Sibby Online

More on Democrat values

There were a couple of letters in today’s Argus Leader that help define the Democrat’s anti-Christian values. A Democrat partisan said this about President Bush:

With the president's 2006 budget proposal, his true values are apparent. Massive cuts in farming assistance? Massive cuts for health care programs for the poor? Massive cuts for education? Massive cuts for veterans' benefits? Massive cuts for clean air and water programs?

I realize many people have very strong opinions on the values issue of abortion, and also realize that factor alone might drive how someone votes. The sad thing is that the reprehensible Republican Party consistently uses that issue to garner votes, spouting a pack of lies about Republican values and moral standing.

A second letter helped explain the problem with the above argument by using the Democrat's solution to the Social Security crisis:

The sentiments expressed by Dr. Dick Pittenger regarding Social Security exemplify a major problem facing the U.S.: People who think they have a right to the wages of others. They also believe they can judge what other people need and don't need.

Pittenger struggled to pay Social Security taxes. Instead of a physical challenge, he must mean he'd rather have the money to support his family's needs, but his wages were taken to support others. Undoubtedly, the recipients of his money felt their needs trumped his own. He opined: Roger Clemens makes a lot of money in excess of $90,000 ($22 million) and some of those excess wages should be expropriated by the government to support others' retirement. He assumes it wouldn't be a struggle for Clemens. The 10th Commandment is: You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

This is what the flawed Social Security system has brought us: People who assume the rest of society must provide for their retirement and countless other "rights." Groups of people compete at the government money trough and demand ever more benefits and entitlements. They vote for politicians who promise to deliver the goods (taken from others).

There you have it. The Democrats use the divisive class warfare argument of Karl Marx to advance their true agenda of socialism. They try to use the Christian value of helping the poor, but the Democrats do not want to help the poor. They want others to help the poor by using the taxing authority of the government This is not liberal or progressive. This is communism. It is the Democrats who covet thy neighbor’s goods through taxes, instead of helping the poor through charities and churches.

Social Security screw job

From Social Security Choice:

Charles Krauthammer has a good point that the use of far away dates, such as 2018 and 2042, as when the Social Security crisis hits is hurting our ability to motivate more people to see a need to do something about it now. Procrastination is something we all deal with.

Obviously, many selfish older people, who will be long gone by 2042, think they have nothing to worry about, as exemplified by the AARP’s fierce opposition to any changes in the status quo.

As I mentioned earlier, the term "crisis" is subjective. I have always believed that the fact that people have no ownership rights over the hundreds of thousands of dollars they have been forced to pay into the SS system has always been a very serious crisis for the families of each one of them who passes away before recovering at least what was paid in.

While the SS system as a whole may not technically be bankrupt at this time, that’s no consolation to the families of people who have died and were literally screwed out of hundreds of thousands of dollars of their hard earned money.

Argus Leader contradicts CBS News

CBS News has a connect the dots column by Dotty Lynch that includes this:

One of Gannon's first projects was an attempt to discredit the South Dakota Argus Leader, South Dakota's major paper, and its longtime political writer, David Kranz. According to the National Journal, which reported on this last November, Gannon wrote a series of articles in the summer of 2003 alleging that Kranz, who went to college with Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle, was not only sympathetic to him but was an actual part of the Daschle campaign. These articles then got a huge amount of play on the blogs of John Lauck and Jason Van Beek, and were picked up by other conservative sites and talk radio. The paper was bombarded with messages about its bias and acknowledges that these had an impact on its coverage.

A comment was left by "jakester" on Chad Schuldt’s web site [Schuldt was a paid consultant to Daschle’s 2004 campaign] that disclosed this email:

Mr. Kelley:

I suspect the people of South Dakota are getting their fill of Mr. Gannon’s predicament. We’ve researched and written on the role of bloggers in the Senate race. Let me assure you, I, nor any of our reporters, were intimidated by Gannon or any other blogger.

Thanks for reading.

Patrick Lalley

Assistant managing editor

Argus Leader

Looks like the Argus Leader and CBS News need to get their stories straight. Also note the CBS News report got Lauck’s first name wrong. You would think there would have been an upgrade to the editing function at CBS News after Rathergate. And these people have problems with Gannon's journalism?

Also note that I was the blogger (I think CBS News refers to me as one of those other conservative sites) who first reported the college connection of Tom Daschle and David Kranz. That was how Jeff Gannon found out. I was not paid by the Thune campaign. I am only in search of the truth. Too bad the Argus Leader and CBS News are not.

Your welcome Todd Epp

Todd Epp graciously thanked me for all the traffic I sent his way when I linked to his blog the other day. But when his supporting cast of wet-behind-the-ears and snot-nosed kids (plus one old guy) link to my blog, I get only a handful of hits. That’s due to the content of those sites having very little in content. I know that because i have checked out their sites. Some even claim that those few visits makes me there most frequent visitor. That is sad.

But there is still hope. Like me they can get smart, grow up, and become conservatives. It’s too late for Doug Wiken. Perhaps South Dakota can learn more about the true Democrat agenda of hate, by the Democrats pulling another Howard Dean and make Wiken the chairman of the South Dakota Democrat Party.

Democrats on Christian values

Recently I posted comments made by Chad Schuldt, former paid Daschle campaign staffer, that attacked Jeff Gannon for being a prostitute. Schuldt has now increased the stone throwing and has made this accusation:

That’s the Republican Party we’re dealing with, I guess. You’d at least think there would be outrage from James Dobson on this one. Dobson certainly can’t approve of hookers with White House press passes. Maybe they aren’t the "people of God" they claim to be.

Now the church-going Chad Schuldt is claiming Christians must also throw stones at Gannon in order to be "people of God". Here is what Jesus said:

According to the Gospel of John, the Pharisees, in an attempt to discredit Jesus, brought a woman charged with adultery before him. Then they reminded Jesus that adultery was punishable by stoning under Mosaic law and challenged him to judge the woman so that they might then accuse him of disobeying the law. Jesus thought for a moment and then replied, "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her." The people crowded around him were so touched by their own consciences that they departed. When Jesus found himself alone with the woman, he asked her who were her accusers. She replied, "No man, lord." Jesus then said, "Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more."

Jesus taught us about tolerance. The Democrats can talk the talk about tolerance, but they cannot walk the walk when dealing with an alleged prostitute…and a gay one at that. Looks like it is the Democrats who are in the role of the Pharisiees. 

More attacks on Christians

No, not by the terrorists this time. This time the attack comes from Bill Maher:

Television personality Bill Maher, host of HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher," says Christians and others who are religious suffer from a neurological disorder that "stops people from thinking."

Appearing as a guest on MSNBC's "Scarborough County" this week, Maher told host Joe Scarborough:

"We are a nation that is unenlightened because of religion. I do believe that. I think that religion stops people from thinking. I think it justifies crazies. I think flying planes into a building was a faith-based initiative. I think religion is a neurological disorder. If you look at it logically, it's something that was drilled into your head when you were a small child. It certainly was drilled into mine at that age. And you really can't be responsible when you are a kid for what adults put into your head."

The former host of "Politically Incorrect" said the lack of enlightenment of so many Americans means the nation actually has more in common with its enemies than one might think.

Said Maher: "When you look at beliefs in such things as, do you go to heaven, is there a devil, we have more in common with Turkey and Iran and Syria than we do with European nations and Canada and nations that, yes, I would consider more enlightened than us."

There you have it…anti-Christian, anti-American rhetoric from a leftist entertainer. Anti-Christian and anti-American...that sounds like the attitude of the terrorists. The hypocrisy of the left has no limits.

Legislators spank lobbyists

For the second year in a row, South Dakota legislators figuratively spanked two lobbyists from the South Dakota Gun Owners organization. Last year it was durng a House State Affairs committee hearing:

Gun-rights lobbyists were sharply rebuked Saturday by angry legislators who accused them of using threats and lies to intimidate lawmakers.

The angry criticism was aimed at Ray and Zach Lautenschlager, of Rapid City, the leaders of a group called South Dakota Gun Owners.

House Democratic Leader Mel Olson of Mitchell told the pair that their tactics caused him to fear for the safety of his children, and he would not allow his children to come to the Capitol.

"I was thinking about retiring and you have pushed me to the brink of running for re-election, to make sure that nothing that you had your name on ever passes this Legislature," Olson sternly told the SDGO members.

Several members of the House State Affairs Committee accused the lobbyists of using questionable tactics and fooling SDGO members into flooding lawmakers with postcards, e-mail and phone messages regarding bills dealing with the governor's powers in times of emergency.

On Wednesday the Lautenschlagers took a beating in a Senate Judiciary committee hearing:

Judiciary Committee members asked Ray Lautenschlager, director of Gun Owners of South Dakota, what happens to the money he collects from members and whether the organization's tax records are public.

"At this point, I do not believe the question is proper or relevant," Lautenschlager said Wednesday.

Sen. Gene Abdallah, R-Sioux Falls, questioned why Lautenschlager has labeled him and Rep. Tom Hennies, R-Rapid City, as anti-gun legislators. Abdallah is former U.S. marshal and superintendent of the state Highway Patrol; Hennies is a former Rapid City police chief.

"You have zero credibility with me and, I hope, with the rest of the committee," Abdallah told Lautenschlager.

Sen. John Koskan, R-Wood, asked why Lautenschlager's Web site fraudulently claimed he was in a room with anti-gun politicians. Koskan asked whether the claim was made to get contributions from supporters.

Others at the hearing suggested Lautenschlager opposed the bill as a way to recruit members and money for his group.

Most of the above comments were made in the last 30 minutes of the two hour session. (Click here for audio) I do believe the Lautenschlagers mean well and they do bring up good points, but their approach is too attack any compromise with the "they are anti-gun". It was funny to here the committee ask Ray to point out the anti-gun members during the committee hearing.

Democrats are getting suckered

President Bush is giving the Democrats enough rope to hang themselves. He is putting tax increases on the table regarding Social Security reform. David John gives us reasons why tax increases are wrong:

Is a fix for Social Security even worth discussing if it would only delay the system’s inevitable shortfalls by six or seven years? Groups such as AARP think so and have proposed raising the payroll tax cap to make the wealthy pay their "fair share" for Social Security. But this would only patch the system’s finances for a few years, rather than solving the problem for good. And that’s not the worst of it. Raising the tax cap would raise taxes for many middle class families, impose a tremendous burden on small business, slow the economy, and cost jobs. In short, raising the payroll tax cap would make Social Security an even greater burden than it is today.

Rush Limbaugh thinks President Bush is using this stupid idea to set up the Democrat's next downfall:

Let expound a little bit on the president not ruling out raising taxes to help out with the Social Security problem. Up till now, the Democrats' position has been: "No way. There's no crisis. We don't need to fix it," even though we can go back to 1999 and we have the tapes here if we want to play them of every Democrat today saying, "There's no crisis," in 1999 saying there was. We can do that all day long. But they're obstinate. There's maybe two Democrats, Ben Nelson from Nebraska is one. Only two Democrats in the Senate have given any indication here of supporting the president.

So, remember what's going on here. In addition to all these various issues, the president and the mad scientist genius Karl Rove also had as one of their agenda items the utter destruction of the Democrat Party. Ha-ha-ha-ha. Now, what better way to do that than to force these people to come out boldly and loudly for what they are for? And so Bush doesn't rule out raising taxes. Now, what is that like? That's like when you were in high school and you hear the rumor about Spanish fly, big aphrodisiac? Tax increases to Democrats are like a lifetime prescription to Viagra. You know, folks, I don't know, it's a magnet. It will draw these people out. What we want is as many Democrats as possible eagerly and loudly and boldly endorsing tax increases. We want that! "But, Rush! But, Rush! What if it happens?" Ah, I'm not going to conclude here that the president's actually going to do this. But one thing that this does...

The two things that this does, number one, it changes the focus from, "This can't be done," to, "Oh, okay you're willing to raise taxes? Well, we'll talk." So now we're talking about how to fix it rather than, "It doesn't need to be fixed. There's no crisis," and the second thing it does, it flushes these people out and makes them come out boldly on the record for tax increases. Now, I don't know about you, but I can't find in recent histoire where being madly, boldly, loudly in favor of tax increases has helped anybody at the polls. You could ask Walter Mondull about it. I mean Clinton raised taxes, but this was after promising a middle-class tax cut, and after he got in office he said he "never worked harder on anything in his life" but just couldn't find a way to do it and raised everybody's taxes. So until we get a definitive program and a set of proposals here from the president, I'm not gonna panic over this. I think in a political sense the move here is pretty good.

Wow

Check out the new SDP.

The truth about Dems comes out

Rush Limbaugh covers how Howard Dean fumbled and demonstrates how the Democrats are really the racists:

"The most powerful African-American member of the House of Representatives is calling on Howard Dean to apologize for a racially insensitive joke he told Friday during an address to the Congressional Black Caucus. Asked on Tuesday if Dean should apologize for suggesting during his address that minorities usually work as servants, Charles Rangel said, 'If he offended anybody, he certainly should.' Critics say that Dean crossed the line when he told the CBC, 'You think the Republicans could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here.' Addressing the comment directly, Rangel said, 'I think Dean may not have used the right language, which he has had problems with before.' Rangel then went on to translate what Dean meant to say, that 'the Republican Party finds it very, very difficult to attract blacks to become public officials.'" Now, Charlie, that's not what he said. That is not what he said. He said the only way Republicans can get 150 people in a room is if they work for the hotel staff, i.e., servants.