2nd Annual throw lefty a curve

So, here we go, this report will probably be broken into parts, but if you were not a reader of my blog when we first did this last year, you can find reports here, here, here, here, here, here, here (come to think of it, this guy wasnt there this year), here, and here.

This year was more of the same. We attempted to pull a permit 2 months ago, but was advised that the moonbats already had one. Turns out they got it on 3/16/07, so they had been planning this for awhile. Word on the street was that they were pissed off about our showing up to ruin their good time last year, so this year they were ready to go all out. And they did!

The General and I went to her office early in the morning to load flags and signs into our vehicles. Admittedly, our planning was poor for this event as we didnt get an email out until a few days prior. Life has a way of getting in the way. We headed over to our meeting point at which had been advertised on KNST and 104.1 freedom radio. Getting there late, we setup and the General went to get breakfast. We ate, had coffee, people showed up and off we went.

Arriving in Sierra Vista we were pleasantly surprised by the closure of the front gates of Ft Huachuca, and I mean it was CLOSED. The military had directed all traffic to the east gate and had barricaded the front gate. Noone was allowed to cross the street. Shortly after our arrival, Sierra Vistas finest showed up. I took the opportunity to go talk to the Lieutenant who I had previously spoke with on the phone. The plan was that since both groups wanted a permit for the same day at the same time, they would compromise and keep us in one area, seperated by a wall of police. I introduced myself and spoke with him and we went over ground rules. We unloaded our vehicles and began setup.

Getting there at this time was members of the Cochise county Republicans, who were on board for this thanks to Gail Griffen and Irv. We got all of our flags setup and were ready to rock and roll, I grabbed the megaphone as the lefties were starting to show up and began my fun with them.

As they walked across the street, I embellished, "Righties to the left and lefties to the right" To explain this, their permitted territory access was to the right, ours was to left, so it was a catchy lil thing to say. The look of surprise on their face was something else. I grabbed another guy and we stood there directing people to their areas, we had a few lefties who argued with us that it was a public sidewalk, I said it was permitted territory, they pushed thru which elicited a response to me call for police to re-direct the misguided souls to their area. After doing this 2 times, I was approached by an officer who let his anger show. He told me that its a public sidewalk and anyone is permitted to use it, that if I continued, I would be the one "Inciting"...I reminded him to speak to the Lt. its permitted territory for today, he said its a public sidewalk, I said its permitted territory, he walked away after I turned my back on him. This is the same guy who got Mike Lucero, a gold star dad, all riled up last year and was goading him into doing something stupid so he can arrest him. After about 10 mins I looked back at the corner, and lo and behold, there he was directing...lefties to the right, righties to the left. I do believe I made my point!

Let me digress here and say that Sierra Vista PD is totally inexperienced with protests and has no clue how to handle them. They were more on top of their game this year, but it still was not handled smoothly by them.

Arriving for the moonbats was a Jeep SUV driven by a sole driver pulling a trailer which was to serve as a stage. They were permitted to pull onto the easement while we had been told not to do that. I wondered aloud via the megaphone, "Why is it that we showed up with our vehicles filled and they were arriving one to 2 per car" My statements fell on deaf ears. As the moonbats swelled in numbers, I began critiquing their signs via the megaphone, "You there, if war is not the answer, what is the question?" All I got was a funny look on that one. I spotted another man with the same sign, so I repeated my question...this time he stopped and rambled something about diplomacy blah blah blah...before I could remind him that Sadaam Hussein was in violation of every UN Security council order, he moved on and my attention was drawn down the street where a large contingent of loonies were moving towards the protest area. I just shook my head and continued the questions, "If the earth is tilted on its axis, why dont we have to shorten the legs on one side of our tables?" Ok, that one was seriously a rhetorical question, but I had wondered about it since elementary school, noone has the answer.

Ok, this will wet your appetite, more later, I need FOOD. Meanwhile, check out a couple of articles from Azstarnet and the Sierra Vista Herald.

Coming up later, motorcycles on parade, lefties invading our territory, and speeches being drowned out.

Dhimmicraps cause more headaches for you...Average Joe

Taken from TCS Daily

HT To MichealSavage.com

A Threat to the Internet

By Rep. John Boehner : BIO| 12 Oct 2007

In our rapidly changing global marketplace, America's entrepreneurs, innovators, and workers are striving to remain competitive, and Republicans in Congress have consistently focused on keeping the Internet free from taxation, cutting taxes so entrepreneurs will have a greater incentive to put more money into growing their businesses, and removing regulatory obstacles to competition. The result has been an improving standard of living, millions of additional private sector jobs, and new products, services, and industries that enrich our lives every day.


Since taking the Majority in the U.S. House, by contrast, Democrats have promoted what they call their "Innovation Agenda." In reality, this agenda amounts to little more than a litany of recycled federal initiatives, proving once again that congressional Democrats believe the ideas which trigger innovation and economic growth come to life in Washington, D.C. and not in the free market.


Curiously missing from the Democrats' Innovation Agenda is a measure to make permanent the ban on Internet taxes. Their deafening silence on the issue is especially noteworthy because the ban - first put in place by a Republican Congress in 1998 - is set to expire in mere weeks, on November 1. Few people would argue with the fact that the Internet is driving economic growth in ways we couldn't have imagined 20 years ago. And, at the same time, few people fail to see its potential for driving new economic growth in the future. In fact, the Internet could be viewed as the "hub" of innovation in the 21st Century; there's simply no telling what new doors it could open for students, workers, and consumers in the future.


So, why would we even consider levying onerous taxes upon it? In my view, there's no quicker way to reverse the Internet's incredibly strong and positive impact on our economy than to force consumers and business owners to pay even more to access and make purchases over it.


But that's just what could happen if the ban ever expired: states and localities would have free-rein to tax the web. And that's why, on a number of occasions over the past decade, the Republican-led House passed legislation to make this ban permanent. Unfortunately, our efforts were consistently thwarted by the Senate, leading us to pass a temporary moratorium, which - as I noted - will expire in a matter of weeks. To keep Congress from having to punt on the tax ban once again, House Republican leaders have called on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) to follow the Republican House's lead and schedule a permanent Internet tax ban for a vote. To date, all they have done is advanced a temporary extension of the ban in the Judiciary Committee - ignoring our request to schedule a House vote on a permanent ban.


The Democratic leadership's refusal to schedule a vote on a permanent Internet tax ban is particularly puzzling given their afore-mentioned Innovation Agenda. One of the core goals of that agenda, for example, is the "nationwide deployment of high speed, always-on broadband Internet and mobile communications." A copy of the agenda - publicly available on Speaker Pelosi's website - affirms, "Just as railroads and highways did in the past, broadband and mobile communications will dramatically increase the productivity and efficiency of our economy in the future and bring more Americans into an online global community and marketplace."


I happen to agree. Yet I also happen to believe that the productivity and efficiency of our economy would be stalled significantly if Internet access and purchases were taxed. And that's precisely why the ban must be made permanent.


The Democrats' agenda further states, "Small businesses are the catalysts for technological innovation... Yet small businesses face significant hurdles, both regulatory and marketbased, that thwart the effort to transform ideas into jobs. Removing these hurdles is a key component of this Innovation Agenda."


Once again, I happen to agree. Yet I also happen to believe that taxing the Internet would be a severe blow to small business owners and their employees. But don't just take my word for it. Democratic Chairwoman of the House Small Business Committee, Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), recently acknowledged that the tax hike would saddle small businesses with a 15 to 30 percent increase in their Internet bills. Once again, that's precisely why the ban must be made permanent.


So why are Democratic leaders dragging their feet on legislation to protect small businesses and other Internet users from a massive tax hike? For the answer, one needs to look no further than the record they've assembled on taxes all year long. Democratic tax hike proposals so far this year include: the now-infamous $150 billion "war surtax" proposal; federal gas tax hikes to pay for Democratic energy legislation and infrastructure; and a massive $392.5 billion tax increase on middle-class families in their very first budget proposed in the Majority. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Democrats also are preparing for battle over the alternative minimum tax - a particularly perverse tax swamping more and more middle-income families that Republicans want to eliminate and Democrats want to preserve.


Al Gore didn't create the Internet, but the leaders of his party have proven themselves eminently capable of taxing it. By refusing to make the Internet tax ban permanent, the Democratic leadership is playing an irresponsible game of chicken with American consumers and our nation's economy. As November 1 draws closer, Democrats face a choice: will they protect millions of consumers and small businesses from a massive, abrupt tax increase, or will they add to their ever-growing list of tax hikes and undermine the very same innovation they claim to be promoting on Capitol Hill?

______________________________

This is what you voted for in 2006 America. Got caught up in the whole I hate Bush derangement syndrom and now YOU America are going to pay the price for it. More taxes, more regulation, more government intervention and all the while moving more towards a Nanny state. Nicely done you fools.

Do everyone a favor, unless you know what the whole agenda of a political party is, dont vote for them. Republicans and Conservatives alike tried to warn you, I TRIED to warn you, but did you listen? NOPE

As you reap, you shall sow

Stretch......streeeeeeeettttttttccccccchhhhhhhh....ssssssttttttrrrrrreeeeecccccccch

Ah there it is...a way to blame Bush:

From Sweetness and Light, posted verbatim:

From ceaselessly terrorist enabling New York Times:

Super Bowl Ads of Cartoonish Violence, Perhaps Reflecting Toll of War

By STUART ELLIOTT
February 5, 2007

No commercial that appeared last night during Super Bowl XLI directly addressed Iraq, unlike a patriotic spot for Budweiser beer that ran during the game two years ago. But the ongoing war seemed to linger just below the surface of many of this year’s commercials.

More than a dozen spots celebrated violence in an exaggerated, cartoonlike vein that was intended to be humorous, but often came across as cruel or callous.

For instance, in a commercial for Bud Light beer, sold by Anheuser-Busch, one man beat the other at a game of rock, paper, scissors by throwing a rock at his opponent’s head.

In another Bud Light spot, face-slapping replaced fist-bumping as the cool way for people to show affection for one another. In a FedEx commercial, set on the moon, an astronaut was wiped out by a meteor. In a spot for Snickers candy, sold by Mars, two co-workers sought to prove their masculinity by tearing off patches of chest hair.

There was also a bank robbery (E*Trade Financial), fierce battles among office workers trapped in a jungle (CareerBuilder), menacing hitchhikers (Bud Light again) and a clash between a monster and a superhero reminiscent of a horror movie (Garmin).

It was as if Madison Avenue were channeling Doc in “West Side Story,” the gentle owner of the candy store in the neighborhood that the two street gangs, the Jets and Sharks, fight over. “Why do you kids live like there’s a war on?” Doc asks plaintively. (Well, Doc, this time, there is.)

During other wars, Madison Avenue has appealed to a yearning for peace. That was expressed in several Super Bowl spots evocative of “Hilltop,” the classic Coca-Cola commercial from 1971, when the Vietnam War divided a world that needed to be taught to sing in perfect harmony…

Not a sparrow falls that it isn’t Bush’s fault.

Or rather there is no subject too far afield that cannot be pressed into service by the New York Times to press their America-hating agenda.

… and a clash between a monster and a superhero reminiscent of a horror movie (Garmin).

"Horror movie"? Try a Japanese monster movie. (Which, some claimed at the time, were allegories about the Cold War.)

I guess the Solons at the New York Times don’t get out much.




Couldnt have said it better myself if I tried.