Sibby Online

SDSU Feminists versus Bob Ellis

Bob Ellis ran a post about how Planned Parenthood promotes immoral behavior to children with taxpayer funds. The SDSU Feminists respond with this:

I’m always amused by anti-choicers who think that "back in their day" everyone waited until marriage to have sex and never used birth control and mom didn’t want to work –blah blah blah.

The Guttmacher Institute, however, begs to differ

After posting an excerpt from Planned Parenthood’s propaganda machine, this was said:

WHAT?! You mean that sexuality is *gasp* NORMAL?!

And the other thing that gives me a kick is how these people whine about the menial federal funds Planned Parenthood gets to provide essential community services, when abstinence only programs are almost omnipresent!

You mean providing willing victims for pedophiles is a community service? Or believing that normal human sexuality is the same as what dogs do? I wonder if those behind this also get taxpayer funding?

The narcissistic Big Government

From Ernest Istook:

"Betcha can't eat just one."

Lay's sells billions of potato chips with that slogan each year. The U.S. government operates on the same principle, selling us record-high deficits by appealing to our appetites for federal interventions and handouts.

The latest news says the deficit will reach half a trillion dollars next year. How has this happened?

Once we try a federal program to address a problem, we end up trying several more aimed at the same problem, plus dozens of others aimed at "equally worthy" causes.

Once Congress makes a single spending earmark to finance a worthwhile project, other members insist on cramming their worthless projects into the same bill.

Once a special interest is placated with money or language placed in legislation, every other special interest demands something for themselves.

All this leads to the alternate slogan for those who populate Congress: "What's in it for me?" It's often followed by, "I want some more."

But for those of you who want to blame DC, maybe you need to look into a mirror instead:

Snack makers' slogans and marketing may tempt consumers to stretch their waistlines, but it's consumers who decide whether or not to yield to that ever-present temptation.

Likewise, spending blame can be heaped upon the Congress for yielding to the temptations of special interests. But blame may also be attached to voters who demand more from government but less from themselves and who reward politicians who feed that demand.

Sounds like that is the game that gets played out in South Dakota. Instead of self-reliance, South Dakota’s state government’s economic development plan includes expanding the Universities research departments so more federal grants can be written. Isn’t the $1.4 billion of federal funding of our total $3.5 billion state spending already too much federal dependency?

The GOP RINOS are no better than the liberal Democrats when it comes to increasing the size of government. And it is not without cost…freedom. Time for conservatives to step it up. FIrst we need to fix the SD GOP.

Pat Powers versus Jan Nicolay

I say it is a toss up as to which RINO can twist the truth the most…Pat Powers or Jan Nicolay. Voices Carry has the goods on Jan Nicolay:

On Tuesday we are all invited to an open house (5:30 p.m. to 7 p.m.) at the new Rapid City office (1315 Haines Ave., Suite C) of the South Dakota Campaign for UNHealthy Families. Here's a bit of the announcement as reported by today's Rapid City Journal…

"South Dakota’s families don’t need big Government telling them what they can and can’t do," Republican and former State Representative Jan Nicolay, co-chairwoman of the Campaign for UNHealthy Families, said in a news release. "Families know their own circumstances best, but this ban would strip families of a private, moral decision. And a woman would be forced to carry a pregnancy to term even if the fetus couldn’t survive on its own after delivery."

The talking points are obvious.

1) The focus will be on "letting families decide." This from those who fight parental notification tooth and nail.

2) The focus is going to be on government involvement, not on what they are doing. Jan, if you don't want government involvement, join me in fighting the public funding of Planned Parenthood - $335 million last year in taxpayer dollars. If you won't join me in that, then every time you say "we don't need Big government" to the voters of South Dakota this fall - I promise to point out your enormous hypocrisy ten additional times. Here's a little refresher for you in terms of the purpose of government…

"The first and primary duty of good government is to protect innocent human life." Thomas Jefferson

3) The focus will be on fetal anomalies and the "cruelty" of carrying a baby to full-term even though doctors say the child has slim odds for any kind of normal life. Jan, what about the cruelty of dismembering a baby without anesthesia then leaving the mother to walk through the emotional aftermath of that all on her own? Do you have any integrity to tell anyone in South Dakota you have a concern for the pain people go through in life?

Obama’s Marxist agenda

Ellis Washington has a column that points out the typical liberal tactic of deception:

King George III would be proud of the taxation without representation Americans currently face. Even with the specter of skyrocketingfuel costs., the ancillary price hikes spurred by same (in areas such as food), jobs heading overseas and the epidemic of home foreclosures, an astounding number of Americans currently support a presidential candidate who makes no secret of the fact that he will raise taxes and expand the federal government if elected.

Yes, although Sen. Barack Obama says he will ease the tax burden for middle-class families and increase that of the faceless, evil "wealthy," it is perplexing – as are many aspects of Obama's candidacy – that so many Americans remain gullible enough to fall for these lines.

Washington brings out the truth by describing Obama’s intentions as being Marxist in nature:

On July 25, 2008, WorldNetDaily's Bob Unruh reported on S. 2433, the "Global Poverty Act of 2007." This $845 billion planet-wide welfare program, introduced by Barack Obama, would "require the president to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

A bigger pack of overly encompassing, nebulous pap I've never heard.

This is what comes from 50 years of a Marxist-inspired educational system and the insidious machinations of a far left press – a situation wherein average Americans are wholly ignorant of basic concepts of economics as well as the fact that their attention is being deftly misdirected away from historical facts.

The chief fallacy that has been promoted by the left since time immemorial is, in lay terms, as follows: There is but one "pie," as it were, of capital and resources of all types; at any given time it tends to be inequitably divided, and the reason populations need government is to ensure that it is more equitably divided. This, of course, is pure Marxism.

So that leaves conservatives with no choice but to vote for the RINO-CINO.

Pat Powers goes CINO

A couple of days ago I posted on the issue of economic development through the government. This should add interest to that post:

If there were a handbook produced for state lawmakers entitled "Economic Growth: How Best to Stop It Without Making Voters Think That's What You Want," it would promote high progressive tax rates to care for the poor and high regulations on business to protect people. There's no better way for states to rid themselves of the people responsible for the lion's share of state revenues, both directly through paying their taxes and indirectly through growing the state's economy. That is a lesson that resounds in a new study by the American Legislative Exchange Council written by Dr. Arthur B. Laffer and Stephen Moore.

In their study, "Rich States/Poor States: The ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index," Laffer (yes, the Dr. Laffer of Laffer Curve fame and Reagan's supply-side revolution) and Moore (economist and editorial board member of The Wall Street Journal) analyze the fifty states' economic competitiveness against free-market principles and sixteen factors they identify as affecting a state's competitiveness (many different types of taxes, state debt, the quality of the state's legal system, the state's minimum wage, worker's compensation costs, whether it is a right-to-work state, its recent tax policy changes, etc.).

Laffer and Moore also provide a "State Roadmap to Prosperity" in which they show how relatively low taxes and regulations give people more reasons to work, increasing incomes, investment and employment and bringing more people to the state. Of importance in this politically polarized climate, Laffer and Moore show that the issues aren't partisan. They highlight Democrats for growth and tax cuts in Rhode Island (which recently went from the third to 27^th highest income tax in the nation), Arizona, Oklahoma, Virginia, and New Mexico, where Gov. Bill Richardon cut income taxes significantly, declaring "businesses move to states where taxes are falling, not rising."

Here is a link to the findings in regard to South Dakota. We rank number 1 on income taxes and 22 on property taxes, but 41 on sales taxes (based on tax per $1,000 of income). I am sure the liberals are going to call that regressive. But they should note that South Dakota is 33 in regard to public employees per 10,000 in population.

Fiscal conservatives should take note when we have RINOs in control of the state GOP. South Dakota is 41 in "Legislated New Taxes" per $1,000 in income for the years 2005 and 2006.

Social conservatives should take note of South Dakota’s 31^st ranking in "Education Freedom Index Score" which is based on vouchers and ease of private/homeschooling. And that rating would be a lot worse if it took into account the RINO's attempt over the last two legislative sessions to have the government take over preschools and day cares.

Looks like there is much for conservatives to do if we want South Dakota on the road to prosperity. Education reform and reducing the size of government are two very important issues that the SDCAC has as goals. RINOs like Pat Powers need to called out for being a CINO (Conservative In Name Only) when claiming to be a conservative in one breath and attacking the SDCAC in the next. Here is the proof:

There’s a conservative ideology, and those that subscribe to it, such as myself. On this website, the SDWC espouses a conservative ideology. Bob Ellis espouses it over at Dakota Voice. Gideon Oakes is one of the newest to the blogosphere to espouse that ideology, and there are several others.

I’m not sure what Sibby’s espousing, (or dribbling from his chin as he barfs back Rush) but if he wants to call it conservatism, so be it.

See my post on Limbaugh’s 20 year celebration to understand that one who claims to be a conservative while attacking Rush Limbaugh is by definition a CINO. Now Pat Powers has graduated to the status of a RINO-CINO, the worst enemy of conservatism, freedom, prosperity, and traditional America.

Illegal immigration in South Dakota

From the Madison Daily Reader:

Immigration officials were in Howard last month and served arrest warrants on five individuals who were employed at Dakota Beef.

Tim Counts, public relations officer for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), said Wednesday (today) that four individuals were arrested on warrants June 24 and a fifth person was arrested the following week at his home.

Two were arrested on administrative charges and three were charged criminally.

Tea reacts to new adult store law

First we have Planned Parenthood shutting down its abortion business in reaction to a new state law, and now we have Tea reacting to a new state law:

Fears that a new state law could draw a legal challenge drove the city of Tea to impose a two-year moratorium on any new adult-oriented businesses last week.

Adult businesses became a sore subject last year after the opening of Olivia's Adult Superstore. Because Olivia's moved into an existing building in a commercial zone outside city limits, there were no public hearings until after the opening. At one council meeting last summer, more than 150 people were on hand to voice their concerns.

The new state law, which regulates the hours of all adult businesses in the state and restricts the location of any new business, was sponsored by Rep. Manny Steele of District 12.

As written, the statute prohibits the businesses from locating within a quarter mile of any school, child welfare agency, public park, public recreation facility, residence or place of worship. It took effect July 1.

"We don't want to be the test case," said Tea City Attorney Todd Meierhenry, who thinks the law will be challenged. "We don't want it to be someone versus the city of Tea."

Rush Limbaugh celebrates 20 years

Much to the despair of RINOs like Pat Powers, Rush Limbaugh’s 20-year celebration of broadcasting excellence is on August 1. Jackie Mason and Raoul Felder say this:

He's been doing his gig for 20 years, and, back then, when we were all 20 years old, he recognized that there was a void in the media for many people who were not of the liberal persuasion. At this time, the only thing a conservative could do was write to his congressman and complain. The letter usually came back either marked "postage due" or "deceased." First, the liberals wanted a chicken in every pot, then they wanted the pot, then they wanted the government to pay for their chickens, then if they got sick from the chickens, they wanted the government to pay for the doctors, and if they were so sick they couldn't work, the government should simply pay them. How was this all going to be paid for? Simple: Tax the rich. And they kept taxing the rich until most other people didn't have to pay any taxes. And if that weren't enough, they then wanted a rebate for the taxes they didn't pay.

The only voice heard in this odious intellectual wasteland was the voice of conservative radio started by Rush Limbaugh.

And Burt Prelutsky compares Rush Limbaugh to Ronald Reagan:

I wasn't always a Republican, let alone a conservative. Perhaps, I took Churchill's dictum that if you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, and if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain, a tad too literally. But, even if, like yours truly, you happen to have been a registered Democrat for roughly two-thirds of your 68 years here on earth and only belatedly came to your senses in your 40s, there's no denying the influence of the holy trinity in one's life. However, being Jewish, the trinity I have in mind consists of William F. Buckley Jr., Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbaugh.

I doubt if there's a conservative, at least one of a certain age, who would deny that Mr. Buckley played a major role in first opening his eyes to the role that liberals have played in destroying public education, the courts, the mainstream media and civil discourse. Buckley proved that the right was not only wiser than the left, but a great deal wittier.

Ronald Reagan, the butt of endless liberal jokes, the man alleged to have spent eight years dozing off during Cabinet meetings, who was nothing more than an actor reading his lines, almost single-handedly brought down the evil Soviet empire, while still managing to rescue America from Jimmy Carter's double-digit rates of inflation and unemployment. It didn't take a genius to realize that President Reagan somehow managed to get more done asleep than Democrats did when they were allegedly wide awake.

If Buckley gave the conservative movement wit and Reagan gave it muscle, Rush Limbaugh has provided it with a powerful and eloquent voice for these past 20 years.

And Pat Powers thinks he can call himself a conservative in one breath and trash Rush Limbaugh in the next. Pat Powers is a phony. He hates Rush Limbaugh because he hates conservatives.

Here are more opinions about Rush Limbaugh:

Rush Limbaugh: 'Bambino' of talk
Exclusive: Sean Hannity declares millions 'lost' without radio's king
--WND

Limbaugh never gives up
Exclusive: Roger Hedgecock commends host's unmatched resolve, optimism, humor
--WND

Nancy Pelosi vs. Rush Limbaugh
Exclusive: Chuck Norris applauds news-talk king for inspiring generations of patriots
--WND

Hey Rush, I owe ya!
Exclusive: Barbara Simpson thanks Limbaugh for enabling her political courage
--WND

Patriot of the airwaves
Exclusive: Pat Boone compares radio legend to Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin
--WND

The secrets to Limbaugh's success
Exclusive: Greg Laurie says radio man is 1 of most effective 'preachers' in the world
--WND

Limbaugh: Our link to Reagan conservatism
Exclusive: Ellis Washington honors radio host for helping him survive at Harvard
--WND

Secular humanism, Big Government’s religion

RINOs like Pat Powers don’t even want to hear the truth about secular humanism. Today Joseph Farah lays the truth out for us:

It is, in fact, just the kind of thing the Founding Father had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment prohibiting the establishment of a state religion.

That is precisely what is happening when the U.S. government funds propaganda promoting what has become, de facto, the official state church in America – secular humanism.

And what is the issue Farah is referring to?:

Coming this November from PBS' "Nova" series is a "documentary" suggesting the following:

• Abraham and Sara, the patriarchal couple of Judaism and Christianity, didn't really exist.
• The Exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt never really happened.
• The Hebrew Tanach, what Christians call the Old Testament, was mostly written just six centuries before the time of Jesus.

Now keep in mind who is funding this program and the network that will air it – you, the American taxpayer.

It would be insulting enough to Christians and Jews in America if a private corporation were producing this kind of attack on the foundation of the two faiths. But this is an assault made possible by government – the same government, by the way, that is flirting with reinstituting the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" to limit free expression by private broadcasters.

And Farah ends with this:

It's way past time to pull the plug on PBS and National Public Radio and all the other propaganda arms of the federal government's promotion of socialism and secular humanism and every other imaginable failed idea.

There are plenty of opportunities for filmmakers and broadcasters in the free marketplace of ideas. Nobody in the media should be eligible for handouts from the taxpayers – especially to insult their most deeply held beliefs and convictions.

And I believe Cory Heidelberger enjoys using NPR propaganda to promote socialized health care. So Joseph Farah has a great point here. Restoring Truth and freedom in America is what conservatism is all about. Unfortunately, liberal Democrats, the liberal mainstream media, and RINOs like Pat Powers are for secularism. This plays straight into the hands of those who are promoting the worldview of Humanist Marxism. This movement has been called far-left, but both political parties have mainstreamed it. That power can only be challenged by a united effort of fiscal conservative libertarians and social conservatives. With that core support, another Great Awakening can bring into the movement those who have succumbed to apathy. And the underlying cause of the fall of the Great Roman Empire was apathy. America needs its foundation restored. The Christian mortar has been rotted by the acidity thrown up by the secular humanists.

Government bails out government

See if you catch the hilarity of big government here:

President Bush on Wednesday signed a massive housing bill intended to provide mortgage relief for 400,000 struggling homeowners and stabilize financial markets.

Bush signed the bill without any fanfare or signing ceremony, affixing his signature to the measure he once threatened to veto, in the Oval Office in the early morning hours. He was surrounded by top administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Housing Secretary Steve Preston.

"We look forward to put in place new authorities to improve confidence and stability in markets," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. He said that the Federal Housing Administration would begin right away to implement new policies "intended to keep more deserving American families in their homes."

The measure, regarded as the most significant housing legislation in decades, lets homeowners who cannot afford their payments refinance into more affordable government-backed loans rather than losing their homes.

It offers a temporary financial lifeline to troubled mortgage companies Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) and tightens controls over the two government-sponsored businesses.

The House passed the bill a week ago; the Senate voted Saturday to send it to the president.

So we pass into law a government bailout of "two government-sponsored businesses". That is an obvious example of the dysfunction of socialism and the governmental interference of free markets.

Senator Thune was one of the 13 Nays, while Senator Johnson and Representative Herseth Sandlin voted for this hilarious example of socialism interfering with free markets.