TO TRUST A MATTRESS OR A DEMOCRAT?
Democrats, and Republicans too, have got us all confused about Social Security, but here is an explanation that even the mentally retarded can follow. The average American makes $16.05 per hour according to The Bureau of Labor Statistics; lives to age 77 according to the Center for Disease control, officially retires at age 66 according to a law passed by Congress, and contributes 12.4% of his income to Social Security according to a legalized scam perpetrated by the Democrats.
So, $16.05 (per hour) x 40 (hours per week) x 52 (weeks per year) x 46 (years worked) x 12.4%gives you $190,422 that is now stolen by the Democrats, but might have been put in your mattress. To disguise this grand larceny the Democrats give back $952 (average Social Security monthly check at retirement) and say to you, " the math is very complicated but trust us, this is a great deal; we love you and care for you; and those Republicans are just so selfish and mean."
But, if you had been free from Democratic treachery to put the 12.4% each pay period ($190,422 in total ) in your mattress until retirement, and then lived 11 years longer (average life span), you could take 51% more ($1442 vs. $952) per month($190,422/11/12=$1422) in retirement income than the Democrats give you!
For those who are fortunate enough to fall above the retarded level of intelligence you know that money, rather than being invested in a mattress, can be invested in a balanced Republican fund of stocks and bonds where it might return, conservatively, 5%, in which case the return would not be 51% above the Democratic grand theft return, but rather 580% above the Democratic grand theft return!
In point of fact, many Americans retire to a life at or near the poverty level because the Democrats steal their money by convincing them they are the caring Socialist Party. In poorer countries around the world, where retirement income is proportionately less, this Democratic lead is often followed and as a result millions die prematurely of poverty.
Sadly, those who cannot understand this are not functionally above the mentally retarded level, but rather have fallen prey to the same pack animal or tribal/herd mentality that throughout history has caused mankind to worship and trust strange Gods and stranger men who were far more likely to kill or abuse them than to care for them. It all makes you wonder if the Jeffersonian concept of freedom from Gov't is too unnatural to prevail in the end.
Comments: Ted Baiamonte, bje1000@aol.com
4.21.2005
GOD'S ROTTWEILER?
The liberals are hard at work rudely denouncing the new Pope as God's Rotweiler. They apparently figure that religious toleration, let alone respect, is an outdated concept. Moreover, liberals are now so intellectually secular that they are precluded from tolerating religion in general, let alone Catholicism which they often see as the most ancient, and absurd religion. Judiasm apparantly gets a pass due to the holocaust. What the liberals seem to hate most in the new Pope is his family values. It seems this Pope, like his predecessor, in fact, like all his predecessors, is against contraception, divorce, abortion, and premarital sex. Imagine that?
The enlightened liberal version of liberal culture is being played out in Africa, and quite literally millions are dying; most directly from AIDS, but secondarily from poverty. It seems, as the old saying goes, two can live as cheaply as one, and without AIDS too. In Africa, where most live at or near the subsistence level the added little bit of wealth from a 3 person household (mother, father, child) can make the difference between life and death. And , beyond the mere advantage in numbers you can throw in the "love" factor. Imagine if Africa was a Catholic culture where men were actually obligated to not only provide for, but love their children too? Such men are more productive than their single, selfish counterparts. But, in secular Africa love is rare, they have very liberal no-fault divorce, if there even is a legal family, and, in fact, an entire no-fault culture, with the obvious results.
But that's just poverty stricken liberal secular Africa. What about wealthy liberal secular America? In American they don't live at the subsistence level so perhaps liberalism works better there? It turns out that in America at any given moment there are 2.2 million people in jail. In the course of a year there are 13 million people who spend some time in jail. Over a 10 year period 25% of the entire population might have spent some time in jail, and those are just the people who got caught. And guess what? In nearly 95% of the liberal households from which these prisoners come, there has been a no fault divorce, or no legalized family at all.
What this seems to demonstrate is that even with wealth, the standard, loving, 3 person traditional Catholic family, works far better than the liberal secular alternative. The love of a father actually seems to be an important thing in a young boy's life. Wouldn't it be an amazing thing if America's world leading, feminist, male bashing secularists could see the wisdom that God's so-called, Rottweiler, has to bestow on the world?
The silly old Pope and his silly old church are against abortion too? The liberals hate him for that. When the liberals legalized abortion, the number of abortions shot up from 1000 legal abortions a year to 1.2 million per year today. World wide the number is 44 million per year. Even if you are a liberal and don't care one tiny bit about the 44.1 million slaughtered babies a year, why do you want abortion anyway? They are performed on, in the U. S anyway, mostly girls under 25 who are not and have never been married. Is this something that liberal parents want so when their daughters get aroused by a Justin Timberlake music video they can go out and have anonymous sex with whoever they want and not have to worry about love or babies? Or, is it something secular liberal parents want so when their sons get aroused watching Janet Jackson they can go out and have sex thinking that if a pregnancy does result the girl will feel free to abort the baby rather than love it? Imagine some silly old Pope wanting kids to grow up thinking about sex in terms of love and marriage and family? What responsible parent would want that for their kids anyway when modern liberals are offering free, anonymous, loveless sex ?
comments: Ted Baiamonte bje1000@aol.com
The enlightened liberal version of liberal culture is being played out in Africa, and quite literally millions are dying; most directly from AIDS, but secondarily from poverty. It seems, as the old saying goes, two can live as cheaply as one, and without AIDS too. In Africa, where most live at or near the subsistence level the added little bit of wealth from a 3 person household (mother, father, child) can make the difference between life and death. And , beyond the mere advantage in numbers you can throw in the "love" factor. Imagine if Africa was a Catholic culture where men were actually obligated to not only provide for, but love their children too? Such men are more productive than their single, selfish counterparts. But, in secular Africa love is rare, they have very liberal no-fault divorce, if there even is a legal family, and, in fact, an entire no-fault culture, with the obvious results.
But that's just poverty stricken liberal secular Africa. What about wealthy liberal secular America? In American they don't live at the subsistence level so perhaps liberalism works better there? It turns out that in America at any given moment there are 2.2 million people in jail. In the course of a year there are 13 million people who spend some time in jail. Over a 10 year period 25% of the entire population might have spent some time in jail, and those are just the people who got caught. And guess what? In nearly 95% of the liberal households from which these prisoners come, there has been a no fault divorce, or no legalized family at all.
What this seems to demonstrate is that even with wealth, the standard, loving, 3 person traditional Catholic family, works far better than the liberal secular alternative. The love of a father actually seems to be an important thing in a young boy's life. Wouldn't it be an amazing thing if America's world leading, feminist, male bashing secularists could see the wisdom that God's so-called, Rottweiler, has to bestow on the world?
The silly old Pope and his silly old church are against abortion too? The liberals hate him for that. When the liberals legalized abortion, the number of abortions shot up from 1000 legal abortions a year to 1.2 million per year today. World wide the number is 44 million per year. Even if you are a liberal and don't care one tiny bit about the 44.1 million slaughtered babies a year, why do you want abortion anyway? They are performed on, in the U. S anyway, mostly girls under 25 who are not and have never been married. Is this something that liberal parents want so when their daughters get aroused by a Justin Timberlake music video they can go out and have anonymous sex with whoever they want and not have to worry about love or babies? Or, is it something secular liberal parents want so when their sons get aroused watching Janet Jackson they can go out and have sex thinking that if a pregnancy does result the girl will feel free to abort the baby rather than love it? Imagine some silly old Pope wanting kids to grow up thinking about sex in terms of love and marriage and family? What responsible parent would want that for their kids anyway when modern liberals are offering free, anonymous, loveless sex ?
comments: Ted Baiamonte bje1000@aol.com
4.13.2005
WHY DEMOCRATS THROW PIES
Recently there have been 3 significant events in the development of Democratic intellectual life. It seems Ann Coulter (author of 3 Republican best sellers), David Horowitz (Communist turned brilliant Republican author), and William Kristol (neo-con publisher given much credit for freedom in Iraq) have had pies hurled at them by liberals while they spoke on college campuses. Honestly, Democrats communicate with pies because they often don't know how to communicate with words. They are very convinced they know the truth and that it is just so obvious that it doesn't even need to be communicated with words, let alone rational words organized in a logical way. Democrats feel very deeply that in their hearts they are very sensitive and caring, while Republicans are callow people who represent special interests, big business, or old fashioned values. Republicans, with their penchant for words, logic, and history find this bigoted, racist, prejudiced, discriminatory, rude, stupid, and antidemocratic but nevertheless they show up to talk to and reason with college kids and professors whose only language is often, pies.
The pie incidents are not isolated, but broadly symbolic. For example, college Republicans at many different colleges have been using bake sales where Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics are charged different prices for cupcakes to make a theatrical point about what they perceive as the unfairness and absurdity of liberal affirmative action. This comment is typical: "their "guerilla theater" protest elicited a strong negative response, not only from students, but also from the university. Lukianoff says school administrators took no disciplinary action against the angry students who disrupted the bake sale, sometimes violently, but instead chose to censure the conservative group for its demonstration." Needless to say, if a liberal group held a bake sale and charged men and women different prices to highlight the so called "wage gap" between men and women, liberal universities would have been supportive rather than willing to condone or overlook violent opposition. The incidents go on and on. At Dartmouth the Democrats actually stole and destroyed entire editions of the Republican newspaper. And yet Republicans still show up to talk and reason with sometimes violent liberals.
One can see the same manifestation of liberalism in many places. A look at the liberal blogosphere reveals that they function as non intellectual liberal support groups. If a Republican shows up they shun him or personally attack him, but never will they challenge his ideas on an intellectual level. They seek power not with logic and debate as our founding fathers intended but rather by shaming you into joining their bigoted club.
Does one wonder why the major TV networks are sheepishly and clandestinely liberal while the cable Radio and TV networks are openly, boldly, and verbally Republican? Why are famous and very diverse thinkers like Alan Greesspan, William Buckley., Jr., and Milton Friedman perfectly and 100% dismissive of Democrats? It is because Democrats can't and don't defend themselves. It is because Republicans have confidence which comes from having logic on their side, and being able to deploy it against liberals. Democrats, conversely, are sneaky and quiet, and sometimes throw pies, because they rely only on a feeling in their hearts that they don't really trust in open debate. They need to believe in themselves as caring and involved citizens with deservedly high self esteem, and they won't let a mere inability think interfere with their very excellent, self righteous lives.
But where did liberals get the idea that thinking is not necessary? Actually it started with George Washington who believed that too much conflict between Jeffersonian Republicans and Democrats (Federalists at the time) would prevent our country from being founded and launched successfully. When the anti government, freedom loving Republicans nevertheless trounced and destroyed the Democrats in the election of 1800 the Democrats were driven underground; primarily for being against freedom from gov't, which was virtually the entire principle of the American Revolution.
They have reemerged but only as the default opposition party and never with a coherent philosophy. In fact, they made serious gains only when shamelessly exploiting tradegies like the Great Depression in the 30s and racism in the 60s, and then only when they had constantly gamed the system by expanding the voting franchise to less and less thoughtful voters. Hilary Clinton just continued this desperate Democratic tradition with her "make every vote count" legislation which seeks to extend the voting franchise to felons. Next they seek drive through voting because they are happily willing to exploit people who won't make an effort to vote but will vote for a Democratic free lunch if it requires no effort, and no thinking. Ultimately they seek to reduce American democracy to a series of thoughtless electoral contests decided by thoughtless voters responding to raw emotion, prejudice, and 30 second TV commercials.
If Republicans could make pie throwing a felony at least the Democrats would have a coherently thoughtless Party.
comments: bje1000@aol.com Ted Baiamonte
The pie incidents are not isolated, but broadly symbolic. For example, college Republicans at many different colleges have been using bake sales where Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics are charged different prices for cupcakes to make a theatrical point about what they perceive as the unfairness and absurdity of liberal affirmative action. This comment is typical: "their "guerilla theater" protest elicited a strong negative response, not only from students, but also from the university. Lukianoff says school administrators took no disciplinary action against the angry students who disrupted the bake sale, sometimes violently, but instead chose to censure the conservative group for its demonstration." Needless to say, if a liberal group held a bake sale and charged men and women different prices to highlight the so called "wage gap" between men and women, liberal universities would have been supportive rather than willing to condone or overlook violent opposition. The incidents go on and on. At Dartmouth the Democrats actually stole and destroyed entire editions of the Republican newspaper. And yet Republicans still show up to talk and reason with sometimes violent liberals.
One can see the same manifestation of liberalism in many places. A look at the liberal blogosphere reveals that they function as non intellectual liberal support groups. If a Republican shows up they shun him or personally attack him, but never will they challenge his ideas on an intellectual level. They seek power not with logic and debate as our founding fathers intended but rather by shaming you into joining their bigoted club.
Does one wonder why the major TV networks are sheepishly and clandestinely liberal while the cable Radio and TV networks are openly, boldly, and verbally Republican? Why are famous and very diverse thinkers like Alan Greesspan, William Buckley., Jr., and Milton Friedman perfectly and 100% dismissive of Democrats? It is because Democrats can't and don't defend themselves. It is because Republicans have confidence which comes from having logic on their side, and being able to deploy it against liberals. Democrats, conversely, are sneaky and quiet, and sometimes throw pies, because they rely only on a feeling in their hearts that they don't really trust in open debate. They need to believe in themselves as caring and involved citizens with deservedly high self esteem, and they won't let a mere inability think interfere with their very excellent, self righteous lives.
But where did liberals get the idea that thinking is not necessary? Actually it started with George Washington who believed that too much conflict between Jeffersonian Republicans and Democrats (Federalists at the time) would prevent our country from being founded and launched successfully. When the anti government, freedom loving Republicans nevertheless trounced and destroyed the Democrats in the election of 1800 the Democrats were driven underground; primarily for being against freedom from gov't, which was virtually the entire principle of the American Revolution.
They have reemerged but only as the default opposition party and never with a coherent philosophy. In fact, they made serious gains only when shamelessly exploiting tradegies like the Great Depression in the 30s and racism in the 60s, and then only when they had constantly gamed the system by expanding the voting franchise to less and less thoughtful voters. Hilary Clinton just continued this desperate Democratic tradition with her "make every vote count" legislation which seeks to extend the voting franchise to felons. Next they seek drive through voting because they are happily willing to exploit people who won't make an effort to vote but will vote for a Democratic free lunch if it requires no effort, and no thinking. Ultimately they seek to reduce American democracy to a series of thoughtless electoral contests decided by thoughtless voters responding to raw emotion, prejudice, and 30 second TV commercials.
If Republicans could make pie throwing a felony at least the Democrats would have a coherently thoughtless Party.
comments: bje1000@aol.com Ted Baiamonte
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)