Take a Walk on the Wild Side (Kevlar Underwear Required)

Red Stater not afraid of opposing views, but Air America is.

"Things are different nowdays, folks are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke." Will Rogers- 1879-1935

Being the open minded and curious person that I am, I recently went on over to Air America Radio's Al Franken Blogs, to see what it is all about. I registered, logged in and commented on what I saw and read on the AAR blogsite message board. Since I was a guest in the opposing teams locker room (so to speak) it was important to be reasonably polite, not curse or call names and keep to the facts.
Hate Goggles:
It was clear right away that the folks who frequent the AAR blogsite do not subscribe to the above basic rules I outlined for myself. Sure, I expected there to be plenty of Bush hating- and there is- but what I didn't expect was a complete intolerance for anyone who has a different view besides HATE BUSH. The word "Nazi" is one of their favorites, which is ironic considering they enforce a zero-tolerance policy for any opposing view themselves.
The name "Red Stater" was enough to provoke hatred and outrage all by itself.

It is obvious that not many conservatives ever post there as the regulars post as if no one is reading or watching what they say, and thus facts don't matter. Hating Bush is all that matters. They go un-checked for the most part until someone like 'ol Red Stater (or you) happens by.
The Big Ban Theory:
The moderator(s) for the AAR boards had several online discussions (thinking I didn't see them) about what to do about "Red Stater". They wanted to ban me immediately, but didn't have one single complaint from other posters to use as justification. I stuck to relevant topics that they raised and used sources and links to support my opinions. That didn't stop them however as the very next day- Red Stater was banned for life. The reason was "inflamatory topics".
"Ban, Ban, They Shot Me Down" :
So, I then went to the "sister" blog called Air America Place. This is like "Air America Lite".
The blog posters at AAP prefer to talk about favorite tv shows and i-pod issues mostly but of course throw in an occasional "Hate Bush" here and there. Logged in As "Red Stater", I asked them to please help me understand what they think Democrat's plan is for Iraq, Terrorism, Taxes etc. (since there doesn't seem to be one.)
Red Stater was banned in just a few days!
aka: Red's Tater Banned 2:
I was able to re-register at AAP by simply using another username- "Red's Tater".
So, A few days ago they posted the total U.S. military deaths in Iraq at the top of the blog page. I responded by posting the official U.S. statistics for U.S. military deaths during 1995-1999 during peacetime and the Clinton administration which were close to the same rate as now during the war. (774-974 per year)
Since they never mention those numbers themselves, I asked why deaths now were more important to them than those individuals who gave their life serving their country during peacetime? No Answer to that question (merely name calling and cursing at me) and I was banned for evermore.

In fact the usernames "Red Stater" and "Red's Tater" are both banned from use at both blogsites by anyone in the future. (sorry you will have to pick another annoying handle)

So, If you enjoy driving liberals wild and crazy, (like I do) please go and pay a visit to these two ultra-liberal, wacko-leftwing blogs and have some fun. And I assure you, FUN it IS.

Please just stay calm, keep it clean, stick to facts and you will represent other conservatives well. (It isn't difficult against their "Hate Bush" logic) Let them do the spewing.

Of course you will most likely get banned too, but just accept that going in.
Let them demonstrate that the party of tolerance isn't.

Here are some helpful topics that are guaranteed to send them into orbit and you rolling on the floor laughing at them.
#1- Bill O'reilly (Al Franken wouldn't have a show without him)
Just type in those two (Bill O'Reilly) words and stand back.
#2- What is the Democrat plan (other than "Bush Lied") There isn't one and they know it.
#3- Iraq and/or Vietnam (they don't know the difference) Good luck with the history lesson.
#4- Rush or Hannity (they don't know the difference)
#5- Abortion, Taxes, Supreme Court nominations, Immigration/Borders, Guns, God or Gays. (in other words any actual issues)

Be ready for "Bush Lied us into war", "Republican Culture of Corruption", "Bush is Spying on Americans", "Bush blew up the levy's in N.O.", Everything in Farenheit 911, al franken's book, "Republicans are all rich, white, christian, racist, nazi's", Tom Delay, and of course Jack Abramoff.

Also, they absolutely HATE it when you say "Democrat" Senator etc. instead of "Democratic" Senator etc.

Oh, and be sure to tell them "Red Stater" and "Red's Tater" sends his "regards".
(That'll get ya' banned right there)

Since we started with the great Will Rogers, let's end this one with him also.
"I don't belong to any organized political party, ... I'm a Democrat!" Will Rogers 1879-1935

Hey Detroit, did you see the Barrett-Jackson?

You could buy a small new-car dealership inventory of 100 cars for about the same price as a 1954 Pontiac Bonneville concept car sold for ($2.8 million) this past weekend at the popular Barrett Jackson Auction and "extrava-ganza-frenzy" in Arizona, but it wasn't even the top dollar getter.

Good old U.S. "musclecars" of the 50's 60's and 70's dominated the sales over exotic foreign cars including Ferrari, Porsche, Mercedes and the rest. Mustangs and Camaro's, Cuda's and Vette's sold for around $1 million each and over.
Ray Alley's 1970 Chevelle NHRA SuperStock racecar sold for $1.8 million.

"Sold-sold-sold"- one Auctioneer would yell as he slammed the gavel 3 times for each car that rolled out under the incredibly bright lights that showed any flaws.

Thousands of bidders crowded the giant tents set up for the huge auction of over 1,000 cars and competed furiously for the baddest hotrod they could find. Money talks, everyone else walks.

A 1954 GM "Tour Bus" sold for the record amount at a whopping $4.1 million. A 1954 GM bus? 4 million dollars? The guy who purchased it also bought several musclecars to go with it.
The seller said he would have been happy with $600,000 coming into the "No Reserve" auction.

A 2007 (yes, 2007) Ford Shelby Mustang GT was auctioned off (before it even exists) for around $700,000. The bidding was for the first one off of the assembly line. The hotrod Mustangs will sell for under $100,000 next fall when released.

For folks at this auction, fuel economy/gas mileage was not a factor as many of these cars measure in "gallons per mile" (or gallons per quartermile) and not the other way around.

Millions of people around the world watch the Barrett-Jackson LIVE each year on SPEED channel via cable and it is the number one most watched program on SPEED.

With GM and Ford going through cutbacks and losses, are they listening to what Americans are buying? (and paying a lot of money to get)

With a new Chevy retro-Camaro in the works for 2008 and Chrysler planning a Dodge Challenger retro along with Ford's 2007 ShelbyMustang, American automakers are dipping their toes in the water, but they need to take the plunge.

Forget about trying to "out-foreign" the foreign car manufacturers and do what you do best.

Give us trucks that really are trucks and American-styled cars that rumble, go fast, look cool, and have ties to the past.

"If you build it, they will come"(back)

Criminals and Democrats, say "Cheese"!

Since all of the major news media and Democrats are so excited to show us pictures of President Bush in a photo with accused criminal Jack Abramhoff, here are a few great looking shots of prominant Democrats to take a peek at.

Hillary, Algore with convicted drug dealer - CNN News.

Bill, Hillary and Denise Rich - Marc Rich pardoned of tax evasion by Clinton - CNN News.

Sheets - The Finest linen for bedtime or a fashion statement at gatherings? You be the judge.

In other news, Ted Kennedy (d) (MA) still has not been charged in the unexplained death of his aid who drowned after a car accident in which she was riding with Kennedy following a party decades ago. Their car went off a bridge and into a river. Kennedy made it out, got home and called the police ...the next day.
Was alcohol involved? If Ted Kennedy was there, then alcohol could have been involved. He was seen wearing his "I'm only here for the beer" T-shirt before leaving a party with his young female aid who would not make it home that night.

John Kerry (d) MA - In sworn testimony during the Vietnam war, stated that he had "committed horrible war crimes" against Vietnamese innocent women and children.

Did I leave anyone out?

Red

Attention Blue Staters

Invitation to all Bush Haters: "Can we talk"?

If you are tired of current "hate" politics, then please consider this attempt to reach out to those who are either “left of center” or not sure where they stand politically, but are willing to consider the basic core issues without looking through Hate-Goggles.

Perhaps you are more conservative (“extreme right wing”) than you think. Do you dare to find out?

Okay, so lets get right down to it and answer the tough question first.

Some basic rules first: These are simple yes or no questions.
That means answer with a YES or NO.
If your answer is “yes-but,” count it as a “YES”.

#1- Abortion/Right to Choose.

(An unborn infant feels pain at 9 weeks, has fingerprints and all working organs at 12 weeks. Several methods of preventing unwanted pregnancies are readily available to both sexes. Around 1 million abortions are performed each year in the U.S.)

Q- Would you agree that abortions should only be available to adult women (and minors with parental notification) when necessary due to medical, health, rape or other reasonable need during the first trimester? (3 possible yes/no answers)

#2- Death Penalty

(Death by lethal injection is painless according to Physicians and studies)

Q- Would you agree that in certain instances of extremely violent, mass murder, repeat offender serial cases, that the death penalty should be applied? Yes or No

#3- The Government

Q- Do you view the federal and state government as too big, too involved in people’s lives, too wasteful, too corrupt, and/or too dishonest? (Bonus: 5 possible yes/no answers)

#4- Your Taxes

Q- Do you think your personal taxes are too high? Yes or No

#5- Control U.S. Borders

Q- Do we need to stop illegal immigration coming across the U.S. borders? Yes or No

#6- Jihad on us

Let’s say (just for the sake of discussion) that a war is being waged against you, me and all Americans as you are reading this. (BTW, it is.)

Q-Do we fight? Yes or No?

End of 1'st Round.

If you have answered 3 or more questions “YES” or “yes-but”, then you are a conservative, rightwing, nut-job, who is not in the mainstream of America according to the Democrat party.

If you answered “NO” or “Bush Lied” to 3 or more questions, I am sorry but you should probably continue to carry around your protest signs and hope for the best in '08.

If you made it through this round, please advance to the Lightning Round below:

Bonus Lightning Round:

God, Guns and Gays.

#7- Should all references to “God” be banned and removed from US currency, public buildings, public schools, Congress and the Courts, including prayer? Yes or No.

#8- Do you believe that we are safer if we are unable to own guns? Yes or No

#9- Is it any of my business what you do in your bedroom? Yes or No

#10- Gay marriage. Yes or No

If you answered NO to more than two of the bonus questions, you could be a true gun toting, rightwing, extremist, racist, sexist and possible homophobe according to the Democrat party.

Welcome to mainstream America, and say goodbye to Hollywood.

Red

Scoreboard: Alito -100, Democrats -0

Sam Alito: Stellar / Ted Kennedy: Embarrassing / Byrd: No Comment

During the recent Ali-yee-oto, (hiccup) Aloti-yoti-oh, errrr-uhhhh, (burp) …Alito hearings for the Supreme Court, the senior senator from Massachusetts Ted Kennedy (D) did the political process proud once again.

Drunk with power and rage, driving off of the bridge to reality and drowning in the river of denial, Kennedy splashed and kicked and screamed verbal insults at Alito.

Unable to even remember Sam Alito’s name, Kennedy who was member of an all-white, male-only club in the late 1950’s and 60’s, accused Judge Sam Alito of being a racist and sexist due to Alito’s former membership subscription to a Princeton Alumni Club/magazine in which editorials had reportedly spoken out against women and minorities.

Kennedy (hiccup) demanded a subpoena for the records of the Club, which it turned out, had already been made public.

It had already been determined in a story by the NY Times several months ago that Judge Alito had virtually no connection with the club, club activities, fundraising or any editorials. “He was a subscriber to the magazine not the writer or editor of the magazine,” said CAP club member and Judge Andrew Napolitano.

Sam Alito had joined the Princeton Alumni Club in support of the ROTC where the University had ruled to not allow ROTC members on the Princeton campus to recruit. Alito is a strong advocate for the ROTC program. Alito knew nothing of any racist or sexist activity (primarily because there was none). Past editors of the club magazine have included women and minorities,- none who were racists however.

Ted (hiccup) Kennedy however, did know exactly what the club he had belonged to was about and years later he reportedly had his name removed from the membership.

The only way democrats could have been more hypocritical would be for former KKK member/current Democrat Senator Robert Byrd to call Judge Alito a racist.

Now that would have been priceless.

If you want to make a case for term limitations, look no further. It is about time for Sen. Kennedy to lose.

Meanwhile, a few Democrats who don’t know how to handle losing and/or how the process works, are considering how to filibuster Alito at the last second without looking like the idiots they are.

In other news:.. THANK YOU to President Bush for selecting great, quality candidates of both character and philosophy to the Supreme Court. (see post below, Supreme Appointments: July 2005) Thank you to members of the Senate who confirmed John Roberts and soon, Sam Alito too.

Red's Top Ten List

The Top 10 List of people David Letterman should have said- “...60% of everything you say is crap”- to, BEFORE saying it to Bill O’Reilly.

#10- Everyone within the zip code 90210

#9- All ex-comedians turned journalist/pundit/political hack/radio talk-show hosts.

#8- Anyone who makes op-ed/propaganda videos and calls them “Documentary” Films.

#7- Anyone who didn’t bother to graduate high-school or vote but feels qualified to tell the rest of us how to run the country.

#6- Anyone who tries to convince us that oral sex…. Isn’t sex.

#5- Anyone that is still married to Bill Clinton.(see #6)

#4- Yeeeeeeeeeeeee-Haaaa, Howard Dean and (hiccup) Ted Kennedy.

#3- Anyone who threw away their Vietnam war medals then ran for President AND anyone who made an exercise video then married Ted Turner.

#2- The News Media: Dan Rather, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, NPR, NY Times, etc.

#1- AND....The Number One person that Dave should have said “60% of what you say is crap” to, before saying it to Bill O’Reilly, is…..(Drum Roll Please Paul)

That young, good-looking, smart fellow Dave sees in the mirror every day.

Additional To-Do list for “60% Crap”, before you get to Bill O’Reilly:

Anyone who has used the terms “Selected Not Elected”, “When Clinton Lied - Nobody died”, “ Republican culture of corruption”, “Bombed the levy, Quagmire, freedom fighter, Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, War for Oil and/or Bush Lied.

Anyone driving an electric car or riding a bicycle to work who thinks they are saving the planet.

Everyone who thinks SUV’s are responsible for global warming, hurricanes or forest fires.

Anyone who claims marriage is anything other than between a man and a woman.

Anyone who tells you that we are safer if we cannot own a gun to defend ourselves.

Anyone who tries to claim that Hillary is in the same league as Condi.

Anyone who demands a total separation of state and church but has no problem with Rev. Al Sharpton(d) for President and/or Rev. Jesse Jackson(d) being in politics.

Lawyers and/or Used Car salesmen.

Anyone still driving a VW van with a peace sign and a “make love- not war" sticker on it.

The Letterman Principle

“The Letterman Principle” - My 100% Crap beats your 60% Crap.

The David Letterman vs Bill O’Reilly "debate" is the perfect example of the liberal’s method of forming an opinion. Form your opinion based on what Hollywood thinks, not on facts.

During the interview, Dave told Bill that he had never seen or heard Bill O’Reilly’s show (the #1 rated cable news analysis program several years running) but, he (Letterman) thinks that, “about 60% of what you say is Crap”. “About 60%, …right Paul?,… “Yeah… sixty percent crap.”

Without knowing anything that O’Reilly had ever said and without being able to give even one example of O’Reilly distorting a single fact, Dave (with Paul) is able to come to the conclusion that O’Reilly is a liar. Did Dave ever challenge Michael Moore or Al Franken that way? (LOL)

The next time you happen to hear someone spouting the “Bush Lied, O’Reilly is a liar or Republicans are liars” mantra, remember they are basing their entire view of politics on the rich, Hollywood stars (mostly high-school dropouts) opinions and ex-comedian’s book covers. One thing the liberals all learned in junior high (before quitting school) was that if you wanted to be liked by the “cool” people then, you had better agree with them.

Letterman would rather be liked by “cool people” like Michael Moore and Co. than by “stuffed shirt, Bible thumping, liars”. Unfortunately, many of Dave’s viewers who don’t get into the details don’t challenge Dave’s opinion because he is “cool”. Cool is good, in it’s own place, but not so much in deciding politics or views on life.

You don’t have to dig very deep to see that actually the conservatives are much more open minded and understand the importance of civil debate than the Hollywood liberals who first seek to degrade conservatives, discredit and suppress the viewpoint and in some cases virtually criminalize the individual to eliminate the point of view.

O’ Reilly was armed with loads of facts and his analysis of those facts.
Letterman didn’t need any facts to analyze.
Dave heard the word “conservative” in association with Bill O’Reilly and therefore could conclude that about 60% of what O’Reilly said was a lie. Perhaps Dave had seen the cover of Al Franken’s book and that was good enough for him.

Letterman: "I'm just spitballing here"...."I'm not smart enough to debate you..."
After challenging O'Reilly on the right to criticize Cindy Sheehan for calling the insurgents in Iraq "freedom fighters", Dave simply said he didn't believe O'Reilly- (liar).

With all due respect to Cindy Sheehan and sympathy for her loss. Her voice should NOT carry more weight than any of the 2,000+ families who's son's and daughters have given their life serving their country in Iraq. Her political views are no more valid or important than any others. Referring to the very people who were trying to kill her son and other U.S. military as "freedom fighters" is disrespectful to all, including her son and the rest of her family do not agree with her views. In O'Reilly's opinion she is being used by the anti-war crowd and the Democrat party as a weapon against Bush.

O'Reilly doesn't do the news, he does news analysis. He has representatives from both sides of every issue to debate on his show and he gives the opposite side to his view- "the last word".
That is about as "fair and balanced" as it gets whether you like O'Reilly or not.

So the real question is:
Do the liberals and Democrats who have claimed that
Bush knew about Sept. 11^th attacks and did nothing to stop it(false),
Bush “stole” the 2000 election(false),
Bush suppressed black votes(false),
Bush is planning a secret draft if you vote for him (vote or die)(false),
Bush bombed the New Orleans levy(lol false),
Bush is listening to your phone calls(false*,* unless you are planning an attack on the US),… etc. etc. etc.,
do those Democrats really think that somehow while making these incredibly outrageous claims (lies), at the same time, they can convince anyone with a brain (actual voters) that it is the conservatives who are liars?
If so, they are believing 100% crap not just 60%.

Liberal Media Bias and "Away-Team" Reporting

If you are like most red and blue-state American's and have a favorite sports team in baseball, football, basketball or hockey, the TV and radio announcers can play a large role in how you view the game.

Try listening to a game with your favorite team on the radio broadcast of the opposing team announcers. If you travel or have a cable tv package or satellite, you know what I mean.

You will hear everything your team is doing wrong and everything the other team does right. You will hear about alleged criminal activity of ex-players from your team and how the other team donates time to the Children’s Hospital and the homeless. You will hear all about dirty, cheep tactics from your team and about the great sportsmanship of the opponents.

In hockey, many tv announcers have a loud signature "GOAL" scream for the home-team, but when the "other team" scores, all you faintly hear is... "the puck went in the net"....

For “Red Stater”, Listening to and reading the mainstream media’s reporting on politics and the Iraq war is just like listening to an opposing teams broadcast of the events.

Our team could be winning 75-0 but all we are hearing is gloom and doom.

Finally, after hearing none of our team’s successes, but all of our team’s injuries, penalties and failures highlighted and replayed over and over, we could begin to question our team’s coaches and players. Their abilities and motives. By listening to the other teams announcers, you would think your team is going to “blow it” any second and lose the game.

The fact is, neither team’s announcers give a totally objective view of the game. They can’t. There is no such thing in sports, or in News reporting. Reporters are biased/people are biased.

We humans make decisions now based on the info we have now. Waiting for all of the facts doesn’t work for most of us. It is easier to simply adjust our opinions based on new information as it comes in rather than to not have an opinion.

The main-stream media, in order to avoid being accused of “home-team” reporting, puts itself in the role of “away-team” reporting and calls it “journalism”.

It is not journalism to automatically have an “anti” perspective on a positive story.

Cable News political talk shows provide a format for reporting “both sides- you decide” type reporting which at least attempts to address both sides of a story.

But wouldn’t it be refreshing to see the media in the U.S. be the home-team reporter once in a while, like when it comes to the safety of our troops in war and of our citizens here at home?

There is no more harm in rooting for the home-team in times of war than there is in times of sports achievements, space program, technological breakthroughts etc.

Of course there is a bias in the news media and of course it is to the left/liberal tilt. Duh.

You don’t have to conduct a study at UCLA to determine that, just ask any Red Stater.

But if you need clinical scientific proof, here it is.

Red.