The Neosecularist

I Said That? Yeah, I Said That!

Of “Lazy” Spanish Speakers And Obama’s Lazy, “Lazy” Speech.

Barack Obama gave another “lazy” speech.  “Lazy” for so many reasons.  It’s thoughtlessness; it’s lack of credibility; its lack of substance.  If Obama really wanted to talk about “laziness”, when he said,

But we’ve been a little bit lazy, I think, over the last couple of decades.’’

Obama should have directed that statement to all the “lazy” people who have come to America and gotten citizenship without learning the English language, like these folks with whom our tax dollars will be redirected to because they cannot vote in English.  Why is it whenever one of these stories pops up, it is always about Hispanics and Latinos?  Why is it this one group of people, Spanish speakers, refuses to learn the English language?  And why do we, Americans, continue to make it easier for them to retain their language, their history, their culture at the expense of losing ours?

Here we have, in Barack Obama, a President who condemns American business owners for being too “lazy” to create jobs over the last twenty years in America; American business owners who have instead been busy creating jobs elsewhere in the world, thus the “real reason”, according to Barack Obama, for why so many millions of Americans are out of work.  Not because American business has been taxed and regulated out of the country; not because Barack Obama has supported taxing and regulating American business out of the country in all of his anti-business, anti-capitalist rhetoric.

While American business looks abroad for real economic sanity that liberals and Democrats have all but destroyed in America, ironically over the same last couple of decades Obama touts we’ve been “lazy”, those businesses that have remained, the vast majority of which have always been small businesses – the backbone of the American economy – have had to make drastic cuts in their businesses, including wages.  Such cuts have resulted in having to hire foreigners, non Americans, who are more willing to work for lower wages than actual American citizens, and most of whom are from Mexico and Central America – Spanish speaking countries.

See the correlation yet?

Said Obama:

We’ve kind of taken for granted — well, people will want to come here and we aren’t out there hungry, selling America and trying to attract new business into America.”

How does Obama expect to “sell America” to the rest of the business world that has a grounded understanding of economics?  Because of Obama and the Democrat Party – over the last two decades – competition in American business has all been wiped out.  There no longer is that competitive edge in American business.  High taxation and bloated regulation (which does not exist in other parts of the world) enacted, supported and viciously protected by Obama and the Democrat Party, has curbed the “hunger” from foreign business owners looking to invest their money.

In other words – why would a foreign business owner look to invest their money in America, knowing they will pay more for the investment, and lose more from the taxes incurred when they could invest that same money say in Ireland, and others parts of the world, where taxes are more competitive, where the risk is less, where profits made and realized are guaranteed to be greater than they would be investing in America?

Blame “lazy” Obama, directly, for his laziness when it comes to helping business creation in America.  Blame all “lazy” liberals and “lazy” Democrats for their political hatred of business and capitalism.  Blame anyone who is “lazy” enough to believe in Obama, liberalism  and the Democrat Party.  Anti-capitalism is why American business and the American economy is in the tank.   But a business, in America, or anywhere in the world, that is legitimately “lazy” is not going to remain in business for very long, is it?

Don’t blame business owners for doing everything they can to keep their businness from dying, even if it means having to leave America.

But what of all these “lazy” businesses and business owners right here in America, who have decided to brave Obama’s New World, working their butts off to stay alive?  The more “lazy” American businesses become, trying to find creative ways to remain afloat, because Obama and the Democrat Party refuse to support the pro-capitalist approach to our economy and American business – which, if they did support, would end our recession and put millions of people back to work – the more these “lazy” businesses are having to hire people for lower wages.  And who wants to work for minimum wage?

Not Americans!  Which is the reason for “selling America” to immigrants willing to “do the work” Americans are otherwise unwilling to do.  At least, for minimum wage.  Yet, even seven or eight dollars an hour is attractive to Mexican and other Central Americans who would be making considerably less in their own home country.  They come to America, legally and illegally, and soon are absorbed into the American “melting pot”.  A “melting pot” that has had its temperature cool and its ingredients change over time so that the recipe for becoming an American no longer includes learning English. (Or at least being proficient enough in the language when it comes time to vote.)

Now – which group is it that is being lazy?  American business for taking their businesses abroad, where taxes and regulations are lower, and competition is vastly greater?  Or foreigners coming to America to work and to become Americans, but unwilling to learn the English language, among other necessities?

Isn’t it ironic – Obama criticizes the act of being “lazy”.  Yet, the more “lazy” an American, or immigrant turned American citizen, actually is, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

Isn’t Obama only hurting his reelection bid trying to end “laziness” in America?

November 14, 2011 Posted by | Obama's lies, politics | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Of Herman Cain, And Why Some Who Cry “Rape” Ought To Be Ignored

How do you know when liberals are deathly worried about losing their political power to conservatives?

When desperate times call for desperate measures.  And when playing the “race card” back fires on them (which it has) they pull out the old “rape” thing from their bag of dirty tricks.  Whether its sexual assault, sexual harassment or sexual innuendo, what “rape” means to a liberal, besides a woman “playfully resisting” one of them, is an opportunity to smear their conservative opponents.

So it is with Presidential contender, Herman Cain, who has been accused of sexual harassment.  Not while running for President.  Not even recently.  Many, many years ago, back in the 1990′s when he was head of the National Restaurant Association.  Two unidentified women, at that time, alleged he sexually harassed them.   Although a settlement was reached, and agreed to by the women in question, which consisted of a severance package in the five figure range, proof of their allegations was just as sketchy, rudimentary and shady then as it is now.  No charges were ever actually filed after the women agreed to the terms of the package deal.  Hmm?

‘Tis most foul.  Sexual harassment in the work place is bad regardless of the situation, but it is worse when it is the employer sexually harassing his employee.  And the stakes are higher than if it is one employee sexually harassing another employee.  Also at stake is the whole “women’s movement”, feminism, and equality between the sexes in the world place.  If women want to be treated as equals, how does either falsely accusing a male employer of sexual harassment, or dropping an allegation of sexual harassment in exchange for money, help their cause?

Whatever actually did, or did not transpire, between Cain and his accusers, the two women, rather than take the issue to court, instead took the money and ran.  What does that tell you about the women?  In other words, if there actually was sexual harassment, whether physical proof existed or not, why wouldn’t the women have been more determined to take Herman Cain to court, see him prosecuted, and hopefully charged and sentenced for the very serious crime of sexual harassment so he could not do this to another woman?  Why was is more important to these women to take the money, if the charges they alleged against him were real?  And what does that say about women who cry “rape”, only to calm down and shut up when they are offered money?

And – why now?  Why some 15 years after the fact is this being brought up once again?  Ask  They are the ones who apparently dug up this old and ancient and forgotten, and politically irrelevant, story of alleged sexual harassment.  At Obama’s and the Democrats bidding, perhaps?

What is known fact is liberals are in a panic and in crisis mode.  Public opinion of, and support for, Obama is floundering.  They see a political opportunity to use a very dated charge against Herman Cain, who is, by all recent polling,  (with 24%  to Romney’s 20%) a legitimate and serious contender for the Republican Presidential nomination.  Liberals never waste an opportunity to smear their opponents.

And should Cain win the Republican nomination and go head to head with Obama, one recent poll has Cain beating Obama.  With barely a year to go until the real election, Democrats aren’t taking any chances.  Oh, by the way, for those of you who still don’t know – Cain is black.

That’s important to note because should these two men, Obama and Cain, be our choices for President, it will take race, the factor of race, and the Democrats favorite dirty trick, the “race card” out of the equation.  Authentic blackness aside, Cain is just as much authentically conservative as Obama is authentically liberal.  That difference will be the only factor in Americans, white and black, deciding who the next President of the United States will be.

Cain has his 9-9-9 plan, and while there are flaws in it, such as the fact that if implemented people who pay nothing in taxes now will end up paying 18% under the 9-9-9 plan – 9% in federal taxes plus 9% in a federal sales tax.  However, that problem is easily overcome by shifting the numbers upwards so that poor people will still be exempt from the federal 9% taxation.  They would then only pay a 9% sales tax like everyone else.  And even there one can find wiggle room if such necessities as food and clothing are exempt from the federal sales tax.

Cain also has a problem with his stance on abortion.  It is not entirely clear whether he opposes abortion in any case, including to save the life of the mother.  However, that in itself is a non issue because the vast majority of Americans, including religious, conservative, pro-life Americans, support abortion if it is used to legitimately save the life of the mother.  In other words, should Cain be elected President, and should he actually hold the view that abortion be outlawed even to save the mother’s life – such a bill would never even come to his desk for him to sign into law anyway.  And so long as Roe v. Wade is “law”, such a bill would be struck down by the Supreme Court as Unconstitutional.

Obama, on the other hand, has his Obamacare, and that screws us all.  Well, all of us that aren’t politically connected and can’t get waivers.  He has his “jobs” (job killer) bill he’s trying to force upon us as well.  Higher taxes on the rich; more “green” initiatives which ultimately wastes more green, as in money, than it generates (we’re still sifting through the Solyndra files); abortion on demand, for any reason; more government programs, more government “solutions” to the problems government itself created in the first place, more government itself; higher deficits, more national debt; more excuses why he can’t get his plans passed by congress, more whining about how Republicans are obstructionists, more complaining about partisan politics, more stumbling through his speeches, etc.  Do we really want another four years of all that?

Cain is a major threat to Obama, and he would be an even greater threat than Romney or Perry, or anyone else.  It’s true some white conservatives will not vote for Cain because he is black.  However, the vast, vast majority of white conservatives (in the very high 90 percentile range) absolutely will vote for Cain.  Not because, or whether, he is authentically black, but because he is authentically conservative.

That is the only reason why liberals have sunk back down to the bottom of the barrel and scraped out the sludge on Cain’s passed charges of sexual harassment.  Charges that did not stick then, nor would they now, nor should anyone seriously consider or ponder or wonder about.  Charges that ought to be ignored, as they were ignored back in the 1990′s when they were fresh.  Charges that are as stale now as are liberals themselves, and all their phony, doctored, made-up cries of “rape”.

And by bringing up these charges, how much does it, will it, bring down the whole “women’s movement” in America if the charges are once again shown to be as irrelevant now as they were then?  Are liberal feminists really willing to see their “cause” thrown under the bus just to slander another strong, black conservative in the hopes he will falter enough in the polls to pull out?

What say you, women of America?  A good gamble?  Or just aces and eights?

November 1, 2011 Posted by | 2012 election, Obama, politics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Barack Obama’s America: Small vs. Big (More Obama Lies)

In a televised address, pandering to Gay rights groups and touting his support for repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Barack Obama has called Republicans visions of America “small“.  Somehow, in the mind of Barack Obama, and liberals, a  “small’ America” encompasses a world view that is anti gays in the military, and where a “big America” encompasses a world view, and a more compassionate one at that, which is anti life in the womb.

Only a liberal like Barack Obama would be more concerned with ending the practice of discrimination in the military than say ending the practice of murder in the womb.  Only a liberal like Barack Obama would conflate military discrimination with a “small America”  (i.e., a small and narrow minded point of view) while bolstering support for other issues like abortion rights in a “big America” (i.e., big and kind-hearted and open minded).  And only a liberal like Barack Obama could not see how wrong-headed he is actually being.

Liberals view a “big America” as one in which an ever expanding government exists to protect us all from ourselves, and any past, present and future mistakes we might make, as well as to “protect” the rights of everyone, regardless of how outlandish – unless you are a Christian, and unless you are still in the womb – but in reality to “protect” the vote and keep liberals and Democrats in office.

But that’s not a “big America”, that’s just big government.  And Barack Obama, as with all liberals, would have you pay tribute for that protection through steeper taxes, more regulations and more government oversight into your personal lives so that you might enjoy living in Barack Obama’s “big America”.

Obviously Obama’s “small America” speech was nothing more than liberal code for his support of big, and bigger, government.  And ironically, for all Obama’s hatred of “small America” it was after all a small group of political figureheads which coerced the military into dropping DADT.  If Obama had gone out to “big America”, the American people themselves, DADT would still be in effect because most Americans supported it.

The question, then, is – how exactly does Barack Obama define a “Republican vision of small America”?  (Keeping in mind that this is merely a code for conservative bashing)

A “small America” from a liberal Obama’s point of view is, to name a few, an America in which:

  Our borders are protected from waves of illegal aliens, arms and terrorists sneaking back and forth into our country

  Our children are protected from a liberal in-school indoctrination including a biased, untrue and unchecked, anti-American point of view

  Our culture and society is protected from an out of control Judiciary system that refuses to adhere to our Constitution and insists on making up laws, throwing out others, which suits their own personal views and liberal agendas.

Conversely, a “big America”, from a liberal Obama’s point of view is, to name a few, an America in which:

  America has no borders, does not seek to repatriate (deport) those who have come to America illegally, and instead allows for a blanket amnesty for all illegal aliens, (which, out of fairness, would have to include all future illegal aliens) despite the fact that this is a slap in the face to the millions of immigrants who have, and are trying to, come here through legal channels.  It’s also a slap in the face to common sense as it then becomes ridiculous for anyone who wants to come here to do so legally if, under Obama’s “big America” it becomes that much less of a hassle, and that much easier, to make the trek illegally, enter America and then claim the right of citizenship simply because they “have made it across” the border without being caught.

  Our children are taught (brainwashed) into despising America, its history and its principles, and our founding fathers because slavery was not abolished at our founding; women were not immediately given the right to vote until 1920 (and presumably not given the right to kill their child in the womb until 1973); poverty and homelessness were not wiped out, healthcare was not a “universal right”, the American Indian was uprooted from their ancestral land to make way for white Europeans, despite the fact that they never actually had a legal deed to the land, other than it had been occupied by their ancestors, to show proof of ownership; that all wealth creation in America was a direct result of the back breaking labor of both slaves and the poor, despise the fact that, slavery aside, many of the richest and wealthiest Americans made their money, rather than inherited it; that America, for all its mistakes, is inherently an evil and intolerant construct and therefore must be remolded into a nation which is continually “atoning” for its past mistakes and setting up government run program after program to better assist all those who have been “disenfranchised” throughout all of America’s history.

  Our judges are not held in check; are not held accountable for their actions; are not bound by the United States Constitution, as they are required, but rather are able to redefine and reinterpret law as they see fit – as they did in the 1973 Roe vs. Wade abortion case where the Supreme court cited a protection in our Constitution giving women the right to kill their unborn child in the womb – a right that did not exist then, nor exists now, anywhere in the Constitution.   But a “right” that exists solely within the liberal agenda.

Barack Obama’s “big America” is nothing more than one big lie.  And within that big lie are more Barack Obama lies, one lie after another.  Which makes Barack Obama himself one “big” liar.  And one in which will turn out to be a big mistake for Obama, and all liberals, in the 2012 election.  Big time!

October 2, 2011 Posted by | 2012 election, abortion, attackwatch, Don't Ask Don't Tell, gay and lesbian, government, homosexuality, Obama, Obama's lies, politics, Right To LIfe | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Why Black Americans Need To Abandon Barack Obama

Obama tells blacks to ‘stop complainin’ and fight – Yahoo! News.

Who is Barack Obama calling “y’all”?

Barack Obama, addressing the Congressional Black Caucus‘s annual awards dinner Saturday night, clearly showed how frustrated and how nervous he was, as well as his overall growing distrust with, and sense of betrayal from, black Americans, a voting block he easily secured in his 2008 Presidential victory,  but one that now is being chipped away at a rate which could ultimately cost him reelection in 2012.  He sincerely believes black Americans owe him big, and ought to remain loyal to him under any conditions and circumstances.  And he has a real problem with those blacks that have publicly scorned him and are beginning to turn against him.

Obama is keenly aware that blacks are angry with him, which is why he told them to “Stop complainin’.  Stop grumblin’.  Stop cryin’.”  And it is also why he made the very conscious and very deliberate move to talk “black speech” to them.  It’s not the first time Obama has talked down to blacks with this condescending speech pattern, dropping his “g’s”.  If a white person had addressed this same crowd and spoke in the same demeaning manner in which the first black President of the United States had, that same Congressional Black Caucus would be screaming bloody racism.  So would Morgan Freeman.

And if someone who had never heard Obama speak before listened to him for the first time at this annual event, they would assume Obama was both ignorant and uneducated, and wonder how such a man could ever be elected President of the United States.  They probably wouldn’t understand that Obama was intentionally speaking in a derogatory fashion, playing to his crowd, his base, his race.  Nor would they understand why.  But those of us who do know who Barack Obama is, and his ways, understand “why” he lowers himself and speaks this way to blacks.

It is the audacity of this hopeless man, Barack Obama, in believing that he has the black vote sewn up.  And while he will still win a majority of the black vote, it will not be as large a percentage as it was in 2008.  With just over a year before we go to the polls, that percentage has the real potential to plummet even further.  Barack Obama knows this, which was his cause for frustration and anger at last night’s event.

If it does, even dropping down to seventy percent, Obama’s reelection bid will be in serious trouble.  It isn’t just the black vote but whites and Hispanics as well.  There is indeed a growing sense among all his constituents that they have been bamboozled by a man who campaigned to deliver them unto the promised land, but now realize that was another broken promise, a campaign maneuver, he never meant to keep.  How many blacks even know Obama doesn’t really have a “stash”?

Which is why all Americans, but black Americans in particular, ought to come to their senses and abandon Barack Obama, and the Democrat Party as well.  A man, and a party, who have a clear and dangerous agenda to destroy the American Dream for all of us, and in doing so he will take down millions of blacks who have struggled and yearned for a piece of the American pie for generations.  His wrongheaded policies will make us all slaves to government.

Even before Obama became President, as Jr. Senator from Illinois, and along with a majority Democrat controlled House, he has sought initiatives, legislation and laws that have hurt the growth of American business, jobs, employment, housing, etc., including his fervent assault on the bill of rights.  Since taking office his efforts to undermine the American spirit of free enterprise, liberty and independence, creativity and inventiveness have cut sharply into what had been considered a unique experiment.  The American Dream is evaporating under an oppressive Obama Administration.  No one benefits from that.

If he has his way, and taxes continue to rise while others are allowed to sunset; if his push to further regulate business, and the choices we make as Americans, is successful; if he is free to spend trillions of dollars on wasteful, meaningless projects that only provide a bankroll for greedy unions and lobbyists; if the national debt continues to rise by trillions of dollars more in unfunded mandates and liabilities the likes of which will never be paid back, at least not for many, many generations to come; if Obama is reelected President and given a clear path to continue his destruction of the American Dream – it will not just be white Americans who suffer the dire consequences!

If Barack Obama will not listen to reason, why would anyone assume he would listen to the very people he refers to as  “y’all”?

September 25, 2011 Posted by | 2012 election, government, Obama, Obama's lies, politics, racism | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.