Candy For Idiots

Candy For Idiots

This Website is Presented in High-Definition

Candy For Idiots RSS Feed
 
 
 
 

Dang this thing is cool!

I can take pictures of ole Jack, exploit him, upload his picture and post a blog about it all right here from my iPhone.

I could use my computer…

But that simply wouldn’t be nearly as fun as using my brand spankin new iPhone! Yep, blogging from the ole iPhone. Ain’t life grand? Well I’m dome rubbing it in. Peace out losers!

Mays Design Co.

I Have A Hate

This hatred I have is deep. It runs throughout my soul ten times. It’s a hatred so strong that it’s palpable. People around me can sense this hatred and they run away in fright. What is my hatred? Advertisers or companies who use Christmas jingles to promote their products. And what’s worse is when they change the FRICKIN’ lyrics to some corny discombobulated song that in the end, makes no sense. I HATE IT AND I HATE THEM!

It’s not that I’m taking a stance against using the songs just because they’re Christmas songs. No, THEY JUST ALL SUCK! Actually, as a rule, I pretty much hate anytime advertising uses any popular song, not just Christmas songs. For example, every time I hear “Sweet Home Alabama” I want KFC. Well, that pisses me off! I hate KFC for using that song in their advertising! Come up with your own damn songs!!!

I feel like a law should be passed. Someone, please put an end to this!! Whatever GPS company who currently has radio jingles and TV commercials to the tune of a Christmas song touting their shit product needs to be fined, bankrupted and blown off the face of the earth and that needs to happen NOW! Anyone else should suffer the same fate. That is all.

Enter Catchy R.E.M. Lyrics Here

Is it really the end of the world as we know it? Obama has won. Incredible gains have been made by Democrats in the House and the Senate. The Federal Government is in complete control by liberals and an agenda resembling the debacle’s in Europe and Canada. Is the American Way, as we truly have known and know it, over?

That was my epilogue… Let me start off by saying that I’m terribly sorry that I haven’t posted in quite some time. I’ve been traveling a lot on business and life just hasn’t been very accommodating to this blog. And on the heels of this past election, that’s saying a lot for me. I should have been blogging 10 times a day, every day, but I simply couldn’t. Hopefully though, life is returning to normal.

So President Barack Hussein Obama. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reed. Speaker Of The House Nancy Pelosi. All three are known to be extreme liberals and all three team up to become the most left-wing leadership ever seen in the history of the United States of America. Why should that scare you?

A lot of people, including me, love the idea of Utopia. Socialism, on paper, is a miraculous thing. To think, no one is hungry, everyone feels good about themselves, everyone who gets sick gets cured, harmony and bliss throughout this great land! Then compare that to Gotham City in Batman. Humbled and battered citizenry where crime rules and corruption reigns. Capitalism has left these people’s hopes dashed and dreams scattered by the road-side.

Man, when you look at it like that, it makes you WANT to elect the Obama’s, the Reed’s and the Pelosi’s! There’s only one problem: Socialism doesn’t work.

I saw something in this election that I have truly never seen, nor thought I would ever see in this country. People, in droves, voted for Obama, not based on substance, but based on his personality, candor and charisma. Then what they did next was even more amazing; they adopted his principals.

Who? How do you know, MAYS? Well, I’ve read. A lot. I listen to talk radio, a lot. Those who have always subscribed to conservative principals in the past and voted for Obama are explaining themselves and how they’ve abandoned their conservative principals. They don’t have to, because I understand their true motivation, but they are. So now we have a lot of Bush Republicans who support Obama. They’re not being intellectually honest about why they voted for him so they are slowly convincing themselves they agree with his positions and defend him against “attacks” when true conservatives question Obama’s character and judgment. The thing is, these people voted for Obama because the REPUBLICAN PARTY AND LEADERSHIP abandoned its principals, morals and true calling to represent their electorate; not lobbyists, special interests, etc. And that’s OK! If you want to vote against McCain and Republicans because of that, GO FOR IT! Don’t do it and then say you adopt the ideals of socialism!!

So is there a shining light? Maybe. It depends on what Obama is going to be able to accomplish in his first four years as president. It will be a lot, but will it change the fabric of American freedom to the extent that it’s irreversible? No one knows. Will these Bush Republicans continue to subscribe to the principals that is Barack Obama’s presidency? No one knows. Can the Republican Party generate a charismatic candidate of their own who can energize, lead and represent with moxie and prowess? Would they be willing to risk a candidate like that against a successful President Obama?  No one knows.

In this election, issues were a non-issue. In this election, the light of conservatism dimmed just a little bit. In this election, the American people spoke out against the over-extending Republican party. In this election, The Shining Light On The Hill looked a little smaller, and farther off in the distance than it did just two weeks ago.

Hang tight my friends. Hang tight. My wife and I just found out we’re going to bring another life into this world, and I have faith that my child will continue to live in the greatest country this world has ever seen. The road is going to be bumpy, the days hot and the nights cold. But this is still the greatest country in the history of man-kind, and that cannot be forgotten, no matter who this country elects to represent us. We still live in a democratic republic and this country can still change no matter what harm a president, house or senate can inflict upon us.

My Take On The Polls

According to the latest Battle Ground Poll, a joint polling effort by Republican and Democrat pollsters, the race is a statistical dead heat as of today. Go to http://www.tarrance.com/bg.cfm to read about it or to http://www.tarrance.com/files/2-way-ballot-trender-10-21.pdf for the actual graph.

A lot of polls by CNN, Gallup, etc, have very weird “weighing” measures when they calculate these polls. What that means is, they take the results that they’re given when they poll people, weigh them against past polls/elections and come up with a number. When you see a poll, it’s not 100% true that 51% of the people said they would vote for Obama, it means that they take their sampling and compare it to results in the past to getter a better idea as to what the national average might be.

Also, polling samples as of late have been shown to not be very objective. I heard about one poll by a major polling firm sample some 600+ registered Democrats and only some 300+ registered Republicans. Obviously, you don’t get a fair and objective sampling with those types of numbers.

Polls are very convoluted, very skewed and not always accurate. Actually, in the past two Presidential elections, polling and exit-polling have been shown to be completely inaccurate. According to RealClearPolitics.com, Obama has a +7.6 Average lead over McCain. Taking away all the weighing and sampling errors (if you want to call it that), I think the race is a lot closer to the Battle Ground Poll I first mentioned. A little light at the end of the tunnel for you kids.

I still think you have a better chance at winning the lottery than McCain becoming president, but we’ll hope for change in the coming two weeks (like how I used Obama’s mantra’s against him?).

Update: Here’s an AP-GfK Poll which has Obama at 44% and McCain at 43%. That light is getting brighter!

Update 2: It’s also worth noting, this poll was conducted with not only land line telephone users, but also cell phone users. It’s the first poll that I know of to have that far of an outreach. The media constantly says that Democrats are underrepresented in polls because younger people who don’t have landlines aren’t represented. This poll shows the exact opposite is happening.

Could this poll also show that the Bradley Affect is also coming to fruition? Maybe not, but it certainly seems as if the tides, at least temporarily, are changing.

Now I Reel ‘Em In!

I went this morning and cast my ballot for John McCain and Sarah Palin. I love being a great American!

Oops!

Well, I sort of stopped writing, but it’s only because I’m INSANELY busy. In California this week, then will be in California for two weeks starting October 26 for business, so don’t expect a lot out of here. In the mean time, check out the links section and read those blogs. Remember, socialism sucks. PEACE OUT CRACKA’S!

This Sustainability Study Can Sustainably Kiss My Arse

Why I’m a proud Nashvillian:

Nashville ranked 40th out of 50 large cities in its efforts to promote environmental sustainability, according to a survey released on Monday.

Sustainlane.com ranked the cities on air quality, street congestion, metro transit ridership and other factors.

Nashville ranked 47th in the commuting category, which looked at what portion of the population walked, biked, or used some other method other than a car to get to work.

The city ranked 46th for its “green economy”; 44th in transit ridership and 43rd in water quality.

The city’s top ranking of 3rd came in traffic congestion.

Screw the environment, I say.

Mad World

The following is the transcript of a Glenn Beck interview with David Freddoso, the author of the book “The Case Against Barack Obama”. This interview centers around the stance that Senator Barack Obama, current Democratic Presidential Candidate, takes on Infanticide. It’s mindnumbing to say the least, that there are people in this world who have the extreme views that Barack Obama has. This man stands in front of large crowds with teleprompters and his snarky and condescending attitude every day, while he’s directly responsible for the death and torture of babies who were the victims of botched abortions.

To sum the transcript up before you read it, Barack Obama wants BABIES, who happen to survive a botched abortion, to be thrown into a utility closet to suffer and die instead of receiving medical attention and the chance to live. Born children, living and breathing souls. Left to die in a medical utility closet. Hearts pumping, but left to die, because of Barack Obama. Is this pretentious, smug-looking celebrity candidate the person you want leading our country? I pray not.

GLENN: We have David Freddoso on. He is the author of a book, The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate. He is a reporter for the National Review Online. WGN in Chicago getting heat for having him on. The Obama campaign does not want this man on. There’s another guest that they had on that they also went through the roof and just did everything they could to scare WGN into not having these guests on. Why? What is it that the Obama campaign doesn’t want? They say smears. David Freddoso is somebody that, believe me, I have had on my program and on my program, to get it on CNN, it better be right. If you’re a conservative, it better be right. David Freddoso is somebody that we have checked out ourself to make sure what he’s saying is right, and let’s go to the abortion thing. I played the ad. It’s a 527 now against Barack Obama that says please, Barack Obama, please don’t allow babies to die from botched abortions. That’s a pretty outrageous claim.

David, where does that claim come from? What is this story?

FREDDOSO: Well, this is the story of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and it goes back to a hospital in the southwest suburbs of Chicago called Christ Hospital where they were performing on a regular basis induced labor abortions and these are late second, early third trimester abortions in which the drugs are given to the mother to induce violent labor and the baby is usually killed in the contractions and comes out. But about 15 to 20% of the time this produces aa live baby is born, I should say. And sometimes the babies will live just for a few minutes, sometimes for several hours. But this hospital was not giving any thought to medical treatment for them when they survived and could have potentially lived on and saved in incubator under whatever sort of medical technology we have to keep premature babies alive. They were simply shelving them and

GLENN: Hang on just a second. I just, I don’t care how you feel about abortion. If you think abortion is a right, you know, a woman’s right to choose, et cetera, et cetera, fine. I disagree with you. We’re going now to a step of partial birth abortion. Now people are not for partial birth abortion. The vast majority of people. They are pro choice but they are saying you can’t take the baby and have them birthed all the way except for the head and then suck the brains out while the head is still in the mother. That is a that is a step way beyond. And Republicans and Democrats agree on that. This is something further than that. This is a baby that survives an abortion and is living outside of the mother, is now just neglected and dies from neglect. Right or wrong, David?

FREDDOSO: This is what yeah, that is exactly what was happening and, in fact, that fact isn’t even in dispute. What is in dispute is exactly what condition that they were being left to die in. According to the nurse, Jill Stanek whom I interviewed for the kids against Barack Obama, they were one of the places they would put these babies to die while they were struggling is the utility closet where medical waste goes. According to the hospital they were putting them into comfort rooms where they would just simply leave them to die with a blanket or something. So that was the practice. And the attorney general of Illinois told Jill Stanek, this nurse, that this was not violating the law, that they couldn’t do anything about it and, you know, all protestations to the contrary, there wasn’t any law protecting these babies because the attorney general of Illinois wasn’t you know, he absolutely said, you know, no, you would need a new law if you wanted to do this.

GLENN: David, why couldn’t you, why couldn’t the doctor just kill the baby once the baby was born?

FREDDOSO: Well, I mean, I would say that’s murder. I mean, I’m also pro life.

GLENN: Got it. No, I’m not talking about your opinion. I’m talking about the law. It would indeed be murder if they would have killed the baby once the baby was born.

FREDDOSO: Well, of course, and even this practice itself strikes me as murder because you don’t actually have to stab someone through the heart to commit murder.

GLENN: I understand that.

FREDDOSO: You can certainly leave them, there’s such a thing as negligent homicide as well. But in any case, there wasn’t a law protecting them and that was what they went to the Illinois legislature to do was to pass a law that would define anyone who is already born and alive as a person. And that would have made the laws of the State of Illinois apply to these premature babies.

GLENN: How did Barack Obama stop it?

FREDDOSO: Barack Obama was the only state senator to speak against this law and

GLENN: Sorry. Repeat that, please.

FREDDOSO: He was the only state senator to speak against this law on the floor of the Illinois Senate.

GLENN: Okay.

FREDDOSO: In all the times it came up, in fact, he was the only one to speak against it. And his speech that he gave is very interesting, and I’ve given it in full in Chapter 10 of The Case Against Barack Obama because the argument is basically this, that if we go and recognize premature babies born alive in what some people call a previable condition, although they were clearly living for a while, if we do this, then it might down the road affect the right to abortion. It might cause it might create some kind of

GLENN: Slippery slope that they always say doesn’t exist.

FREDDOSO: I’m sorry?

GLENN: A slippery slope that liberals always say doesn’t exist.

FREDDOSO: Exactly.

GLENN: He was using that argument.

FREDDOSO: And that was his argument was essentially a slippery slope argument. His argument on the floor, it had a few contradictions in it, didn’t quite make sense. I mean, he used the word “Fetus” to describe a premature baby for a moment and then corrected himself.

GLENN: All right.

FREDDOSO: But, you know, by his argument you could also say that a premature baby who wasn’t born in an abortion, who was just simply born premature. I have a friend who recently gave birth to a premature baby and by his argument you would have to question or deny their personhood as well, as though they are somehow less persons than babies carried nine months.

GLENN: So the first time did he sign the bill?

FREDDOSO: The first time he voted present on the bill, which is in the Illinois legislature is equivalent to no. And it was part of a strategy that he had devised with Planned Parenthood lobbyists.

GLENN: Stand by. Stand by. We’re going to come get the rest of the story in just a second.

(OUT 11:42)

GLENN: I can tell you why Barack Obama did not want David Freddoso on WGN, because these are the most powerful arguments I have ever heard against Barack Obama. Well stated, well documented and so unbelievably damning. David, we are quickly running out of time. May I invite you for another hour tomorrow?

FREDDOSO: I would love to do it again tomorrow, absolutely.

GLENN: Okay. So let’s finish the abortion story, please.

FREDDOSO: Yes. Senator Obama voted he voted present on that bill. It was part of a strategy that he devised, that he and some Planned Parenthood lobbyists had devised that basically everyone would vote present instead of voting no. And just to you know, it came up the following year; he did it again. The bill, by the way, it passed the state senate and died in the state house committee. In 2003, though, Democrats had taken over the state senate and Obama was now the chairman of the Senate health committee. And as chairman he presided as they made the reason that Obama has ever since said he voted against this bill in committee is that it didn’t contain the same language that the federal board of live infants protection act contained. Sort of redundant protection against this law ever effecting the right to abortion. What he didn’t realize, didn’t or was misleading people about is that, in fact, in 2003 the bill that he voted against in his committee did contain that language, was exactly the same as the bill that had gone to the U.S. Senate floor, that Barbara Boxer had stood up and said, “I support this bill, everyone should vote for this bill.” Obama voted against it and that puts him on the very fringes when it comes to issues of human life at its very beginning.

GLENN: So wait a minute. He is Barbara Boxer was on the other side of this issue?

FREDDOSO: Yes, that’s right. Hillary Clinton was also on the other side. The vote was 98 0 and the two guys who weren’t there to vote were pro life Republicans. So basically every abortion proponent in the United States Senate is more protective of human life in its early stages than Senator Obama.

GLENN: Say that again, please.

FREDDOSO: Every single abortion proponent in the United States Senate at the time they voted on this the roll call vote was in 2001 every single one is more protective of human life in its early stages and more respectful of human life in its early stages than is Senator Obama based on his voting record.

GLENN: Now, Barack Obama will say, no, that’s not true, I wasn’t I was of course for this. He seems to have an ever evolving but he does believe in evolution an ever evolving story on this.

FREDDOSO: Yes. Because at first his story for the next three years or actually four years was that it didn’t contain the language if it had just contained the federal bill language, then he would have voted for it. In fact, it did contain that language and he voted against it. This year when National Right to Life found the records this is just a few weeks ago, found the records of the committee hearing and they found the bill was exactly the same and Obama voted against it in a party line vote in his committee, changed his explanation to say now the thing was there was already a law protecting these babies. And there is an old abortion statute on the books in Illinois and it’s a bill that Obama has repeatedly argued that every element of it is unconstitutional. It was enjoined from in most of its aspects it was enjoined from enforcement precisely because of the Roe versus Wade decision. And the decision they clinged it to last as each part of it is being knocked down is a provision that would require a second doctor to be present when such an abortion is performed in order to save the baby that the first doctor is trying to kill. And that’s something Obama has specifically argued is unconstitutional because it creates an undue burden on the woman and so that is basically, Senator Obama is grasping at straws when it comes to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. He’s making arguments now that don’t make sense and arguments, by the way, that he was never making at the time when he voted against it.

GLENN: I would just like to point out to anybody who doesn’t understand the rhetoric of politicians, I’m a recovering alcoholic. So I speak bullcrap for most of my life. So I speak it fluently. I can translate political speak into English. When anybody says that they are worried about that they want the condition of the mother’s health, let’s make sure that we have an exception for the mother’s health, there has never once been a case where a doctor says, in the case of let’s say partial birth abortion or where they are performing the abortion late term and they would birth the child, that it is better for the mother if they kill the baby. What they’re talking about, there have been cases on mental health, yet her mental health matters if she has the baby, but they deny any kind of mental health stress if she has had the abortion. It doesn’t make any sense. It is a game that they play. You cannot tell me that mainstream America you know, I’m not even going to say that. You cannot tell me that 98% of America, pro choice, pro life believe that we should leave a baby to die through neglect. There is no way to make the mental hurdles in your own head to say that this child should die from neglect, this fetus should die from neglect. There is no person within the sound of my voice of 98% of the population of this country that thinks that that is reasonable. This is the kind of guy that you have to understand you’re dealing with. He’s not somebody who’s kind of on the left. He’s not somebody who’s kind of out of pace with the mainstream. This guy is as far left as you can get and this is just one example.

David, on tomorrow’s program can you give us more examples of how incredibly out of step with the mainstream he is?

FREDDOSO: Oh, absolutely. Just about every issue you can find Obama taking stands during his career that are, you know, whether it’s guns, babies, taxes and national security as well, stances that members of his own party think are completely wrong. He is the most liberal senator in the United States Senate for a reason, and I’m not the one saying it. That’s National Journal, which is a highly respected $2,000 a year publication here in Washington.

GLENN: Tomorrow, tomorrow I would like to go a little bit into and I don’t even know if you did this, David, but his mom, he always is saying “My mom from Kansas, my mom from Kansas, my mom.” It’s like I see Auntie Em every time he says “My mom from Kansas.” His mom from Kansas was leftist as well. He’s not coming from a background of people that are Auntie Em and, oh, quick, get into the root cellar. There is the roots of Barack Obama are from the left. Tomorrow can you go into a little bit of “Show me your friends and I’ll show you your future” and just give me the absolutely best well documented cases that this guy’s judgment on friends, if you take him at his word that, “Well, these guys aren’t the people we know; well, I can’t really answer for my friends or my family or whatever,” that his judgment is off.

FREDDOSO: Oh, absolutely.

GLENN: And I don’t believe it’s his judgment. I believe he is choosing to surround himself with these people.

FREDDOSO: Well, right. And that’s just the thing. You know, I have spoken with many people about this question of guilt by association. This isn’t about guilt by association. This is about looking at the actual choices that Barack Obama has made in his life. And that’s the best sort of gauge we can have. And if you give it the most charitable interpretation and we look at some of these relationships and that’s the only conclusion you can come to is that his judgment in picking friends is rather suspect.

GLENN: Name of the book is The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate . The author is David Freddoso. He will join us again tomorrow and all of this will be available online at GlennBeck.com soon.

Is this the kind of Hope and Change you were thinking about voting for?