A still relatively relevent, relatively long, quote

"The current Occupy Wall Street movement is the best illustration to date of what President Barack Obama's America looks like. It is an America where the lawless, unaccomplished, ignorant and incompetent rule. It is an America where those who have sacrificed nothing pillage and destroy the lives of those who have sacrificed greatly. It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators, murderers and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred, class warfare and murder are all promoted as acceptable means of overturning the American civil society. It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of animals: defecating in public, having sex in public, devoid of basic hygiene. It is an America where the basic tenets of a civil society, including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been rejected. It is an America where our founding documents have been shredded and, with them, every person's guaranteed liberties. It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the American people, but the rulers like Obama, Michelle Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and other loyal liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor. It is the America that Obama and the Democratic Party have created with the willing assistance of the American media, Hollywood , unions, universities, the Communist Party of America, the Black Panthers and numerous anti-American foreign entities. Barack Obama has brought more destruction upon this country in four years than any other event in the history of our nation, but it is just the beginning of what he and his comrades are capable of. The Occupy Wall Street movement is just another step in their plan for the annihilation of America. Socialism, in general, has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." - Dr. Thomas Sowell

12/15 Debate

With the last official debate of 2011 in the books, here are my observations and opinions about what went down.
Starting from the left, Rick Santorum. I'm not a huge Santorum fan, and his performance and answers tonight did not change that. I don't know about anybody else, but I have a hard time listening to him without losing focus after 30 seconds or so. I do agree with his policy decision about Iran, but then again the policies for that crazy country are the same for all of the candidates except for Paul.
Next comes Rick Perry. Perry performed about as well as I expected him to. I enjoyed him poking fun at himself and admitting that he is not much of a debater. Although, he seemed surprisingly loose, getting in a few crowd-pleasing one-liners. What I did not like was his stupid Tim Tebow analogy. I feel like I can't escape the guy. Before I turned on the debate, I was watching ESPN and they were running a story on how kids in New York got suspended for Tebowing during school. As a Seminole, I can't stand Tebow. Sure I concede he is a great leader, a talented athlete, and he brings faith to the game, thats fine but for the love of G-d please stop talking about him. Perry's analogy made plenty of sence, the "Tebow of The Iowa Caucauses" but it just made me grimace.
Mitt Romney shined tonight. He really had a great debate, he spoke very well, and he defended himself well. He also did something that everyone wanted to hear, including myself, which was attack Obama. All candidates did this especially well tonight, and one of my fears for a long time now has been than the candidates are attacking eachother rather than Obama. So when the potential candidate faces the President, he (face it, Bachmann aint winning) will be at a disadvantage because he has already been cut down by his competitors. I believe Brett Baier actually adressed this as well which made me happy.
I love Newt Gingrich the historian. Newt gingrich the politician has got some work to do though. I think for the most part he debated pretty well, he caught a lot of flak about his tIme advising Feddie Mac. I personally don't have a problem wih this because they came to private citizen Newt Gingrich not Speaker of the House.
Gingrich defended himself just fine against the barrage coming from the candidate to his right, Michelle Bachmann He stated that her information was simply false. She then proceeded to whine about how she is a serious candidate, wah wah. I don't like Michelle Bachmann, she creeps me out with all her make up, and here abnormally slow blinking. Also I think she is way to serious, I understand that running for President is a serious thing, but lighten up, will ya? But, like I said before, I do agree with her foreign policy.
I just realized I skipped over Ron Paul, oops. Thats okay, he didn't speak much after he got roasted for his foreign policy towards Iran. I like a lot of what Ron Paul does, especially with the the cuts he wants to make to our budget, government, and to a certain extent, military. But I think this stance on Iran will be he end of him. I have been saying that he could win Iowa, which is still possible. But I don't think he can hold up outside of that. Granted, if he were some how able to win the nominee, I don't think the stance on Iran would make much of a difference because it's not like the republicans are going to vote for Obama.
And last but not least, Jon Huntsman was finally able to join us at a debate. If anybody missed Herman Cain's universal problem solving answer, 9-9-9, they can appreciate Jon Huntsman. To Huntsman, everything, whether it be foreign policy, the keystone project, or talking about the supreme court judges, it all circled back to the economy. Now I realize the economy has been a hot issue for a while now, but seriously? It got a little heavy-handed after a while. I was actually able to answer questions for him about a quarter way through the debate.
So those are my thoughts for the time being, I love Newt, but after this debate, if I had to vote right now, my vote goes to Mr.Romney. I will probably post a lot more in January with the caucases on the 3rd, New Hampshire primaries on the 10th, and another debat on the 16th, so be on the look out for more posts from me.

Occupy vs. Tea Party

I wrote a comparison between the two movements for a mini article in my yearbook.

The Occupy Wall Street movement took the United States by storm on September 17, 2011. Protesters set up camp in Zuccotti Park in New York City to protest various issues, the most popular being that the 1% (the “fat cats” on Wall Street and other wealthy Americans) hold too much wealth and too much power. One could say that the Occupy movement is the liberal equivalent of the Tea Party movement that started in 2009. For those who don’t know, the Tea Party movement was a resurgence of paleo-conservative beliefs in America after the Bush era.
  The two movements are similar in that they both started as peaceful protests, a right we have had as Americans since the Constitution was adopted in 1788. They both started out with clear grievances, reasons for their protest. They have also both had their share of extremists as well. The similarities end there.
  The Occupy movement was unorganized from the beginning, with rag-tag protests popping up around the country. The Occupiers were able to amass incredible amounts of protesters The Tea Party movement was organized and able to put together mass rallies with ease. The Tea Party was also able to do something that no other group of protesters in our history were able to do, not the Anti-Federalists, not the Whigs, not the Anti-Masonics, and not even the Rent Is Too Damn High party. The Tea Party was able to make the Republican party change to fit them. The GOP changed to fit the Tea Party beliefs, and even got people, such as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Christine O’Donnell, elected to office.