughout the world

Hmmm…  This commentary speaks quite loudly about the rank and file that are voting or would vote for Obama.  WICKED.

And lastly, this group actually has a forum entitled Why is Obama the right candidate for Canada? Yes, really.  Fortunately, as of this writing, no one has even posted there.

I realize that even calling attention to this site is potentially falling into the “any press is good press” pit, but I think that this is potentially one of the clearest examples of how this election has gone off track.  Why, you ask?  People who aren’t qualified to make the decision still have a vote.  Canadians aren’t qualified, yet they are actually advertising – PAYING – to get their message out.  Fortunately, in the case of this group and their website, the “vote” they have is more symbolic than real (again, thank goodness…).

You have to understand – I love Canada.  I’m part French Canadian.  I work for a Canadian company.  I’ve been there literally dozens of times.  If I had to pick a place outside of the US to live, Toronto would be in the top 3.  I LOVE Canada.  But…  Canadians vote Obama?  Really?  Big surprise there.  HELLO, you live in what is largely a socialist country!

Canadians Vote Obama. Has there ever been a better articulation of why Americans should vote McCain?  We are not socialists.  Most Americans, if asked the question, “Are you Socialist?” would emphatically answer, “No!”  Yet, their voting habits simply don’t reflect that.

While Canadians can’t vote in our election, this perfectly symbolizes the degree to which our elections have left the realm of being a serious issue and have instead entered the miasma of being a vocalized media circus.  People who can’t vote or even worse, aren’t qualified to vote are still partaking in the dialogue.  A media circus is a popularity contest.  Where are the facts?  Where is the UNDERSTANDING of the issues?

If I hear one more person say “Well, I just feel that, blah blah blah…”   You FEEL?  Hmm..  That’s an excellent basis for a decision, isn’t it?  Your feelings?  I FEEL like punching you, but fortunately, I’m conservative and don’t ACT on stupid, unfounded and destructive feelings.  I research, I understand, I debate and I decide.  That is how an important decision should be made.  Each time, and every time.

Lets just call this as it is.  If our election was anything BUT a simple popularity contest, Obama would never even have been a known candidate.  I mean absolutely no disrespect to the man by saying that.  At this point, he just hasn’t accomplished enough to warrant making him the most powerful man on earth.  Give it another decade or so Barack.  Get more experience.  I’ll still disagree with you politically, but at least I’ll know that you are qualified.  I won’t like it if you are elected, but I’ll be OK with that.  I don’t care if you are black, white, Christian or even Muslim.  You just aren’t qualified right now.

In this election Obama is being supported by a number of people who are just too caught up in the popularity contest to understand the ramifications of their vote.  In my book, that is an unqualified voter.  That leaves us with an unqualified candidate being supported by unqualified voters.  Can it get worse than that?

Yes, it can. You can have the Republicans doing the same thing!!

While I applaud Palin as a vice-presidential candidate choice in the face of the opposition, I don’t think she has enough experience to be president.  Fortunately, she’s the VICE PRESIDENTIAL candidate.  Hello Libs, the VP has no power.  She doesn’t have enough experience to have the power.  She has more than Obama, but not enough.  Why the hell do the Dems seem to be making this election between Obama and Palin?  Yes, if McCain dies, she will be President.  But, the Dems bemoaning this point?  How stupid!  Last I checked, Palin has a LOT more experience actually running things than Obama.  Remember, the only thing that Obama can come up with to demonstrate his leadership potential is his own campaign!

The Dems’ argument seems to be: “To avoid the possibility of an unqualified person becoming President in the unlikely event that McCain dies, we are going to elect Obama, ignoring the fact that he is KNOWN to be untested, unproven and even MORE unqualified that Palin.  Not only that, we are going to make it a focal point of our campaign to spotlight how unqualified she is and how bad it would be for her to be President (even though our candidate has LESS experience).”

As is so often the case, I’m largely confused by the Democratic idea of logic.

There, I’ve said my piece.  Oh, wait…  Just one more thing.

<RANT>

One of their contributors said, “People have to look at this on a grand scale. . It is not just America voting for a president, but their decision will reverberate throughout the world.”

Um, no we don’t.  Excuse me, but fuck the world – I don’t vote in their elections, so hands off mine.  I’ll vote for the candidate that, after careful consideration, research and debate, I’ve concluded is right for MY family and MY country.  Everyone else can piss off.  I don’t see Canadians picking their PM based upon who Americans LIKE.  Nor does anyone else…

So, please.  In this one thing, you crazy Canadians, SHUT YOUR DAMN PIE HOLES!

</RANT>

There, NOW I’ve said my piece.

When the barber goes to open his shop the next morning  there is a ‘thank you’ card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.

Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he tries to  pay his bill, the barber again replies, ‘I  cannot accept money from you.   I’m doing community service this week.’  The cop is happy and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open up there is a ‘thank you’ card and a doz en donuts waiting for him at his door.

Then, a Congressman comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to  pay his bill the barber again replies, ‘I cannot accept money from you.   I’m doing community service this week.’  The Congressman is very happy and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open up, there are a dozen congressmen lined up waiting for a free haircut.

And that, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between the citizens of our country and many members of our Congress.

Well, fortunately our Governator thought that this was pretty stupid too.  He vetoed it, saying that the bill would “create a system that could unduly limit choices for consumers and small water systems, with potentially little positive impact given the relatively limited contribution of water softeners to our salinity problems.”   Find out a bit more at the Water Quality Association.

Score:

Common Sense: 1
California Legislators: 347828

Exactly why do I live in Kaliforniastan?