This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Friday, July 27, 2012

With Thanks to Sarkazian

"We are all aware that the greatest threat to constitutionally-limited small government and personal liberty that we see active in politics in America today is President Obama. I mean, this guy is -- in n fact, we see him clearly. He is obsessed with controlling the distribution of income, the distribution of product, the behavior of people, the allocation of capital resources to goofy social causes that are inspired by bad science and bad finance," Fmr. Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) of FreedomWorks said on CNN this morning.

"And I tell you, the grassroots activists across this country known as the Tea Party activists will work diligently for Romney because a 180-degree turn-around is a big change, and we will have removed what we perceive to be the biggest threat to our liberty in the history -- in our lifetime in the presidency of Barack Obama," he added.


NewGuy said...

First, Obama ignores enforcement of our immigration laws...

Then, recently he has ordered that illegal aliens who went to school here or was in the military, will not be deported..

Now, apparently our border patrol is being told that IF AN ILLEGAL ALIEN SAYS HE WENT TO SCHOOL HERE, that's all that's required and there should be no "investigation" to determine if it's true.

That according the the Border Patrolmen's Union and others.

"Chris Crane, an ICE Officer for over nine years, states that management of ICE is directing its employees to not require any corroboration of aliens claiming to have attended school here in the U.S. and employees are ordered to let any that claim this go.

More chilling than this is Crane’s description of the directed release of an illegal alien who had committed several serious crimes, including assault with bodily injury to a family member, due to the claim that the alien had attended school here in the U.S and fit within the Presidents criteria of a “dreamer”.

NewGuy said...

Here is a pretty good website...

It's the site of Local 2544 of the National Border Patrol Council and will give you some first hand insight into what impact the ridiculous Obmama immigration policies are having on the men and woman who put their lives at risk trying to enforce the laws of this country!

Example from recent article..

Obama Administration Continues to Frustrate Rank and File

07-27-12 More shenanigans from the Obama Administration. The inmates are now running the asylum as it pertains to our immigration enforcement, just like they did with IRCA 1986. Agents are told to turn a blind eye to nearly everything outside mass murder, the lie that the "border is secure" continues to be spread, and the American people fund all this shameful political gamesmanship with their tax dollars.

Mike D. said...

Only problem is that Republicans in Congress will vote against Obama's policies, but they will vote for Romney's. If Romney's policies are 10% less bad than Obama's, then we will get a bunch of invasive legislation passed under Romney that would not pass under Obama.

Sarkazein said...

Tell us more about the future MikeD. Are you looking for more of a 50-50 vote?
All Conservatives need is a filibuster proof Senate, maintain control of the House, and a President who can figure out which end is up.

Where are your smarter people and why were you not smart enough to get them elected?

I grow weary of those who think there are no people as smart as themselves, so no one is any good.

USS Rodger Young said...

Mike D,

Not for the first 4 years of a Romney Presidency (notice upper case). Romney will want re-election, and he won't go against conservatives on immigration or guns. If he does, he's toast. The 2nd four years, if he gets it, might be a different story. If Romney goes in, the 1st four years will be bliss for conservatives. We will have what we want. He will be forced into a lot of positions that he normally wouldn't be in. The mass deportation of illegal aliens, repeal of health care, no more gun control, and a decent economy might just come to fruition.

Don't know if I'll vote for the idiot though. I'm like Faulks - watch from the sidelines, peacefully, as it all go down and then rebuild from the ashes.

If Sark can convince me to vote for Romney, I might. But right now, I'm done with the lesser of two evils. Might vote for Cain, Bachman or Ron Paul.

NewGuy said...

Well, I'm not Sark....but I wish you would let me help him convince you. If we don't get Romney in in 2012, I'm not sure that it won't be too late come 2016.

Obama has already decided that he doesn't have to follow this nations laws. Why not just suspend elections next?

Sarkazein said...

USS Rodger Young- If you are right and he has to lean Conservative in his first term, and then he is re-elected, why would he change direction? He is, if nothing else, pragmatic.

I may too, at some point, watch from the sidelines as it all burns down then rebuild from the ashes. But I will, for now, fight the fire.

NewGuy said...

Republicans may take the Senate, but it won't be by much of a majority. My 'prediction' (guess) at this point is either a 50-50 Senate or 51-49.

If this is the case, even with a Republican majority, it isn't going to be enough to reverse the direction we are heading in. Obama is making up his own rules and it will take a real effort in congress to stop him. He doesn't wait for legislation to proceed...he proceeds thru executive decree and agency regulations that go beyond anything that congress ever imagined!

To stop him, we will need a filibuster proof Senate. We MIGHT get a few 'right thinking' Democrats to recognize what is happening and step up to help stop it, but we aren't going to get 60 Republicans!~

That being the case, we need to elect a Republican president! Or continue to see the system be corrupted.

Sarkazein said...

If it is a 50-50 Senate, beside thrilling MikeD, a Republican VP is even more important for the rare tie-breaker vote.

Mike D. said...


Senate terms are six years. Every two years, one third of the Senate is up for reelection. This is 2012. This class of Senators was voted into office in 2006, a year when President Bush was extremely unpopular. In this class of Senators up for reelection in 2012, there are 21 Democrats, 10 Republicans, and 2 Independents.

If Republicans can't turn in a majority with that setup, then the American public does not believe what you think they believe.


I think I hear a coyote taking away your grandkids, and I think it may have been a homosexual coyote. Better form a lynchmob and hobble out into the desert after him.

guy faulkes said...

I still think Romney is not electable. His liberal past is going to kill him. There is no issue he can debate Obama on in which he has not supported a like option. This includes gun control, abortion, socialized medicine, etc.

The only way Romney can win is if the far left pushes Obama into politically stating his real feelings as with his endorsement of an "assault rifle" ban and support of gay marriage. This might cause enough people to choose the lesser of two evils (regrettably) to make a difference.

Romney cannot win the election, but Obama might lose it.

NewGuy said...

Mike D.

Re your post on the makeup of the Senate.

With just a quick glance at the numbers, it does seem that Republicans might have a "set up" year, and I do agree that we have some opportunities.

But, it's not as good as it looks like. Many of those Democrat Senators up for reelection are in heavily Democrat states - unlikely (although not impossible) that Republicans will unseat entrenched Dem incumbents like Menendez in NJ, Cantwell in Washington or Manchin in WVA.

Republicans, on the other hand, are unlikely to hold the Maine seat left by retiring Republican senator Olympia Snowe. Also, Scott Brown in heavily Democratic Massachussetts is at risk.

Other seats, like Leiberman's Connecticut seat and Hawaii's vacant seat are going to stay Democrat.

There are maybe 10 seats that are really likely to be in play. Maybe 7 of these are Dem seats.

All in all, I think we will do well if we gain a majority....I'm not looking for any sweep here!

NewGuy said...

Rasmussen has some interesting data on the senate races...

He has Republicans gaining 4 seat and then rates 5 as tossups.
If they get both the Repub incumbered tossups and 2 of the 3 dems, they end up with a net gain of 6.

That translates to a 51-49 Republican majority in the new Senate. (actually, 51 - 48 and 1 socialist who, quite naturally, votes dem)

USS Rodger Young said...

New Guy,

If hussein obama wins this election, I don't believe we will see another conservative in office ever again. 2016 will see someone like Hillary take the spot. With the severe depredations hussein obama has bestowed upon America, his re-election would seem severely in doubt. Yet, that's not the case. He may well win it. If he does win, it points to a fundamental shift in the country's politics. We may be socialist now and not realize it. November will tell us.

As for voting for Romney, I just can't bring myself to vote for an anti-gun, pro health care, Yankee liberal like Romney. How in the world is it likely he will change his stance on these issues?

Mike D. said...

If Obama wins, I think we will see Chris Christie win in 2016. If Romney wins, I think we will see a Democrat, maybe Hillary, win in 2016.

NewGuy said...

The politics of the country are shifting....along with the demographics. Another point Ann Coulter made in her recent column!

On the other hand, we had a hugely successful election in 2010. No, we didn't gain everything we wanted and some of the people we got in office didn't do everything we expected, but overall - we made substantial gains and I think that WORKING CLASS MIDDLE AMERICANS are starting to wake up and pay attention.

While Obama is encouraging young people to take on college loans they can't afford to pay back....while his DSS is ADVERTIZING (in various languages) for more people to apply for welfare benefits....while more and more Americans are opting for 'diaability'...while people who reliably have paid their mortgages are being told that they were fools, that if they had defaulted, then the Democrats would have bailed them out....while illegal aliens are being told that it's ok to break our laws, you can still stay here and IF YOU TELL US you went to school here, then we wont deport you.....etc. etc. etc...

All of these voters are being told that Obama will give them money from the public treasury and all we have to do is tax rich folks, who after all, didn't really succeed thru hard work but because of a benevolent government.........

Well, you get my point!

USS Rodger Young said...

New Guy and Mike D have a point. If Rommey does pull it out, it may change the course of our nation in that socialism will be kept at bay if Romney doesn't himself keep socialism-like tendencies alive. But why would Christie win in 2016 if Romney wins in 2012? Christie is as big a RINO as Romney and offers nothing more than Romney does. If Rommey improves the economy, which is undoubtably will if re-elected, then Christie doesn't stand a chance to unseat him. If Romney does less than a stellar job, then Hillary gets the nod in 2016.

New Guy, you hit a home run with your assessment of the U.S. becoming a welfare nation. My problem all along with this has been the lack of outcry by those of us who know better!! We had Tea Party rallies in 2010 over a mid term election. With all that's taken place in the past 2 years, I don't feel any energy. The Blowing Rock Town Hall meeting over guns in parks is a prime example. I just don't see conservatives angry about much of anything. Perhaps the Independents will save the day, but I just don't know.

It will be hard not to punch a straight Republitard ticket in November. That I must admit to. If it weren't for RINOs like McCain, Carl Rove, Richard Burr who backstabbed us conservatives, I would vote Republican in a heartbeat. I'm conflicted over this. On one hand, hussein obama is out to destroy traditional America. On the other hand, RINO Republitards are so full of compromise, they make the French look conservative. How can I convince myself to give power to those who want to give it away?

Let me ask Sark, New Guy, and Blogger and others this: Will Mitt Romney increase individual freedom for Americans if he goes into office. If so, how do you see that happening?

USS Rodger Young said...

New Guy and Blogger,

Several months back, you asked us to give election predictions. We did. Will you do another election prediction for us all to answer? I would like to hear what New Guy, Sark, Blogger, Mike D, shep-heard, pov, Faulks, Wolf's head and all other think will happen in November.

Tell who you think will win and why. Also, which swing states will go to who. And what issues will be the deciding factor.

This ought to be interesting.

NewGuy said...

JR...yes, I will be glad to put something together...maybe a couple of things

Presidential Election - state by state

Balance in the Senate

Balance in the House

Maybe something on the NC US Congressional representation? This is going to be interesting with maybe 2 or 3 NC seats in the US House of Representatives switching from Dem to Repubican....

Let me give it some thought and I would welcome suggestions on just what to do...Probably start with the US Senate since I've been pretty much watching that and it's likely to be a very close split in the next Senate?

NewGuy said...

"Let me ask Sark, New Guy, and Blogger and others this: Will Mitt Romney increase individual freedom for Americans if he goes into office. If so, how do you see that happening? "

Let's start with the obvious one, Mandatory health insurance. Never mind if you want it or's going to be a requirement and will go into effect unless Obama is defeated. And, it's not just that you will have to have insurance. You will also have to have insurance that covers things that you may not even want! A few years ago someone I know was telling about her health insurance - which she was getting at a pretty reasonable price. It didnt cover much but, as she said, she only wanted to protect herself against going bankrupt should she have a serious health issue. Under her policy, she paid for almost all of her own care until she had paid %5000.00 out of pocket ...then her insurance kicked in.

Now, if you think insurance is to cover you for the risks you can't afford to take are just out of luck under the new rules. You will have to have coverage for many things that you might not want, or would rather pay yourself rather than pay a higher premium. Contraception being the easiest example that comes to mind.

guy faulkes said...

"Let's start with the obvious one, Mandatory health insurance ..."

It will go in in some form if the conservatives do not win the House and Senate with a large enough majority to override a veto.

Romneycare was the father of Obamacare.

Mike D. said...


You didn't pay enough attention to my post. I said Christie in 2016 if Obama wins. Hillary in 2016 if Romney wins. Get it right.

As for how Christie and Romney are different: Romney does what he is told, follows the policy set for him, and no one cares. Christie sets policy, explains it to everyone, follows through on it, and people follow him.

Romney = weak political puppet follower.

Christie = strong logical inspiring leader.

Romney = Bush Jr.

Christie = Reagan

The two could not be more different.

USS Rodger Young said...

Mike D,

Ok, then if what you're saying is right then Christie is a bigger threat to gun owners than Romney. Christie is from liberal New Jersey which has strict gun laws which he supports. I could see him giving us another assault weapons ban or something like that. What do you think?

USS Rodger Young

Mike D. said...


I think that's what the Supreme Court is for, interpreting our Constitution and applying it to the hair-brained laws our legislators cook up.

Anyway, Presidents don't write bills, legislators do. Presidents sign bills. Christie could not present a gun restriction bill to Congress unless his party agreed to craft it.

Right now, we need a leader, and Romney ain't it.

guy faulkes said...

MikeD, I agree Romney is not the man to lead this country. Neither is Obama.

I would be interested in reading the answer to Rodger's request for your personal opinion. I personally do not trust Christie and think he would back gun control.