Sunday, April 29, 2007

Deception 2008: Mitt Romney

Welcome to Deception 2008. This will be a series of articles looking at the Presidential candidates our nation is faced with.

The world sat by and watched as Bill Clinton sat in the White House for 8-years. The elections never stirred the nation's voters into much of a frenzy. Then in the Fall of 2000 the circus that insued and it again sparked the nation's interest in our leadership. With 9/11, the War on Terror, and the 2004 Presidential elections the nation was constantly being tuned into the happenings of our President, with the media's help. Then in the Fall of 2006 the people of the US voted in a liberal-controlled Congress.

With such issues as defeating Islamic Jihad, illegal immigration, and the War on Terror the nation's political stars have, in my opinion, prematurally started their campaigns of vanity and mudslinging. As our candidates start to build up their empire of money to slam each other I thought I'd take a chance and look at the candidates from a Conservative's point of view.

The Republicans I will be seeing if they are true Conservatives or just liberal Republicans, or RINOs. The Dems I will see what they will be standing, or not standing, for. As of right now (this may change), I don't see any strong conservative leader that can stand up and that I'd vote for. The first candidate on my list to see is MITT ROMNEY:

Willard Mitt Romney
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Party: Republican

In the beginning of his campaign he wasn't known in comparison to the other candidates. I dub him the the "The Little Republican that Could". Among the religious right he has the task of proving his faith since he would be the first Mormon president in our history.

At the moment he stands as the #1 Republican when it comes to campaign funding. What I like to point out though is that money doesn't necessarily mean he's getting his name out nor does it mean he's getting a popular view.

I started looking at his and he would seem to be a good candidate, but then you look at his history when he ran as governor and senator for the state of Massachusetts. That state seems to produce more flip-floppers than I have ever seen.

When running as Senator against Kennedy his stance on abortion was pro-choice:

I believe that abortion should be safe and legal this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v Wade has been the law for 20-years that we should sustain and support it. And I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice. And my personal beliefs like the personal beliefs of other people should not be brought into a political campaign.

And again when he was running for governor:

I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose and I am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard. I will not change any provisions of Massachusetts’s pro-choice laws. And with regards to this issue of age of consent, it is currently 18-years-old. If one wants to have an abortion younger than that, one must have the permission of one parent and if a parent doesn’t go along, one can go to a judge or justice to get that permission. And so far in Massachusetts history when a young woman has gone to a judge, not one single time has there been a denial of that permission. And so I am in favor of retaining our current law which is the age of consent remaining at 18.

Sounds pretty liberal to me. But during his time as governor he says his views changed, but most believe (myself among them) that this was to win over the Right; personal gain vs what he thought was right.

Most on the Conservative/Right side are staunch fire-arm supporters and hate liberal gun control laws. Romney again shows his colors when he stated:

Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts, These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

Spoken like a true RINO.

He reiterated his support for an assault weapons ban contained in Congress's crime bill, and the Brady law which imposes a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases:

I don't think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect, Romney said.

If it won't have an affect on crime why have it? He is starting to sound like Feinstein or Pelosi:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them… ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in,’ I would have done it.

If I had my way, sporting guns would be strictly regulated, the rest would be confiscated.

Now in recent years the ACLU has attacked the Boy Scouts of America for their anti-gay stance. During his campaign to become a Senator he stated:

I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.

When it comes to marriage he says he won't force his beliefs on the world, that the state should be the ones who decide on this issue, and believes that the Republican party should do more to support the gay community.

Now I'm curious about his loyalties. In 94 when he was running for Senator, Kennedy stated that Romney was trying to bring back Reagan/Bush Sr. conservativism. I'd personally be honored to say I was bringing back Reagan conservatism, but Romney got all defensive and stated:

Look I was an Independent during the time of Reagan/Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan/Bush. My positions don’t talk about things that you [Kennedy] suggest they talk about. This isn’t a political issue.

Then a very astute man said the day after:

Romney demonstrated very clearly in the debate last night that he has more in common with liberal Democrats that he does with Conservatives…Conservatives should not let their disgust and anger with Ted Kennedy’s big government liberal record blindly lead them to support Mitt Romney
--Brent Bozell (10/26/94)

This country is a capitalist society. You get what you put into. A survival of the fittest society where the best and brightest succeed and are subsequently burdened with helping out the rest and the less fortunate. Liberals usually try to dampen this with a socialist view and make a status quo to force the government burden themselves with less able employees or those who may not have credentials. Now I'm not saying that minorities or women are less qualified, but affirmative action usually discriminates against the qualified and screws them over so don't take me as a sexist or a racist. Romney on the other hand believes that if you are a woman or a minority that you can't get a job on your own and you need the governments help:

Woman. Woman are concerned about the glass ceiling. Woman that I have seen in organizations have not been able to have the opportunity they deserve to have in getting ahead of organizations. If we are going to compete as a nation we got to draw upon the skills of woman and minorities, and I see organizations from the Federal government to corporations that are not drawing on the skills of woman and minorities.

I believe that public companies and federal agencies should be required to report in their annual 10K the number of minorities and woman by income group within the company. So we can identify where the glass ceiling is and break through it. And I think that the market of America will say 'that company has not promoted woman, has not promoted minorities' and will put pressure on American corporations and agencies to respond.

He basically wants to guilt trip corporations to fill positions with those who MAY not be qualified. So much for equality.

After all this I don't think there is any Conservative bone in this man's body, but he says:

The current system puts up a concrete wall to the best and brightest, yet those without skill or education are able to walk across the border. We must reform the current immigration laws so we can secure our borders...and increase legal immigration into America.

Then in 2004 Romney vetoed a bill
that would have allowed illegal immigrants to obtain in-state tuition rates at state colleges if they graduated from a Massachusetts high school after attending it for at least three years and signed an affidavit affirming that they intended to seek citizenship.

Yet he doesn't seem to quite get it when you see his policy:

3) A temporary worker program that enables willing foreign workers to be matched with participating employers to meet increasing workforce needs;

4) Provisions that will allow undocumented workers to earn legal status so that they can continue to remain in the workforce.

Most politicians don't seem to realize that illegal immigration is a wound in America's side. They just want to put a bandaid on it and call it good, but you can't heal it if you don't stop the bleeding (in and out) you won't fix the problem.

Well, he seems as conservative or right for the job as Hillary does. He seems to be spouting Conservative thought to win us over, but I guarantee will turn over once in office. He doesn't seem to have a solid conservative foundation to sit on. I have some advice for him; to win, change the (R) to a (D) and spout all that crap and you're in.

This ends the first installment of Deception 2008. I will get the rest out when I have the time.

Saturday, April 28, 2007

Stupid in America

This is something to see. I was shocked at some of the information presented in this. Seeing this makes me want to homeschool my children or send them to a private school. This is one area where I don't tolerate any extreme Liberal thought at all. Our schools should be a priority to set up our kids to be productive citizens of this country, not targets to indoctrinate.

What's worse is that our government is loosening the requirements for individuals to teach which will only damage our children's education.

Debunking 9/11 vs Loose Change

Here is a video to watch if you believe in the conspiracy or if you ever meet one who does believe in it. Watch as the authors of Debunking 9/11 sit and look respective while the young punks who created Loose Change try to heckle and make themselves look like asses. I had a roommate who believed in this crap and he would try to spew this crap at me so I turned this on. Pissed him off, it was great.

My Political Compass

I went onto and took the test. Here are the results:

Your political compass:
Economic Left/Right: 3.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.77

Friday, April 27, 2007

A little bit more about me

As I said in the "About Me" I was born and raised in Idaho. I'm currently training as a UAV Operator for the Idaho Army National Guard. I was previously a Intel Analyst for about 4 1/2 years. In my civilian life I am a student at Boise State University, majoring in Political Science with the emphasis on International Relations.

I am the Junior Warden for Oriental Lodge #60 AF&AM in Boise, ID. I became a Master Mason in June of 06 and I am looking forward to the future. I am planning on applying for the Scottish Rite this Fall, which is the centennial.

Being a college student, I am in a frat. I am a part of the Kappa Rho chapter of the Kappa Sigma fraternity

The rest of my life that forms my views you will see as my blog grows

Something Potter this Way Comes

Come this July you will see little wizards and witches running around. Harry Potter mania will hit when the 5th Harry Potter movie, Harry Potter & the Order of the Phoenix, comes out July 13th and the 7th Harry Potter book, Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows, comes out July 21st.

I find it laughable that many people think this series is evil and the work of the devil. I mean it's about good triumphing over evil. This condemnation of the book just gives me more reason to read it. It's all still publicity.

I'm a huge fan of JK Rowling because she inspired an entire generation of children to read. If you haven't seen it yet, here is the trailer to the movie

Here is the book cover for the 7th book. Harry Potter fans always love to try and guess scenes in the book by what the cover looks like.

Saturday, April 21, 2007

US Policy: Airpot Security

US Policy: Airport Security
by IDARNG Loki

You walk in, you get your ticket, and you head for the security line. It’s there where I hear, and have given, complaints about having to be halted and searched before going onto our flight. In reality you have been watched, since the moment you entered the airport property, by an arsenal of surveillance devices, censors, and security personnel. With the tragic events of September 11th, 2001, the US Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, or ATSA, which amends and enhances Section 449 of Title 49 of the US Code.

Now I am all for keeping everyone secure, but I would feel better knowing our security is based off statistics. It’s a known fact that a government basic responsibility is to “provide new Guards for their future security.” What aggravates me is when I see little blue haired ladies and even members of the Armed Forces being searched! What threat do they pose?

Not to be insensitive or “intolerant”, but last time I checked it wasn’t a US Army Guard that rammed a plane into the side of buildings. Soldiers are defenders of this country. They give up so much to keep us safe and yet they are still searched.

It’s not just soldiers I think should be exempt if you will from these security parameters. I also believe certain “sub-cultures” such as the elderly should not have to be searched. I have yet to hear about an arthritic riddled woman take over a plane and hold it hostage.

Now what would I do to fix this little problem. I personally believe that profiling works. Many people call profiling racist because it can targets certain cultures or groups, but it’s based on statistical fact. How can you call something offensive when it’s true? Here in Idaho middle-aged white men are likely to be behind the crimes, in parts of Los Angeles the crime may be perpetrated by young Hispanics, while in the Harlem young Black men commit many crimes, cause a majority of our crimes. It’s all a matter of statistics of the crimes.

Even before 9/11 befell us the Airports kept a passenger manifest; in this only name and address information was kept, but afterwards the ATSA stated that the Under Secretary could include any information he/she deemed necessary. Due to the rising threat of radical Islamic terrorism I believe that ethnicity should be included when registering for your flight. Through my military experiences I know that our government has the specific profile and modus operandi for terrorist cells.

Our government feels the need to give us this false sense of security by meddling in political correctness when it should combat the real threat using statistical analysis and modern technology.

The Illegal Immigration Issue

I wrote this during college and before the injustice done to our border agents.

My thoughts on Illegal Immigration
by IDARNG Loki

This topic is a touchy one with many people, but though our attention is constantly being taken to international affairs such as the Middle East, I believe, we should keep our attention on our own domestic issues.

I should first give my definition when I use the word “illegals”, which I say is any citizen of another country who is residing within the US illegal, not just Hispanics like some have stereotyped the phrase. I am one who is against giving amnesty to illegal immigrants because I am not one to reward those who break the law. Why should any illegal immigrant get amnesty when others have waited to get into this country legally?

We need to amend Section 1 of the 14th Amendment so it rids the part that says anyone born on US is a citizen. This is a key battle in the immigration issue. Someone born in America should only become a citizen if their parents are citizens! Otherwise it allows illegal alien mothers to come over, run to the nearest hospital, and give birth to a new burden of the state.

14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law, which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

We need to send National Guard forces to the border, not just as a support unit, but also as an active unit who can arrest and deport the illegal. Engineer units could build a good border fence and build a trench that would stop illegals from even reaching the fence, plus make tunneling impossible without detection. Use Unmanned Ariel Vehicles (UAVs), sniper teams, radar units, and scouts as surveillance along the border. UAVs would be able to survey the parts of the border that are harder to traverse by foot or vehicle. Sniper teams, as a none combative role, have the ability to track illegals while radar units have the capacity to track even the slightest movements all along the Mexico border. The MPs can become the border patrollers who have training in law enforcement and procedures. Send our Tactical Human Intelligence Teams (THT) assets across the borders to collect intelligence and counter the illegals crossing by using GPS devices. We need to close down the border because you can’t heal a wound unless you stop the bleeding.

To combat the illegals already in the US the best strategy is to give power to the State and Local law enforcement because local authorities have a better understanding of their city and where the illegals are living. The feds should give the state some kind of grant depending on certain factors such as location and perceived number of illegals. The locals can easily round up the illegals since they deal with them every day. The State and Local enforcer’s grant should increase with their successes.

Once apprehended the illegals, whether on the border or in the country, biometrics should be taken. If the illegal has been living in the US and is caught then all of their financial assets should be frozen. The costs to send them back to their country should be taken thence from their accounts, plus any taxes they have not paid should also be paid. Their employers should be fined; the severity of the fine should depend of several factors such as knowledge of employee status and number of illegals working for him.

Medicaid/Medicare, school assistance, and welfare programs should be off-limits to anyone who cannot prove citizenship, to a point. I don’t like the welfare program, but I’d rather help an American than an illegal. Plus you take away the incentives you take away their reason to come across.

As I said earlier, “you can’t heal a wound if you don’t stop the bleeding.” Now I’m all for immigration into this country because my family came across the ocean too and I think that everyone should have a chance to have the freedoms we have here in America. What I am against though is illegal immigrants coming over leeching off the system while not contributing anything.

I am also irritated by the state of our prison systems. Illegals have increased crime, especially in larger metropolises. Now I’m not saying illegals are the only one’s who commit crimes, but if we were to deport them then it would ease up on our prisons. We also know that terrorists have partnered with the gang known as the MS13 to help bring terrorists cross the border.

I hope one day this issue will be fixed, but with partisan politics in play in our Congress I doubt it will happen anytime soon. Remember though immigration is great thing, but it is a double edged sword when we allow the illegals to throw away the law book then try and hide behind it. As I said in the first weeks of class during our political party assignment, “We're not closing the door, just locking the windows."

NOTE: 1 out of 10 of all illegal immigrants that cross the US-Mexican border are not Hispanic

Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West

This is a great documentary, yes even better than Al Gore's "award" winning 'An Inconvenient Truth'

Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke

Almost 70 years ago, Europe found itself at war with one of the most sinister figures in modern history: Adolf Hitler. When the last bullet of World War II was fired, over 50 million people were dead, and countless countries were both physically and economically devastated. Hitler’s bloody struggle sought to forge the world anew, in the crucible of Nazi values. How could such a disaster occur? How could the West have overlooked the evil staring it in the face, for so long, before standing forcefully against it?

Today, we find ourselves confronted by a new enemy, also engaged in a violent struggle to transform our world. As we sleep in the comfort of our homes, a new evil rises against us. A new menace is threatening, with all the means at its disposal, to bow Western Civilization under the yoke of its values. That enemy is Radical Islam.

Using images from Arab TV, rarely seen in the West, Obsession reveals an ‘insider's view' of the hatred the Radicals are teaching, their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination. With the help of experts, including first-hand accounts from a former PLO terrorist, a Nazi youth commander, and the daughter of a martyred guerilla leader, the film shows, clearly, that the threat is real.

A peaceful religion is being hijacked by a dangerous foe, who seeks to destroy the shared values we stand for. The world should be very concerned.


My Daily Sites

Here are some sites I go to on a daily basis. If you have any good sites, please post.

Conservative Life

The Dirty Dozens Bunker


Politically Uncensored

Cox & Forkum

World Net Daily

News Max

Little Green Footballs

Jihad Watch

Infanticide in China

Here is another article that I wrote at Conservative Life.

Infanticide in China
by IDARNG Loki

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines Infanticide as (a) the killing of an infant

Due to China's excessive population the government has inacted a one-child policy. In this culture a boy is viewed as a worker, or soldier, while a girl is seen as "damaged goods" so if the parents have to pick they will kill the girl. When the Communists took over in the mid-1900s they abolished the practice, but in the 1980s census started showing an upward trend of "missing" female children. This practice has killed off millions of girls. This horrible autrocity is occurs on a daily basis since the government does nothing to stop it and in rural areas girls are abandoned if the parents so desire. How is this going to affect China and it's population?

For one it will evetually cause a severa implosion in their population. The sex ratio is so low that several million men will not have a wife. These men will grow old and probably die around the same time which will cause a shift in the age groups. It will also kill off several ancient families which is very ironic because the boy is spared since he will carry the family name and honor, but then is hindered because he can't find a mate.

This will also affect their military because if they have a population drop and they are low on women then where will they get their next warriors? The rest of the world also helps provide the Chinese with food because they can only harvest food on 10% of the land, the rest you are unable to grow anything on. In the future this mega-drop in the population will affect many economies since you see "Made in China" on most goods nowadays.

With such a low sex ratio and the country in turmoil, how will the Chinese get women to repopulate? They can't abolish it anymore than they did 50-years ago becaus the people won't obey. Will they invade a country? Doubtful. The most likely will be kidnapping and human smuggling. Human smuggling will help them, but cause stress and tension in other regions. Not to mention that many of those being smuggled will perish on their way to China.

Another twist that just hit me is that what about homosexuality? Their is such a low sex ratio and the people (mainly men) live close together I wouldn't be surprised that these people may move to homosexuality. If this were to come to pass diseases such as AIDs would run rampant through the country. This epidemic would definately control their population, but also threaten other countries who associate with them. China has their double-edged sword right to their heads and they have some serious decisions to make. For one, they are trying to build their military while their population is teetering on the verge of destruction. Could China, and not the US, be the next Roman Empire and be the ones who fall on their faces?

If they fall what will happen to the world? This economic power falling would be like dropping a pebble into a pond. Everyone will feel the ripple, but for good or bad. Who knows? To me China looks like a balloon; looks real big and bad, but all it takes is a little prick and it will blow up and be done.

Hope you enjoyed the article.

Search engines:
- Infanticide in China

Conservative Life: Infanticide in China

Terrorist Timeline Link

A few links I have found on the net.

Terrorist Attacks on American

Prophet of Doom

Terrorist Attacks

Islamic Terror Attacks on American Soil

The Real First Muslim Attacks on Americans

Timeline of Terrorism

China, the Red Threat

The following was an article I wrote back in February on another site, called Conservative Life.

China, the Red Threat
by IDARNG Loki

This is a look into what communist China has been doing and what it means to us. I'm here to put some of the pieces together for you.

China has basically been Communist since the civil war it had in the mid 1900s. They have been a pain in our a$$ since then. Recently, as you've probably seen in the news, China fired a missile into space where it destroyed one of it's weather satellites.

This space weapon has a few dimensions to it. Is this supposed a distraction off of North Korea? Highly doubtful. IMO, China is flexing it's military muscles to remind the world it's still a power. Should we pass a space weapons ban? Would China honor it? I honestly don't know, but I seriously doubt it. If this escalates though I worry we won't be able to react in time or with the right numbers (I'll explain in due time). Also remember a certain news article a year or two ago that released information on all American satellites (civilians and military alike). Now if China can shoot down satellites and he has a pretty good idea where our classified and spy satellites, how are we to protect our assets and still keep up our watchful eye. It's really hard to see with a black-eye.

China has taken US officials and analysts by surprise by building their military with such expedience. China is trying to catch up to America to become a competitor in the super powers. They have such a massive ground force that it would be foolish of us to try conventional ground warfare with them. They have been building up their naval assets, but nothing to rival us; their airforce is also in the same boat as their navy. But why a build-up now? It's the perfect time obviously. The one power that can hold back China, the US, is spread throughout the world combatting terrorists and not paying too much attention to them. While we are spread out it is possible that China will try to take Taiwan. Even if they don't get it diplomatically they can get it through other means. Send some Chines Special Operations Forces and cause unrest in the area. Even if they do an all out invasion of the island we wouldn't have time to react in time; the only solution would be either compromise (f*** that) or for the US to fight back.

Why do we want Taiwan though? They don't bring us anything really special. Yeah, their economy kicks butt, but still why? It's simple...democracy. They are a shining example of democracy in a very red area. Is it worth it to fight for such a small asset? IDK, but only time will tell.

Now all the time they are doing this, they are also hindering us in our WOT. Everytime the US tries to get something passed in the UN the Chinese strong arm us and go against with all their will. Sometimes it doesn't make sense, but I think China does it just to weigh us down.

Now if we did go to war with China would it be on our shores or theirs? Most likely it will be over on theirs or near theirs. In this modern time we have moved away from conventional warfare and into a more guerilla style, but with China it won't be much of either; it will be a deluted mix. If I were in charge I would send my naval fleet to protect Japan and any approach into the Pacific from China's naval assets. Then I would send the Air Force in and bomb the holy dog crap out of the country and certain valuable military and government targets. Then I would probably send in a heavy (armoured) ground force. At first it would be somewhat conventional. Once we had a foot-hold though and the Chinese military surpressed it would transition into a guerilla style. This scares me because China's landscape is anything, but kind. The insurgents and terrorists would have so many advantages over us it's not even funny; homefield advantage. And I did say "insurgents and terrorists" because we wouldn't just be fighting Chinese nationals (insurgents), but transnational fighters (terrorists) also. You have North Korea right next door, anti-American Jihadi's in the Indonesia/Phillipines islands, Iran would probably send fighters over, Islamofascists would flock to China, and all the while we would find out where Russia really stands (probably against us, but would wear the mask of "neutrality" while sending a force to support China).

China doesn't bode well in my mind. Whether they attack today, tomorrow, or 10-years they will be America's, and freedom's, next great battle and struggle.Also see my article on "Infanticide in China", coming soon to a Hot Topic near you.

Search engines:
- China, military build-up
- China, missile, satellite
- Taiwan conflict, China

Conservative Life: China, the Red Threat