Buy American, Stimulate the Economy

It was my practice to acknowledge contributors, but since the NSA is collecting our every keystroke and spying on us, I cannot tell you that this funny came from my cousin Sharon in California. Did ya get that NSA?

***************************************************************************************

images-1

Sometime this year, we taxpayers will again receive another ‘EconomicStimulus’ payment.

 This is indeed a very exciting program, and I’ll explain it by using a Q & A format:

 Q. What is an ‘Economic Stimulus’ payment ?

 A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

 Q.. Where will the government get this money ?

 A. From taxpayers.

 Q. So the government is giving me back my own money ?

 A. Only a smidgen of it.

 Q. What is the purpose of this payment ?

 A. The plan is for you to use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

 Q. But isn’t that stimulating the economy of China ?

 A. Shut up.

 Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the U.S. Economy by spending your stimulus check wisely:

 * If you spend the stimulus money at Wal-Mart, the money will go to China or Sri Lanka .

 * If you spend it on gasoline, your money will go to the Arabs.

 * If you purchase a computer, it will go to India , Taiwan or China .

 * If you purchase fruit and vegetables, it will go to Mexico ,Honduras and Guatemala ..

 * If you buy an efficient car, it will go to Japan or Korea .

 * If you purchase useless stuff, it will go to Taiwan .

 * If you pay your credit cards off, or buy stock, it will go to management bonuses and they will hide it offshore.

 Instead, keep the money in America by:

 1) Spending it at yard sales, or

 2) Going to ball games, or

 3) Spending it on prostitutes,

 4) Beer or

 5) Tattoos.

 (These are the only American businesses still operating in the U.S. )

 Conclusion:

Go to a ball game with a tattooed prostitute that you met at a yard sale and drink beer all day !

No need to thank me, I’m just glad I could be of help.

 

Chuckle for the Day

polls_db_p_full_rednecks_1537_734254_answer_3_xlarge
That Ain’t Stanley
Stanley died in a fire and his body was burned pretty badly. The
morgue needed someone to identify the body, so they sent for his
two best deer hunting friends, Cooter and Gomer. The three men
had always hunted and fished together and were long time members
of a hunting camp. They were inseparable.
Cooter arrived first and when the mortician pulled back the sheet,
Cooter said, “Yup, his face is burned up pretty bad. You better roll
him over.”
The mortician rolled him over and Cooter said, “Nope, ain’t Stanley.”
The mortician thought this was rather strange, So he brought Gomer
in to confirm the identity of the body. Gomer looked at the body and
said, “Yup, he’s pretty well burnt up, roll him over. “The mortician
rolled him over and Gomer said, “No, it ain’t Stanley.” The mortician
asked, “How can you tell?” Gomer said, “Well, Stanley had two
ass-holes” “What! He had two ass-holes?” exclaimed the mortician.
“Yup, we never actually seen ’em but everybody used to say, ‘There’s
Stanley with them two ass-holes.'”
Cooter and Gomer are both now employed in the Obama administration
as planning, development, and strategy consultants.

No Explanation Required

image001

image002

image003

image004

image005

image006

An Irrational, but Rational Argument

Photo of a police officer, Boston, USA

Photo of a police officer, Boston, USA (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

During today’s headline review one in particular caught me square between the eyes; “Boston Bomber Memorialized as Gun Victim by Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun Movement.” What? I thought we were only crying over poor little school kids killed by crazies? Since when do we memorialize a radical Islamic terrorist shot and killed  by a very legitimate officer of the law in a state where guns are forbidden. Had this same terrorist been shot in Arizona or Texas, he would have been by a citizen.

What I am about to say will no doubt raise the hairs of all police officers in the  country, let “We the People” keep our guns, but disarm the police. The best facts I could dig up from the notoriously incorrect internet is that in year 2012, police officers  nation-wide shot and killed 587 perps in the line of duty. Had we denied police the right to carry a gun, we would have saved 587 people from an ugly death. Think of all the good those people might have done for society. Compare that to losing twenty-six kids to the bullets of a crazy person. Yes, those twenty-six little angels could have grown up to become the greatest and best people on the face of the earth, but a crazy person chose to memorialize his suicide by killing them. I can argue the same for the 587 killed by police in the line of duty. How will we know if one of the 587 might have straightened out to become the country’s next president?

This analogy is preposterous and far-fetched to make a point, i.e. we can argue senseless deaths until we are blue in the face, and never stop innocent people from being killed by bullets. (Remember all the perps killed by the cops were innocent until proven guilty). Here is a question to consider? If we take away every gun from Americans, will we do the same to the police?  Remember, if we disarm the cops we have to take away the second concealed weapon he carries, and the third he might have in his car too, or else who knows what might happen in the dead of night.

Here are some more ways to look at the argument.

In 2011, there were  32,163 reported gun related deaths caused by “We the People.” In that same year the cops killed 587 with bullets. When I compared the ratio of deaths by the total police officers to the total number of officers employed, the police won. There are 683,396 police employed in the US over a population of 313,900,000 souls. Death by a cop’s gun comes to .08% where deaths by “We the People” is .01%. What this tells me is that we are eight times more likely to die by the gun of a police officer than by the gun of another citizen crazy or not.

A few days ago, our Senate narrowly defeated a bill to pass the United Nations Treaty to ban guns which Obama will purportedly sign. The Progressives hell-bent on destroying the sovereignty of the United States by handing over our Second Amendment to the virtuous United Nations lost by a mere four votes. Thank God there were a few Democrat Senators who still love the country. My own Senator Durbin from Illinois voted for the gun ban treaty. In my eyes he is a traitor. In my eyes, Obama will commit an impeachable offense by signing that treaty, it also makes him a traitor. All that treaty will do is to make America more vulnerable to those trying to destroy us. The treaty violates the Second Amendment . The President took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, which he will violate by signing the treaty. Of course, he realizes he is making a political argument against those opposed to the violation. He knew the treaty would never pass through Congress.

Here are my proposals:

Keep the Constitution

Keep the Bill of Rights, but add one more to:

1. limit the total number  terms a Senator  and Congressman can serve,

2. delegate “We the People” to approve all raises and fringe benefits awarded to the Congress,

3. impose upon all Leaders, including the President, the same health care and pensions as “We the People”,

4. includes Leaders to live under the same laws as “We the People,”

5. hold all Leaders financially, morally, and ethically responsible for laws they passed for the duration of their life,

6. limit the total wealth a Leader can accumulate while serving to that equal to his salary by the number of years he serves.

7. limit Congressional staff to whatever the home State or District appropriates

8. define the term “natural born citizen,” and require proof of same by those running for office

Lose Obama

Lose the Progressives.

CAN I HAVE AN AMEN?

A Conservative We Should All Know

I just read the transcript from the 2013 commencement address to the Hillsdale College graduating class. Ted Cruz gave an eloquent address defending the Constitution, Capitalism, freedom, and the need to defend it.
What impressed me most were Senator Cruz’s background. Before today, I knew only that Cruz was a newly elected Senator from Texas. He graduated from Princeton, and Harvard. His work back ground covers several different experiences from private practice to the Department of Justice. He has presented both written and oral arguments before the Supreme Court.
He speaks respectfully about his father’s immigration from Communist Cuba.
What is it about Cuba that’s les people want to leave there? It couldn’t be because it is a Socialist State led by a dictator, could it? The people of Cuba languish while the ‘One’ lives in regal splendor.
After reading Senator Cruz’ speech and his biographical background, I now understand why the Democrats attack and demonize him daily.
I’m posting this from my phone while being monitored from a satellite and cannot copy his speech into this piece,