An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Archive for 28 December 2011
6 days old, but still relevant, and will be until Obama is tossed out on his keister!
Looking at this ‘voter guide’, as well as this one, I am really starting to question Ann’s sanity. I know she is quite conservative, or at least, she was. What has changed? And what the blazes does “mixed” mean?
by Ann Coulter
In the upcoming presidential election, two issues are more important than any others: repealing Obamacare and halting illegal immigration. If we fail at either one, the country will be changed permanently.
Taxes can be raised and lowered. Regulations can be removed (though they rarely are). Attorneys general and Cabinet members can be fired. Laws can be repealed. Even Supreme Court justices eventually die.
But capitulate on illegal immigration, and the entire country will have the electorate of California. There will be no turning back.
Similarly, if Obamacare isn’t repealed in the next few years, it never will be.
America will begin its ineluctable descent into becoming a worthless Western European country, with rotten health care, no money for defense and ever-increasing federal taxes to support the nanny state.
So let’s consider which of the Republican candidates are most likely to succeed at these objectives.
According to a Muslim Brotherhood official, the political party wants to boost tourism numbers to Egypt and will not take steps that would harm the industry.
The strong showing by Islamists in Egypt’s staggered parliamentary poll has aroused fears among liberals and others in Egypt that it could lead to rules that would ban alcohol sales and outlaw mixed bathing in popular resorts.
Tourism is Egypt’s top foreign currency earner, accounting for more than a tenth of gross domestic product and employing an estimated one in eight of the workforce.
Essam el-Erian, deputy head of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), said accusations that the Islamists rise to power would harm tourism were “rumours” circulated by remnants of the party of deposed President Hosni Mubarak to influence voters.
Perhaps the folks of Egypt should have considered the tourist industry before they went nuts for the Islamists? I don’t know about you, but Egypt is the one of the LAST places on earth I would go right now. I guess we should have gone when we were in the area back in 2008. I just don’t trust those people! For very obvious reasons. Obvious, that is, if you’ve been paying close attention to the happenings in the region.
“No citizen who makes a living from this field should be concerned,” Erian said in statements carried by the party’s website while addressing voters in Sinai ahead of the third stage of the election in January.
He said the party wanted to draw in 20 million tourists a year to Egypt, compared to the more than 12 million that visited before the uprising against Mubarak and subsequent political upheaval that sent tourists packing.
Yeah, I’ve no doubt Mubarak needed to be sent packing, but the direction they are heading may end up being 10 times worse than that dictator handed them. Not to mention the danger these thugs have put the Copts in on a daily basis. Apparently, these people think that 8 million more tourist will be glad to come to their country? Seems to be, all they have done is swap one dictator for another, even more oppressive one. Conrats D’Bama for encouraging the insanity.
Erian said laws regarding alcohol would not be changed and the party would not support legislation that might harm the industry. Alcohol is sold at hotels across Egypt and can also be bought at specialised shops and some licensed restaurants.
But he hinted the Brotherhood would seek to curb some aspects of public consumption, but only based on existing laws.
“The current law has punishments in this regard (to alcohol). We won’t add to it nor modify it but drinking alcohol won’t be in the streets,” he said, without giving details.
Under Egyptian law, anyone caught drunk in a public place can be imprisoned for up to six months, but the law is only sporadically enforced.
I kind of get the feeling they don’t want Americans in the country, spending their dollars on tourism. And they especially don’t want folks from Wisconsin. (heh) Seriously, I’m not a drinker, so such rules wouldn’t apply to me anyway, but who is to say they won’t make crap up, accusing people of doing something that is against their laws just because that person if from a certain country, or is not a Muslim? The idea of charging and sentencing tourists, and then demanding money for said tourist’s release wouldn’t be completely out of the norm for Islamist. Nope….don’t trust them at all! I’d much rather go back to Israel, where I felt completely safe. Well, except for in the Muslim territories.
Erian suggested there was broad agreement among Egypt’s political forces to keep, without modification, the first four articles of the constitution, including the one saying “the principles of Islamic (Shariah) law are the principle source of legislation”.
And, there ya go! “The principles of Islamic (Shariah) law” is about as oppressive as they come. American tourists and Shariah don’t mix. Respecting the laws of the country you are visiting is a really good idea, however, when said country’s law is contrary to everything a person believes in, such as FREEDOM, then there is definitely a conflict. Just sayin’.
It’s not a phobia if they really want to kill you!
Abridge – deprive, diminish
Would you be outraged if the Department of Justice shut down The Foundry without any warning and blocked access for more than a year?
That’s exactly what happened to a hip-hop blog called Dajaz1.com, which was falsely accused of criminal copyright infringement. The blog posted music from artists promoting their work. But federal authorities viewed it differently. They seized the domain name, then shared virtually no information with its owner for more than year. Only recently did they quietly drop the case.
The government’s handling of this hip-hop blog is fueling fears about legislation moving quickly through Congress that addresses copyright infringement and online piracy.
The Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA as it’s known in the House, and the Senate’s PROTECT IP Act would give the U.S. attorney general the power and authority to block criminal enterprises from trafficking in illegal products online.
Their cause is a noble one. Business incur significant losses when Americans buy counterfeit items. Consumers must also be increasingly vigilant about purchases they make online. Federal authorities shut down more than 150 websites just last month for pirated goods.
Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey expects Tennessee will put in place a law that requires drug tests for people drawing government assistance or workers’ compensation. Other high-ranking Republicans aren’t so sure.
What’s not to be sure about?
The House speaker and the governor have voiced concerns about the cost and whether federal rules that govern the programs, including food stamps and welfare, give the state enough flexibility to start drug-testing programs that can survive a legal challenge.
Well, what you do, see, is take the cost out of whatever monetary benefits said testee will be getting. Yup. Charge them for the test. If they pass, fine. If they fail, just think how much money the state would save by not paying said benefits for the flunker. Our hard earned money should not be supporting someone’s drug habit. So, what’s the problem?
Ramsey, R-Blountville, recently told the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce that a similar proposal last legislative session carried a $12 million price tag but did not take into account the savings the state or employers will see from cutting off benefits to drug users.
See? It really would come out to our benefit. And, like I said, make the testee pay for the test. If they want state and federal benefits, then while they are looking for employment, they should be stone cold sober, right? Not to mention the test should be given on a monthly basis, with the cost being deducted from any compensation they’d receive.
“This is your money that we’re trying to protect here,” Ramsey told the business group. “Folks, we don’t need to give any support to that lifestyle.”
Ramsey said he’s confident that lawmakers will be able to make a strong case based on other states’ experience that the proposal would be revenue neutral.
Why, oh why, isn’t Ron Ramsey our governor instead the RINO we got? sigh….
House Speaker Beth Harwell said that while she agreed with the aim of the drug-testing proposal, addressing the state’s financial picture is a bigger priority.
“With the budgetary constraints that we face in this state, we want to make sure that those who are receiving assistance from the state are qualified and are doing everything they personally can do to take care and provide for themselves,” said Harwell, a Nashville Republican. “I think there will be a thorough discussion, but I think it’s too early to predict whether it will pass.”
If our state legislators don’t give a damn about spending OUR money on junkies and drunks, then I really don’t think they should be sitting in Nashville with the power to take from us, and give to them, do you? How about we use some common sense once in a while? The state’s financial picture includes giving benefits to people who don’t deserve them. I’d say that’s a pretty big priority as well, and it would end up saving US in the long run.
Gov. Bill Haslam said recently that he hasn’t seen specifics of the proposal but that there are still a series of questions that need to be addressed.
“We need to see what sort of federal leeway we have there, and I haven’t gotten that data back yet,” he said. “And No. 2, who would implement that and how would it be implemented?”
Ya know, Haslam is pretty nice guy, but I’m not all that impressed with him in a leadership role. Those questions that need to be addressed includes how much will this save the state of Tennessee in the long run. I’d say, quite a bit. And honestly, has anyone looked at the 10th Amendment lately? Stop handing over power that belongs to the state to the feckless…I mean federal government. Sheesh!
Florida became the first state to enact drug testing for welfare applicants since Michigan tried and failed more than a decade ago. Michigan’s random drug-testing program for welfare recipients lasted five weeks in 1999 before it was halted by a judge, kicking off a four-year legal battle that ended with an appeals court ruling it unconstitutional.
How is it unconstitutional? If that’s the case, then no company should be allowed to drug test either. If I own a company, I’m going to make sure I don’t have people who are high working in my business. It’s BAD for the business, and there are major safety concerns. The same should apply for those getting “free stuff”. It shouldn’t be free to them. Drug use is a crime. Why reward criminal behavior? They should earn the benefits! I’m kind of fed up with judges making decisions contrary to the will of the people. This is one area where Newt is right. These libtards bozos have no business changing the laws to suit THEIR political agenda. They do NOT have that power, however, they have taken it away from the people. Oklahoma is a good example.
H/T: Rod Williams via Facebook