Oh, I'm sorry. This time it's called "Economic Stimulus". (For the record, since I know it's going to come up, I didn't approve of Bush's stimulus package, either. While he was amazing as the War on Terror, his economic policies were seriously lacking.)

Because 1 trillion dollars (that's $1,000,000,000,000) at the start of it all didn't work, the Immaculate Administration of Hope and Change decided that we needed another 1 trillion dollars (that's $1,000,000,000,000) to help prop up an economy that NEEDS TO RECEDE AND DEFLATE like it always has and always will. Where does this money come from, I ask you? We obviously can't afford it. Our national debt has already peaked 10 trillion (that's $10,000,000,000,000) under the Bush Administration and everyone was upset at the poor policies of the Republicans. I mean, I agreed... Cutting taxes without cutting spending? It's like, DUH! Got to get the money from somewhere if it's not coming from taxes, and that makes the deficit go up!

But yeah, let's completely forget that, because it's the Democrats who're doing it this time, and they said they'd clear out the "Culture of Corruption" and run a transparent administration of hope and change. Yeah! What this economy really needs is more money dumped into it, because there really is no such thing as inflation. Nah. Print more money than we have... Borrow more money than we have... It'll make it all better! Prices will remain the same and everyone can help relieve some of the pressure! What a load of bull honkey... Even the poll on the CNN article (at the moment with over 37,000 votes) has 69% of the people saying it won't make any difference. (When a liberal site has comments and votes against liberal action, you know it's wrong.) But since when has the Democrat-controlled Congress ever listened to what we, The People (aka: The Majority), want? Nobody wanted the first bail out, nobody wanted this bail out. The first one obviously didn't work, so what's the answer? Let's do it again, voters be darned! Why? "Because it's good for us." Please. A population properly educated on an issue will more than likely make the best decision on it. They already know how this economic crisis came about. (Keep reading.)

On the bright side, with the sweep of the Democrats during the last election, a lot of RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) were flushed out and actually switched parties so they could be on the "winning team". What does that do? Why, it leaves Republicans in a cripple state, doesn't it? I mean, that's what the mainstream media keeps saying. What actually happened is that "The Great Republican Flush" cleared out mostly everyone except true Conservatives. When you see a Republican right now, you can most likely say they're a Conservative. And you know what the House Republicans did, bless their hearts?

THEY DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT. Not a single one. Period. This is a completely Democrat idea and it passed the House with nothing but Democrat votes. Finally, the liberals have a back bone. When (not if... WHEN) this thing fails, you know who's going to be carrying the bag? Oh, you know it! The Democrats and their Lord Messiah Barack Obama. Mark my words. It WILL fail. You can tell the Democrats think it'll fail, too, because they kept pressuring the Republicans to vote. If a bill is going to succeed, why try forcing the other party to help you when you can pass it anyway and take all the credit? If it's going to fail, you know they're going to want someone to share the blame with. I mean, even if it's completely insane, they need to keep up their promises that the government can fix everything, don't they! But the Republicans FINALLY said "no way! We ain't helping you do anything!"

Any economist worth their weight in salt can see failure coming from a hundred miles away. Failure of capitalism, my butt. The Democrats can keep blowing their hot air all over the place, but at least The People still realize the true cause of this financial mess was Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION GOVERNMENT REGULATION that required firms to provide loans to people who could never pay them back. When the Republicans tried to get something done about it before it all imploded, good ol' Barney Frank kept saying nothing could happen. The man is a freak, and he and the others responsible for this mess are in charge of cleaning it up. Yeah, that sure is a recipe for success.

The only way to get this economy back on its feet is to let those who made poor business decisions get flushed down the toilet. Nobody's saying it's going to be easy, but it's better to get this thing over with now before we flush trillions down the toilet with them. Seriously... 819 billion dollar stimulus? Seriously? My gosh. People will remember stuff like this next election. So in the best interest of the country, STOP DOING CRAP LIKE THIS. But, at the same time, in the best interest of the Republican Party in 2010, KEEP DOING CRAP LIKE THIS. It will make the Conservative sweep to power that much easier! For those of us who are crying at this stupidity of the administration's push for this bill, remember:

It took a Jimmy Carter to get a Ronald Reagan!

How's that for a post title? I mean, speaking honestly, I'm glad to see that attacks against terrorists are continuing, but I thought I'd adopt a liberal headline for the first drone launch into Pakistan since Obama has had the power to stop it. I mean, he's already found the time to start closing Guantanamo Bay and scale back the Central Intelligence Agency, but he overlooked a missile launch, eh?

Won't that make them angry at us? I thought Obama was supposed to restore the faith people had in us before Bush took office? He's not going to do that by murdering Pakistanis without a trial. I thought we were supposed to stop this war on terror.

It's almost 11:30 and my next class is at 1:15 or something like that, so I have a bunch of time to burn... I'm listening to Glenn Beck and soon to be Rush Limbaugh, and I thought I'd yak about a few things.

The more general education classes I take, the more I think I might be better off doing something besides Computer Science. I mean, CS is great fun, but then there's something like Economics! Well, whaddya know, I like it! It's a lot of what I've already absorbed through my following politics almost religiously, and it's just great to see it all come together in an official way. A major in Economics would look neat. Then there's mathematics... Never was one for math, but then I take it and, hey! I like it! I can understand and grasp these weird, almost abstract ideas and precise rules that the universe works on. A major in Mathematics would look neat, too. Then there's World Literature. Reading all kinds of books and observing the storytelling changes over the centuries and seeing what works and what doesn't... A major in Writing would look neat, too!

Man, if I had the money? I'd always be taking classes. My goal is to get a major in Computer Science, then work at a university somewhere. Usually, when you work at a university, you get free tuition. That's my goal. The free tuition part. I'd get a major in Mathematics next. CS/Math, man. Ultimate combination.

So there were 4 updates for Ubuntu on my netbook just now. Hooray! Maybe there's a little fix so it remembers what my LCD brightness levels are at? Yes? Please? No. It was an update for Firefox. Oh boy. Actually, since there was a huge deal about the stupid license for the STUPID ICON, Linux doesn't actually come with Firefox. It's called "web browser". Oh, it's exactly like Firefox except for the name and the icon. The updates I downloaded were called "Firefox", but it's "Web Browser". You know how stupid that seems? Gotta love open source. Anyway, I don't even use Firefox anymore. It came bundled and I tried using it for a few weeks, but yesterday? Know what I did? I downloaded Opera Linux. It's far, far, far, far faster at EVERYTHING. Heaven forbid that Windows comes bundled with Internet Explorer so as to encourage everyone to stay with IE, but Linux can come bundled with Firefox and there be no outcry over the insane bloat? Guess not. I would much rather install IE on Linux if Microsoft went for that. Oh yeah... I went there. IE on Linux. (I would have tried Chrome on Linux, but Google didn't think it was important, I guess, so I went with Opera. Opera never ceases to amaze me.)

Hmm, what next? Well, related to economics, my professor (And you know, with "professor" you get the image of an old guy, but this guy has a PhD in Economics and can't be older than 35... He's great!) always offers his class a subscription to the Wall Street Journal for 10 extra credit points. At first, I was going to pass... But then I figured, eh. Why not? I saved money by taking back some books I didn't need, and when you think of it as another book, it's really not that expensive, so I went for it. You bet. I now get the WSJ every single day. EVERY... SINGLE... DAY... I don't know what I was expecting, really. I think I was expecting a little magazine or something. And maybe come once a week.

Boy, was I wrong... You know how absolutely gargantuant the WSJ is? Have you ever seen one? It's a massive newspaper. That comes EVERY DAY. It's HUGE. I've never seen a newspaper this big. It's like the Indianapolis Star or something. I've seen the little Kokomo Tribune, which is a pathetic excuse for a liberal union soapbox, but nothing this size. And you know what else? I had just got done with watching an episode of Early Edition, and I was going to do... Something else. Probably to go to the bathroom. I whip open my door and am just about to head down the hall when, all of a sudden, I see it: A huge newspaper outside my door. Right after watching Early Edition? Like, RIGHT after watching an episode, I get introduced to the real WSJ and it was just creepy.

So yeah... I think that's all the interesting things that've happened to me this week. Oh, Center Hall, the building where the boiler exploded on Monday? I'm not sure what happened, whether it was just a gas explosion or the boiler exploded (like shrapnel everywhere), but apparently, the computer labs were flooded (though there didn't seem to be any damage), but it's all been fixed up and we were able to go to classes on Wednesday and have lab yesterday. Plus, there's a lot of sirens going on right now, too... For the last hour or so, actually. This little city seems to have a lot of excitement.

So I have like an hour before next class, since Friday is the low-load day, and I just got done with Macro Economics and I'm going to tell you what I learned and have been learning since I started. I'm telling you... If our government leaders would have only taken an intro economics class, we would be far, far better off than we are right now. I'm, what? A week into classes and we've already covered the benefits of unrestricted free trade and the problems you face when you restrict it.

Basically, there's this thing called COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE. It's the only thing you need to trade with someone and benefit. Basically, it's the idea that you can produce something cheaper than anyone else even if someone can make more than you can. When someone can make more of something than you, that's called ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGE. Say we, the US, can make more lightbulbs than anyone else in the world. We have an absolute advantage. If France can make lightbulbs cheaper than we can, even if they make a total of less lightbulbs than we can, they have the comparative advantage, and that's all you need to trade. Say we can make glass plates cheaper than France can make plates and cheaper than we can make lightbulbs... It is in everyone's best interest for us to focus more on glass plates and France to focus more on lightbulbs and then we trade with each other. Being able to make these things cheaper, we can make A LOT MORE of them and trade with each other for the other thing we need and still have a major surplus. Our economics grow.

So here our economy book shows example after example of how this works and makes everyone vastly better off, but they use stupid examples like lightbulbs and glass plates. (Even though I made up that example, the idea is the same, and the principles are the same.) My professor, on the other hand, keeps going "does that sound like something we could use in anything today?" And generally goes HINT HINT THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY???

Seriously. The two major examples that we can apply this idea to RIGHT NOW is the massively failing auto industry and the ethanol industry. First, I'll explain the auto industry... I mean, it's incredibly sad that I, a week into an introductory economics class, know exactly what is best for the country and the 25 year Democrats in Congress are doing everything but this. Anyway...

We know the story. The auto industry is failing. Sales are too low and costs are too high. As with most industries, there comes a point where the OPPORTUNITY COST exceeds the income you make selling that good. Opportunity cost is the idea that, since we have finite resources, if we make Thing A, we HAVE to make Thing B. A resource can be anything from a worker to a plastics compound. You think "resource" as material of some kind... Nah. It could even be money. Anything and everything you need to make something is a "resource". The opportunity cost for us to make automobiles is waaay too high. Why is it high? All kinds of things... I mean, it didn't help that the price of a COMPLIMENT to automobiles (gasoline) went through the roof last year, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the cost of workers in the automotive industry is WAY TOO HIGH. Those stupid unions keep demanding more and more money for petty factory work and nobody can afford them anymore, but they have to have them to make anything, so they keep trying... So now the industry is failing because the costs outweigh the benefits.

Now, the kneejerk reaction is to prop up the industry because, if it closes, then we've "lost" an amazing number of jobs. Now, in economics, the term "lost" is misconception of what actually happens. When an industry fails, does the economy lose jobs? No! The industry loses jobs in that particular market, but the employees will always migrate to another industry. The jobs aren't "lost", but instead have a transition period of downtime while the resources shift to another cheaper industry. The idea of losing a job on a national economic scale is a fallacy. Now a depression is another story entirely, but we're not talking about that... We're talking about a single industry collapsing under its own costs.

Using textbook capitalist economic principles of free trade that have been proven countless times over the years, what should happen is this: The automotive industry needs to shrink and we need to import vehicles from countries who can make them cheaper. That makes people incredibly upset. HOW DARE WE BUY A FOREIGN PRODUCT! How dare we send jobs overseas! The crying goes on and on... Hold your horses, I'll explain imports in a minute. Using the idea of free trade and comparative advantage, if we can import cars cheaper from outside the country, and we DO IT, what will happen? Well, cars will be cheaper! The domestic production will scale back and lower prices and resources (workers and materials) will be released as a result. What can then happen is these new resources (workers and materials) can be reallocated to other industries that are cheaper to maintain. We can make more of something else and trade it with countries who give us cheaper cars and BOTH ECONOMIES GROW. Sure, there's a period of downtime as resources are reallocated, but it's always far better in the end. Is there really a good argument against making things cheaper? I'm not talking about lowering the price for consumers so that producers lose money, this is "cheaper for everyone, period."

Now, one of the things that ALWAYS comes up, especially from the liberals, is that we're sending American jobs overseas, as if that's somehow a bad thing. No, we're not sending American jobs overseas, we're redistributing the resources from a high cost industry to a low cost industry, and someone else who can make cheaper what's expensive for us to make will pick up the extra slack. We'll still get the same amount of vehicles if domestic plants close, they'll just be from another country instead of from here. BUT THEY'LL BE CHEAPER, and the resources can be used in an industry that we do MUCH BETTER, too.

But okay... Here's what the average person (and Democrats in Congress for 25 years) sees. They go to a store and buy, well, pretty much anything and see the sticker "made in China" and they freak out and wonder where all the American jobs are since "everything" is being made overseas. Well, I'll tell you what... How do you think we pay for imports? How do products get from China to the United States so you can pay for it at Wal-Mart with American Dollars? What someone, somewhere, has to do is export a good to TRADE China for the stuff they're going to sell to you. Hey, there's a word you don't hear very much: Export. Everyone's always crying about how much we're importing, but they don't realize how we actually GET those imports. We get imports by trading other countries for our exports. It's a long, complicated process, but that's it in a nutshell.

Do you realize that the United States is the largest exporter in the world as we speak? This book is only a year old, so I'm going to think that we haven't lost that status, yet. That's right. We give other countries a massive amount of products and services in exchange for a massive amount of products and services. The thing is, we're not exactly known for consumer level products, or you'd see more food and toys and cheap electronics made in the United States. Actually, we have a huge comparative advantage (there's that idea again) in wheat and high-technology and massive equipment. (Think factory robots and cargo jets and excavation equipment.) The United States is the top of the line in many industries, but they're not industries the regular person would even think of buying. What would you need one of those giant dump trucks for? Not the little ones... THE REALLY FREAKING HUGE ONES. See, the US is the largest exporter in the world right now and we export things that you, the Wal-Mart shopper, will probably never see. Just because you're not aware of what we export doesn't mean we don't export. We have a colossal amount of jobs that sell products overseas so they can import the things someone else can make cheaper.

Now, I'm sure those jet and dump truck factories could use some workers, since cheap industries will always grow until it's not in anyone's best interest to do. All these automotive worker unions who've priced their own industry into oblivion can probably shift to other fabrication factories without too many problems. There will be changes, such as relocation and maybe a smaller paycheck, but that's the ebb and flow of the economy. The automotive industry is dying. Deal with it. If you don't let the market adjust like it's supposed to, you'll seriously harm the economy and make the entire country worse off. (Seriously, you've already managed to take 800 billion dollars of tax payer money to be used to bail out everyone who needs to scale back.)

A final example is the idea that the government will tax imports to protect domestic products. This is a horrible idea... If you can get something cheaper somewhere else, and trade for it by making something cheaper, and the whole market gets cheaper, WHY IS THAT BAD? Cheaper means more sales. Remember, this isn't the idea that consumers get a break and producers have to bite the losses, this is cheaper for everyone. Less money to buy something and less money to make something. Currently, there's a restriction on sugar imports. Why? Your guess is as good as mine, but you know what it's hurting? The ethanol industry. You know how ethanol has been deemed a uselessly expensive alternative to gasoline because it uses up valuable corn resources and doesn't really affect the price at the pump? Well, that's because there's a restriction on sugar.

And why is a sugar restriction affecting the price of ethanol? Because there's two ways to make ethanol... One with fermented corn and one with fermented sugar. Using sugar is vastly cheaper than using corn. We don't make a whole lot of sugar. That comes from other countries. As of the writing of the book, which is very recent, the world price of a gallon of ethanol is a single dollar. American price is two dollars. See, the rest of the planet benefits from unrestricted sugar trade and they can use all this extra sugar flowing around to make cheap ethanol. But the United States regulates sugar imports for some dumb reason, and we don't get sugar ethanol OR the sugar to make our own sugar ethanol.

You'd think that all these global warming alarmists who want us to get off gasoline would realize that these stupid trade limits are slowing the transition to "cleaner" fuel... It's insane. They're not interested in helping, they just want to control our lives. If they were really interested in the best for this country, they would approach the economy in the true capitalist sense.

As my professor says: FREE TRADE GOOD, TRADE RESTRICTIONS BAD.

And now it's time for Chapel... Oh boy.

The first day with Barack Obama as the official President of the United States of America and I can already feel the love the Democrats promised would happen the moment we call him President Obama. After all, for the last eight years, the only reason anyone hated us was because of Bush, right? Once we root that tyrant out of the office, everything will return to normal!

Let's see... Uhm, let's look at how Iran is reacting!

Ouch! Is that a photo of Obama? Why, yes it is. And they're burning it, in case you didn't notice the flames. Right next to photos of Bush. Yes, indeed! Iran loves America now that Obama is our President! Oh, they've also switched their chants from "death to Bush" to "death to Obama." Iran sure does have a strange way of showing its love for America:

"Obama's is the hand of Satan in a new sleeve", explained Hossein Shariatmadari. "The Great Satan now has a black face". His words have weight because he speaks for Ayatollah Khamenei, the man who makes the big decisions in Iran; on foreign policy and all matters nuclear.

Then we have everyone's favorite terrorist dictator: Hugo Chavez. What did he think of President Bush? In September 2006, he was next in line to speak at the United Nations after Bush left the podium and he remarked that he could still smell the sulfur. Whether he considered Bush to actually be Satan or to just confer with Satan, we'll probably never know. What does he think of Obama? Apparently the exact same thing. He said Obama's stench is like that of Bush's. (For those of you liberals who still cling to the false notion that FOX is biased against Democrats, there's a link to your favorite Washington Post that says the same thing... The catch is that I'm going to make you go through FOX's site to get it! For you blind bats our there, the link is at the bottom of the article.)

Ouch! Yeah, I'm really seeing the love there, too. Weren't all these people supposed to become our friends after Bush left? After all, they were supposed to hate Bush, not America and its principles. Just Bush. Hmm. Something's up... How could this have happened? Did the Democrats lie to us? Nooo... Why would they ever do something like that? The Democrats? LIE TO GET THEIR WAY? Unthinkable!

But hey, at least the inauguration went smooth, aye? Oops... It didn't. The Immaculate Messiah has managed to add himself to the extremely tiny list of Presidents who have actually messed up the Oath of Office. Good show! You'd think that two people (the Messiah supposedly being one of the greatest intellects and orators alive) could memorize 35 words. 35 words. Something so vitally important as the line you repeat to actually become the President of the United States and he managed to chop it up. Here, for a future President's sake, I will post the line so you can memorize it in the 2 months you have after actually being elected before actually having to say it:

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

There. Print this out, put it on your cell phone (or iPod, if you're so in tune with the youth as Obama is), or on a note card, or, heck, tell your wife to ask you to repeat it at random times during the day. Could you imagine what would have happened if Bush had done this? Of course, the Democrats say, Obama is only human! It's an honest mistake! HAHAHA! For the entire campaign, you've been turning the man into a god and now you say "he's only human." Perfect. Absolutely perfect. There's a reason we conservatives call him "The Messiah", and it's not because we think he's the Messiah.

But let me welcome the Lord Messiah Barack Obama to the office of the President of the United States of America! May you come to handle the adversity and unpopular image we hold abroad and even with ourselves with the same cool dignity that the last President handled it all with. (In other words, I HOPE YOU EXPERIENCE EXACTLY WHAT REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS! Ahem.)

Quick note: I hope everyone comes to realize that the reason our enemies hate us is not because of who we have in office, but because of what we stand for: THE CONSTITUTION. Why did they hate Bush? Because he swore the Oath of Office to protect and defend the Constitution. Why do they hate Obama? Because he (barely) swore the Oath of Office to protect and defend the Constitution. It's not rocket science! But it does seem to me that the simplest explanation and solution is always the last thing the Democrats think of. I think that's the very definition of "lack of common sense", if you ask me.

America's enemies hate America because... THEY HATE AMERICA!

UPDATE 1: By the way, I totally forgot to mention that the link to the schmooze piece about Obama's iPod is from Chicago Sun-Times. Oh yeah, my Early Edition obsession has finally influenced my political commentary! How totally awesome is that?

We all know Nanci Pelosi's sermon about Republican corruption in Congress and how the Democrats will take control and make everything better... Yeah. It was a "great day" when Democrats finally wrested control back from the horrible, horrible Republicans. And then, of course, we get great legislature like banning incandescent lightbulbs and the 800 billion dollar (counting earmarks) "economic stabilization act" that nobody wanted. (How is that economic stabilization going, eh, Democrats? The stock market seems to be doing really well... And what about all those banks? The automotive industry? Rock solid now? We told you it wouldn't work.)

Well, we got something in the mail a couple days ago. It started off with "we're all concerned with consume safety" and insinuated that there were new laws and regulations that were going to impact us. Great, this ought to be good. Mind you, this is a company trying to sell their goods. I mean, look at the thing they're trying to sell... It's supposedly a sort of gun that will sample the material of whatever you point it at:

That's right! The answer is just a click away! Let's open the thing up, shall we?

More exciting photos of the gun in action, it seems. It looks like it's supposed to check for lead levels? What? Look over there on the left. See it? "What are the highlights of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 and what do they mean to you?" Oh boy. What did the Democrat controlled Congress do this time without telling us? "What are your responsibilities as a provider of child-accessible items?" Woah-woah-woah. Hold up. What does this CPSIA thing actually do? Or, better yet, the question to ask with any Democrat controlled law is to ask "how bad is this for us?" Not "is this bad", but "HOW bad", because there's no doubt that anything that Congress does is going to be bad, period. Here's another telling explanation:

"On August 14, 2008, the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act was signed into law, setting NEW RESTRICTIONS on permissible levels of lead in child-accessible products. VERIFICATION AND TESTING are imperitive to PROTECT OUR CHILDREN from lead poisoning and to reduce the risk associated with distributing lead-containing products." Take it at face value, folks... It gets better. Of course there are restrictions, that's what Democrats think governments are supposed to do. They also pull out the always laughable reason: It's for the children! Right, how many times have I heard the jokes fly when the government uses an excuse like that? Let's not give a Democrat Congress a free pass.

The date, August 14, 2008, gave me a place to start digging up the legislation. It didn't take me long to find it. It's called H.R. 4040: Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, introduced by... Can you guess? A Democrat from Illinois. Oh, how appropriate. You can read up on it at the Consumer Product Safety Commission site, if you want, too. So what does this entail, exactly? Well, to be perfectly honest, when you sell (or resell) anything designed for children under the age of 12, you HAVE to test for lead or you'll be subject to huge fines and prison time. We're talking garage sales, here... We're talking Goodwill. Some are even saying you can't GIVE your stuff away without testing. And because I mentioned Goodwill, you might be thinking clothes. Wrong. Everything! Literally anything and everything designed for children under 12 is subject to this stupid, stupid law. Bikes, beds, hats, books, Legos, stuffed animals, you name it, it's required that you test. There's a great expose write-up on Forbes about it, too... I would highly suggest you read it to get a break down of exactly what this is going to do to our already hurting economy. Further proof that Democrats have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

How do you test? Well, the legislature never says, but seeing as how I got a handy brochure from a company that specializes in screening, I'd say Congress had an idea who might be handling that. I don't know about you, but the whole thing reeks of corporate lobbying and a "culture of corruption" that continues to engulf Congress even when Democrats have had a majority large enough to block or pass anything they've wanted since 2006. My gut tells me that a certain Thermo Fisher Scientific was partially involved in the drafting of this bill... Especially when they seem perfectly designed to handle just this type of problem.

Talk about a serious overreaction to the lead paint from China. Heaven forbid we reprimand China and threaten our trade status. No, no, no, it's not China's fault at all... They were only the ones who BUILT the things. No, it was the American outlets who were at fault for not testing the stuff before selling it! Yeah! That's it, exactly! It's the huge, evil, capitalist corporations like Wal-Mart who dared sell tainted goods to the innocent children. Heck, while we're at it, let's use this legislature to smack down everyone who exchanges childrens goods for money! Yeah! We can make everyone from the Wal-Mart managers to the local clothing reseller check for lead poisoning! I mean, it's only painted things from China that were contaminated, but what other excuse do we need to further squash the capitalist endeavors of this country?

Republicans: Striving to mandate that everyone can prosper equally.
Democrats: Striving to mandate that everyone must suffer equally.

Welcome to Democrat America! All hail the messiah! Obama, Obama!

Thank you, President Bush, for keeping this country safe in the aftermath of September 11, 2001; the first attack on American soil since December 7, 1941. That very same day, people were crying out for the government to retaliate against those who would dare try to shake our American ideals. People were angry because the government seemed to take its time to formulate a response. But you knew what you were doing. You got the full support of Congress and set into motion a massive plan to crush anyone directly and indirectly responsible for killing American citizens. The primary responsibility for a government is to protect and guarantee the safety of its citizens, and you did that.

Then, as Americans are quick to do in their luxurious lifestyle, we got complacent. We felt safe again. At first, everyone agreed with our military response to crush the terrorists, wherever they may be. But slowly, and yet shockingly fast, the media and the people started doubting your intentions. They started to forget what it felt like on September 12, 2001 and the doubts grew into disapproval... Disapproval turned into conspiracy theories and blind hate for what you were doing to the "poor terrorists". The outspoken liberal fanatics who care not for the safety of their own country began accusing you of murdering "innocent Iraqi civilians" for nothing but oil. They began to accuse you of murdering "innocent American soldiers" (brave men and women who volunteered to serve the United States of American in a military capacity and to follow orders given by those in charge) in a campaign of personal gain. But you knew what you were doing.

I didn't agree with everything you proposed, especially in regards to the economy and government spending, but I knew you had every intention of keeping us safe, and I supported every military action taken abroad. Because of your sheer determination not to succumb to those poor fools who think the best action to take is to run, hide, and wait for the enemy to come to you, you took the fight to the enemy's homeland and utterly crushed them. In the process, Iraq is a true free democracy as we speak and they are so much better off. Because of your determination in face of crushing opposition and negative press from the amazingly biased mainstream media, we have not had a single terrorist attack on American soil in almost 8 years since the World Trade Center was destroyed. You knew what you were doing and you knew what was best for us.

Because of you, the Iraq War has more or less concluded. There are still more terrorists to root out in other theaters of combat, but Iraq has been secured and the Iraqi government has decided, on their own, on a time table for slowly removing American military aid so they can step up and defend themselves. If we had retreated when the spineless liberals had wanted to, Iraq would be devoid of military aid right now. There would be a demolished government and a power vacuum where Saddam Hussein once was and Iraq would have fallen into so much more of a disarray than it was when under a dictatorship. By keeping to your convictions in spite of overwhelming hate, not only did you secure our safety by taking the fight to the terrorists, but you gave Iraq a true taste of freedom.

I realize that you didn't do all this single-handedly, but all it would have taken was a pen stroke and all of this would have ended years ago had you done what was the popular decision and retreated. Your own approval rating is the worst since we even started recording approval ratings, and you could have decided that it wasn't worth the devastating public image to continue the fight. You could have even decided to listen just to teach us all a lesson as to what the terrorists would do if they weren't concentrated in their own countries. You sacrificed public image to keep us safe, and I feel confident that, in the future, when all the hysterical liberal sensationalism has worn off and people's minds are clear enough to truely think, people will look back and see a President who didn't cave to overwhelming opposition to guarantee the safety of this country.

You are as much of a hero as everyone else in this war. Because of you, the Lord Messiah Barack Obama has nothing to do but "mop up" in Afghanistan. To be honest, we all know that he would never have been able to handle the political stress of something like this, and would definitely have not been able to stand up in the face of the colossal amount of pessimism and hate against his very character and being. They didn't just hate your policies, they hated YOU because of your policies.

So thank you. I never worried about a terrorist setting off a bomb in Indianapolis or Chicago or the air force base a half hour north of here. I personally hate to see you go, because I honestly fear for my safety now that those deranged liberals have gained control over everything. I honestly do. But to you, President George W. Bush, I thank you for keeping everyone safe for a grueling 8 years of war against terrorism. (Boy, won't those liberals be shocked when they see you willingly transfer the office! I mean, how many times have I seen liberals talk about how you're so power-hungry that you'd declare martial law and prevent the elections from even happening? Yeah... They're THAT deranged.)

-----

Comments are disabled. Why? Because I don't want to hear the ignorant spew from liberals who are too blinded with hate and "Bush Derangement Syndrome" to listen to any reason whatsoever. You make me sick, and while I do seriously fear for the stability and safety of this country in the next 4 years, part of me deeply wishes that you get to experience EXACTLY what you've been asking for this whole time. I also look forward to hearing how you liberals will demand that we respect the President now that it's one you love while miraculously ignoring the attitude you've had for the last 8 years. Oh, you know it's coming. I've already seen it. Absolutely despicable. You really do make me sick.