An Open Letter to Those Hating Leftists

The following is an example of how you can take the prose of a devote leftist and turn it around on them without much effort.  Why?  Because nothing they believe is rooted in truth or evidence - just feelings, emotions, and assumptions.

My inspiration, this article found on the Daily Kos website - A open letter to people who hate Obama more than the love America.

My response...

I don't meet you all the time, because you exist on the extreme fringes of society.  You say you are a part of the 99%, but you're not.  You are a part of the 1% who hate just about everything that made America great, except the right to write such hate-filled 'letters'. 

You hate Christians.  I'd say you hate religious people but, based on your letter, you love Muslim-based Sharia law which does more to control women than taking away their 'right' to kill the unborn ever could.  Nevermind the Judeo-Christian based society of America where people of all faiths worship freely (that pesky 2nd half of the Church-State phrase from the Constitution the left forgets), or not, if they choose.

You love gays, though only publicly.  Privately you hate them, or at least find their lifestyle incompatible with your own.  You joke about them behind their backs yet pretentiously embrace them (no pun intended) when they are near.  And if you think Christians hate gays, have you ever asked a middle-eastern radical Muslim what they think?

You hate blacks.  Yes, I said it, and it's very, very, true.  See, you believe blacks can't succeed; they need an all-controlling government to support them because somehow capitalism has held them down.  I say nonsense.  People are exactly where they want to be.  If you truly want to be financially successful, nothing will keep you from achieving your dreams, except you.

Ask Herman Cain how he became so successful.  Wait, nope, you won't.  You assume he's some sort of an outlier.  He's someone who must have achieved his success by accident.  So ask Clarence Thomas.  Wait, nope, you won't.  You assume he's just an Uncle Tom. He's simply going along with the white man and giving him what he wants. 

The fact is you hate anyone, like Thomas and Cain, who espouse conservative thinking over a  socialistic nirvana.  It doesn't matter if other lesser known African-Americans like Thomas Sowell or Walter E. Williams have completely different views about race, capitalism, and conservatism in America, you won't listen to them because you hate them.

Conservatives, on the other hand, know success can be achieved regardless as to one's pigmentation.  We don't buy governmental redistribution of wealth for African-Americans to succeed and we have tons of evidence to support this.  While you claim compassion is found when the government gives stuff away, we believe true compassion is measured by the number of people who no longer need socialistic handouts.

You act like you hate war, but you don't.  You simply hate when America wins them with a conservative at the helm.  You probably supported Obama's actions to continue the hated George W. Bush's policies (and interrogation techniques) in the middle east and didn't object when President Obama sorta got involved in Lybia and almost helped the "freedom-fighting" Egyptians.

You hate bigots you say, while showing that you are in fact, by definition, a bigot yourself.  After all, anyone (!) who is intolerantly devoted to their opinion is, by definition, a bigot.  This includes refusing to see, understand or listen to conservative views, not simply following the narrow dogma of the left.

You hate capitalism because it doesn't allow your lazy rear end to remain as such - otherwise you die. It forces you to put down the joint and get to work. It rewards hard-work and sacrifice and has little patience for emotional responses to problems.

You hate Wall Street, mostly because you haven't the education to understand how capitalism works. You can thank your compassionate education system for your lack of knowledge.  You won't, because your leftist-teachers made you feel good about your ignorance.

Now my liberal friends, no matter what you have convinced yourself of, I don't hate you.  There are very real reasons, full of true compassion, why I believe what I do.   None of those reasons have you taken more than two seconds to understand fully, because if Bill Maher and George Carlin hated it, you were probably foolish enough to hate it too.

Open your mind, young skulls full of mush (a Rush-ism), to all thinking.  If you are truly the open-minded liberals you profess to be, then open it to understand the conservative perspective.

You won't of course, because the ignorant don't know what they are missing.   And ignorance, is bliss.

How Santorum Can Win

Courtesy RickSantorum.com

Nothing would tweak the left more than a true social conservative, the hated Rick Santorum, becoming the GOP's choice for President in 2012.  I know, I'm going way out on a limb here.

No individual is more consistently against the agenda the radical-left holds most dear - abortion on demand with no conditions, sexual exhibition free and preach-able, destruction of the traditional family unit, weakening of US military policy - than Santorum.

The left's attack on him will be relentless, but predictable.  Nevermind the state of the US economy, the massive accumulated debt under Obama's guidance, relationships between the White House and those who've sworn to destroy our economic system, or Iran's apparent new-found comfort with saber-rattling. 

No, those issues won't matter.  To the radical left, forcing acceptance of alternative lifestyles, protecting the 'right' to kill innocence, and the horror of a religious man in the Oval Office will be the problem.  Record money will be spent attempting to scare people - women mainly - about a Santorum presidency and a religious state. Claims - oh by the way - made against every GOP candidate since Roe v Wade.

Some in the DC media loop will insist such a conservative can not win.  Really?  Let's examine the theory.

Assumption:  Moderates will be scared off by Santorum's conservative views
The problem with this thinking is reality.  People vote with their pocketbook first.  When people can't afford groceries, gas, and the mortgage, someone or something has to change.  Further, Reagan and George W. Bush were both cast as extreme conservatives.  Yet they both won, twice.

Assumption:  Santorum is a one-issue candidate
With eight (8) years on the Senate Armed Services Committee, no one can make that claim with a straight face.  Santorum has proven, with his record and in each of the debates so far, he has a firm grasp on Middle East policy and our critical relationship with Israel.

This thinking also  assumes that Obama can duck his one issue - the failing US economy.  Add cozy relationships with the growing list of Obama's supporters who received stimulus funds, only to mysteriously go belly-up, and Santorum has a lot to discuss beyond one issue.

Assumption:  Santorum lost Pennsylvania in 2006, he can't win now
Problem is, this isn't 2006.  Bush is not the face of the party anymore, and the Specter/Toomey debacle that convinced many Pennsylvania republicans to stay home in 2006, is long over.  The issue was played out and won't be held against him again.  He will win Pennsylvania, if he is the nominee. (side note - Lincoln also lost his Senate seat before going on to win the Presidency)

So okay, he can overcome some of the obstacles the DC crowd says he has against him.  But how can he defeat the Obama war chest, the unions, and assistance from the big-four media?

Santorum is less-likely to make a major verbal policy gaff.  He may upset the left with his views on social issues, but he is who he is and he is consistent.  There will be few times when he says something unexpected or shocking.  He is solid on every issue and well-educated about their historical significance.

Besides, the media will bash whoever the GOP candidate is, just ask the 'moderate' John McCain.  Romney, the GOP-elite's choice, will be attacked exactly the way Santorum will.  Mitt's moderate views won't buy him any less critique.

Unlike Romney, Santorum doesn't come off as plastic or pre-programmed.  Unlike Newt, he doesn't try to be everything to everyone.  Unlike Paul, he's not a foreign policy flake.  Unlike Bachmann and Perry, he is solid with his views and can convey them convincingly.  Unlike Huntsman, he has presence and strong resolve.  Unlike McCain and Bush, you won't be holding your breath every time he speaks.

Sure, Santorum is not the perfect candidate.  He's not the orator Reagan was, inspiring a movement toward the shining city on the hill.  His cockiness needs to become more tempered; less know-it-all, more charmed and optimistic.

Santorum has flaws (debt-ceiling to begin with), but he is the best choice for socially and fiscally conservative voters.  Ultimately the House and Senate is where debt-ceiling control can be best attained.

Santorum has worked this Iowa caucus the way it should be - by keeping it real, keeping it local.  If it pays off with a top three finish on Tuesday, as the pundits predict, it will be well deserved. 

Huntsman is the only one of those remaining we know will be around for New Hampshire. Which leaves Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry supporters with a choice.  If their candidate bags the campaign trail where do they throw their support?  Romney?  I doubt it.  Mitt has 22-25% and can't seem to break that number no matter how hard he tries.  Paul?  C'mon Man!  Ron Paul's support will not sustain long-term. Even the Congressman admits he's a long-shot. 

Newt and Michele's support will go to Santorum, Perry's may go to Romney.  Santorum will continue to rise as Paul's supporters look for a home and the race should ultimately boil down to him and Romney.

As we hit the heart of primary season, Santorum will have shown an ability to effectively attack Romney, especially on Romneycare.  He has depth on virtually every issue, and Santorum gives the anyone-but-Romney crowd someone they can feel confident in.  Head to head, Rick beats Mitt.

If the GOP elites start to attack Santorum, he could stand to benefit.  And here's where the Tea Party could make a huge difference - uniting behind one candidate the inept, ineffective, and to-date spineless GOP leadership hasn't chosen.

In November, Santorum will have the religious right (duh!); he will have the Tea Party; he will have the independents (it's the economy stupid); he will have the 'moderate' Republicans (as much as they will hate it); and he will have average voters who have seen 'Hope and Change' and don't like the view.

Can Santorum win?  I certainly think so.

Sadly, Shapiro Hasn't Learned a Thing

A new television ad by the Josh Shapiro/Leslie Richards campaign is taking an old yet familiar tone and, sadly, indicates a pattern of sophomoric behavior by the Montgomery County Democrats which they feel will score points with voters marginally paying attention.

In their latest ad, the Democratic Party duo falsely claim one of the GOP candidates met with the Tea Party. False not because it didn't happen, it did. But rather because they claim she was the only one to do so.

Problem - Shapiro met with the Tea Party too, at his request, last Fall when he was a candidate for State Representative. I know this because I facilitated the forum and invited both candidates (Shapiro and Tom Bogar) to attend. And both of them did.

Perhaps more disturbing however, is the tone the Shapiro/Richards ad takes toward those of us related to the Tea Party. It suggests there is something wrong with citizens standing up to the ruling class of both parties or any one candidate listening to the concerns of regular folks.

This isn't the first time...

- Last spring, at the annual Abington Rockledge Democratic Committee luncheon, current Montgomery County Commissioner and former Gubernatorial Candidate, Joe Hoeffel, called those of us in the movement "lunatics, wackos".  (Video here: 2:40 mark)

- Earlier this year, ARDC Chairman Michael Barbiero referred to me, on this website, as "leader of the local teabaggers", a vulgar reference Mr. Barbiero has yet to back away from or apologize for.

In Hoeffel's case it was no slip of the tongue. His speech was specifically geared at how the Democrat left can defeat the Tea Party. He stated clearly, to beat the Tea Party you must call them names, you must ridicule and mock them. 

So, it's no accident Shapiro is taking the same path - it's very intentional.

The group I represent, Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots - Eastern Montco, will not endorse or officially support any one candidate. However, individual members are free to support whomever they choose.

So you won't see our group openly supporting Shapiro's opposition. Still, he seems perfectly comfortable taking pot shots at us, falsely, to win a few votes.


Sadly, Shapiro and the Democrats just can't seem to learn the lesson from of the 2010 election. We are not astroturf, not to be taken lightly, and refuse to allow the ruling class to get away with their attempts to paint us - not them - as the problem.

Continue to name-call and mock if you must. You only strengthen our resolve.

'Cause I'm The Tax Man

The following is from an email I received.  If you think, like the President, we're not paying our fair share of taxes, then let's examine the claim...


Tax his land, tax his bed, tax the table at which he's fed.

Tax his tractor, tax his mule, teach him taxes are the rule.

Tax his work, tax his pay, He works for peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow, tax his goat, tax his pants, tax his coat.

Tax his ties, tax his shirt, tax his work, tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco, tax his drink, tax him if he tries to think.

Tax his cigars, tax his beers, if he cries tax his tears.

Tax his car, tax his gas, find other ways to tax his ass.

Tax all he has, then let him know, that you won't be done 'till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers, then tax him some more, tax him 'till He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin, tax his grave, tax the sod in which he's laid...

Put these words upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom...'

When he's gone, do not relax,its time to apply the inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom could afford to stay home and raise the kids.

Tea Party's Next Battle - Philadelphia

...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government... - The Declaration of Independence

Philadelphia - In the city where Liberty was given birth, a new movement is underway intended to shake the foundation of a corrupt government machine and, if successful, could become one of Philadelphia's most significant political moments in its history.

Courtesy WeThePeoplePhila.com 

Over the past several months a previously little-known public employee retirement perk called DROP  (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) has been getting a bit of media attention and the politicians who support it - stalwart Philadelphia names like Rizzo, Meehan, and Tartaglione - are fighting for their political lives, and losing badly in the sphere of public opinion.

Now, voter anger has boiled over, and a bi-partisan effort is underway to establish a government study commission - the vehicle by which Pennsylvania Law allows citizens to regain control of their muncipality - by getting the concept on November's ballot.

The commission would comprise of ordinary citizens (no current or former elected officials) and their anticipated goal is to audit the City's operations and eventually rewrite the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter. To do this, supporters of this concept are canvassing neighborhoods throughout the City gathering signatures for petitions, required for such a measure to take place.

Leading the way are a handful of activist groups - Philadelphia Tea Party Patriots, Philadelphia's Loyal Opposition, Reform Democrats, and members of the Black Clergy.

Combined, the group calls itself We the People of Philadelphia Committee and their website is full of evidence detailing where the City's leaders have failed those they are elected to serve, solutions and recommendations for the new Home Rule Charter, and legal justification for the movement.

The last time Philadelphia modified its Charter (think constitutional convention) was in 1951, and was intended at the time to rid the City of corruption by a then Republican-led dynasty who had controlled Philly for 70 years. Since then, the Democratic Party has ruled and the existing charter has done little to stem the tide of corruption running rampant through City Hall and beyond.

I anticipate great resistance from the Philadelphia ruling class, the media elite, and union leadership on this one - shocking, I know. They'll mock, organize against the effort, and do whatever it takes to keep what, they feel, is theirs.

It's no surprise to hear a bold, daring, and aggressive fight against the powerful and corrupt ruling class would take place in Philadelphia and it's the Tea Party leading the way, again.

This should get real interesting - it is Philly after all.

Compromising Debt-Ceiling Facts

Big Lie Number Two was the 2nd of a Tea Party Patriots 4-part series of debt-ceiling-related statements. It shows, before President Obama made such a claim, the fallacy of statements about the US defaulting on debts if Congress doesn't raise the ceiling.

Fact: not raising the debt-ceiling will NOT cause the US to default on its promises. The IRS collects 10 times the amount it owes to service its debt - specifically US Treasury bonds - every month.

Refusal to do so (paying off cashed-in bonds) would in fact cause a financial crisis the globe has yet to see. But insisting to twist facts for political gain, Mr. President and those who blindly re-chirp your claims, is irresponsible at best.

Refusing the raise the debt-ceiling is like a parent informing their child the credit card they've been privileged to use is being capped to a limit or in this case, being revoked. It does NOT mean they will no longer be able to pay the mortgage.

The President decides which bills get paid and when revenue streams are anemic, something has to give. Defaulting on promises to pay certain bills (bonds) have a different impact than paying others - like, I dunno, let's say Obamacare. 

So yes, if the President stopped paying our debt, we'd be in a heap of trouble. But that would be his choice, not Republicans.  And if Obama chose not to pay Social Security, or Medicare/Medicaid, or any other entitlement program, that would also be his choice, not the Tea Party.

We are in this financial crisis because Democrats DID NOT pass a budget in 2010 (they knew the political impact) and yet they still promised, with the Nation's credit card (stimulus, et al) the adults are taking away, much more than they could afford.

The adults in the room realize government has over-promised goodies for their political special interests. Meanwhile, the children are jumping up and down, whining about a lack of "compromise" from the Tea-Party-led-by-their-nose-hairs-GOP and their false claims of defaulting on our debt are a clear indication of their desperation.

Oooooo, sorry, wrong answer. The kids will not get what they want. There is no more room for compromise.

'On the Origins' of Civil Society

Evolution, it's the left's favorite progressive concept.

You've seen the cute little car emblems, like the one I've captioned in this post.  It's a not-so-subtle tip of the hat to the left's great prophet, Charles Darwin.  Darwin's "On the Origins of Man" is their Bible.

They assume it identifies them as enlightened; smarter than the rest of us because they have science on their side.  It solidifies there disdain for anything related to religion. 

The emblem says it all; man evolved from fish, not created magically by a God (you stupid religious neanderthal, an inferred reference).

But when societal evolution takes place, when tried and true methods of a civil society are proven to be the ideal, the left turns its head on natural progression and advancement.

Fact - the United States is the most successful advancement of Humankind in history.

Fact - the United States was the first country to have its Constitutional core based on the ability of man to determine his (or her) own destiny by acknowledging Rights come from Nature's God, not government, not from a King.

Fact - societal evolution has proven the ideal family unit is, and has always been, comprised of one Man and one Woman, united in marriage.

The final fact is where the left's natural evolutionist tendencies take a vacation. 

While they know most people still, and will always, see alternative lifestyles as an unacceptable norm to a strong society, they insist on mandating we honor same-sex partnerships the same way we do traditional marriage.

But why?  Who cares?  Perhaps I missed the wave of people being taken to the gallows because of their affection for a person with the same sexual appetite as them. Right, there haven't been. So what's their real agenda here?  If it's just about two people loving each other, who cares if society accepts the relationship, right?

Simple, it's all about money and respect.  It's about tax breaks.  It's about acceptance; they and their sympathizers demand respect (you religious neanderthal)!

But I've learned in my years, respect is not something one can demand; it's something one must command.  Without pressure, or childish ranting/protesting, respect comes naturally. 

Evolution can't change the natural order of things here.  Neither can those who want the government to force rights on us that God, and a civil society, haven't already given.

Rest in Peace, Mr. Columbo, Sir

According to CNN, actor Peter Falk has died. To honor his career, page13news would like to re-publish a post from our archives, originally posted during the 2008 Hope and Change campaign.

Let's see how many of these items Mr. Columbo received an answer for.

from an emailer...

Excuse me Mr. Obama, I mean Senator Obama,
Sir. Um . . . I know you're busy,
and important and stuff.
I mean running for president is very important
and -- ah -- I hate to bother you Sir.
I will only take a minute. Ok Sir?

See, I have these missing pieces that are
holding me up, and I was wondering
Sir, if you could take time out of your
busy schedule and help me out.
You know, no big deal, just some loose ends and things.

Hey, you have a nice place here!
The wife sees houses like this on TV
all the time and says boy she wishes
she had digs like this you know?
Is that painting real? Really? Wow.
I saw something like that in a museum once!

Oh, sorry Sir. I didn't mean to get off the track.
So if you could just help me out a minute
and give me some details, I will get right out of your way.
I want to close this case
and maybe take the wife to Coney Island or something.
Ever been to Coney Island Sir? No?
I didn't think so.

Well, listen, anyway, I can't seem to get
some information I need to wrap this up.
These things seem to either be
"Not released" or "Not available."
I'm sure it's just an oversight
or glitch or something, so if you
could you tell me where these
things are -- I -- I have them written
down here somewhere -- oh wait.
Sorry about the smears. It was raining out.
I'll just read it to you.

Could you please help me
find these things Sir?

1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- "Not available"
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- Not available
8. Your Illinois State Senate records -- Not available
9. Law practice client list -- Not released
10. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate -- Not released
11. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
12. Record of your baptism -- Not available

Oh and one more thing Senator,
I can't seem to find any articles you
published as editor of the Harvard Law Review,
or as a Professor at the University of Chicago.
Can you explain that to me Sir?

Oh but, hey -- listen! I know you're busy!
If this is too much for you right now
-- I mean -- tell you what. I'll come back tomorrow.
Give you some time to get these things together,
You know? I mean, I know you're busy.
I'll just let myself out. I'll be back tomorrow.
And the day after. . .

What's that Senator?
Who wants to know these things?

We the People of the United States of America!
You know, the ones that vote.

So if we're counting, just two of twelve. One of them, not until Donald Trump made some hay over the issue earlier this year.

Uh, Mr. President, Sir, if you're not too busy...