Why Arlen? Arlen is the TV home of "King of the Hill." It's a small conservative town that is threatened with ruination on a regular basis by twig boys, enviro wackos, diversity nuts, "PC" police and other ivory tower liberals. I like to think of Arlen as a metaphor for this here great nation of ours. |
Monday, January 19, 2004
Posted
10:47 AM
by Hank
THE BUSH CONSPIRACY THEORY GENERATOR Interestingly enough, some of the "random" conspiracies I generated sound all too similar to what you can read every day at "Democratic Underground" and the like. Thursday, January 15, 2004
Posted
6:16 AM
by Hank
Since Dean, like Clinton, is not a Republican, expect this revelation to have no effect whatsoever on his probable receipt of the NOW/Feminazi endorsement if he wins the nomination.
Saturday, January 10, 2004
Posted
7:53 AM
by Hank
The residents of Ithaca, New York, the most liberal city in America (and, therefore, the City of Evil) are starting to line up behind the various democrat candidates for President. Today's Ithaca Journal has an article about their efforts, and this telling quote from one of the local democrats that perfectly, but unintentionally, reveals their true motivation and mindset in this election: "I have been involved in presidential politics since 1948 [and] I can't remember one where there was a stronger feeling among Democratic voters that the primary important accomplishment was to beat Bush." That he can't remember one where there was a stronger desire "to beat Bush" is hardly surprising. After all, this is only the second election in U.S. history where there was an incumbant named "President Bush" to beat (the first, of course, being 1992). But the more you think about it, the more you realize that this is not simply a slip of a tongue from an aging hippie. Stein is a physics professor at Cornell University and, therefore, someone whom you would expect to speak clearly and accurately. So why did Stein mispeak so? Here's what I think: the entire article demonstrates that the primary goal here is not simply to elect a candidate to advance the beliefs of the Democrat Party; it's to "beat" a man they hate. In fact, they hate him so much, it clouds their ability to speak clearly. They are so obsessed with destroying this President that they subconsciously think of every election for more than fifty years in terms of that goal. It will be interesting, over the next year, to see where this hatred takes them. One suspects no where (except maybe to Ithaca). Sunday, January 04, 2004
Posted
6:48 PM
by Hank
As Howard Dean appears closer and closer to locking up the Democrat nomination for President, an increasing number of people are starting to question his fiscal policies, and concluding that Dean would significantly raise taxes on the middle class. This fear is based on an analysis of Dean's proposals by the anti-tax group "the Club for Growth," which argues that the Dean tax proposals would:
Based on their analysis, the Club has began running TV ads on this topic in New Hampshire and Iowa. Dean has reacted as he typically does...with anger. The Club for Growth described Dean as having "howled in protest" over the ad, while the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that "Dean responded with his own ads saying he was falsely attacked by conservatives." Unfortunately, for Dean, it's not just conservatives who are attacking his plan. Dean's fellow democrat, John Kerry has also stated that Dean's plan would raise taxes on the middle class, with candidates, Lieberman, Edwards and Clark expressing similar views. Furthermore, the "nonpartisan, nonprofit, 'consumer advocate'" group FactCheck.Org has weighed on in Dean's proposals, and finds that the Club for Growth is correct: The last time the Democrats nominated a candidate who everyone knew would raise their taxes, it was twenty years ago, and the candidate was Walter Mondale. In fact, Mondale--unlike Dean--admitted that he would raise them....and lost forty-nine out of fifty states to Ronald Reagan. Given recent events in Bush's favor--the economic recovery and the capture of Saddam--and the specter of a tax-hiking Democrat running against a Republican incumbant with strong national security cache, one has to wonder if it isn't going to be 1984 all over again.
|