Quote

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

I'm Starting To Feel Sorry For The 'Occupiers'

With each passing day, more embarrassment piles upon the hapless, clueless "Occupy Wall Street" kiddies.  Or, in this case, "Occupy London" kiddies:

The thermal images that prove 90% of tents in the Occupy camp in London are left EMPTY overnight

Guess that mass protest doesn't have quite the "mass" the media would have you believe.

Take away the empty tents and those who are there for the gourmet meals, free booze, and drug­fueled parties, and you're left with a handful of snot-nosed, pimple-faced, shit-for-brains losers.

Poor schmucks.  I don't think they had any idea what they were getting into.

The real world can be cruel sometimes.  Someone call Obama!!!

Virginia Citizens Defense League Takes Action

From Ammoland.com:
Operation Campus Safety Comes to Virginia Tech

Covington VA: Finally – we have a date and time for Operation Campus Safety at Virginia Tech!

**Mark your calendars, this is going to be big and you’re going to want to be part of it!

**We have approval for the protest from 8 AM to 4 PM on Thursday, November 17th. While some of us will be there early, the main protest will start at 11:30 AM and run until 4 PM. Speakers will start at 12 Noon and continue until 1:30 PM. We will need lots of people to carry signs, pass out literature, and answer questions.

The protest will be held in front of the Squires Student Center (College Ave./Otey Street side), not far from the town of Blacksburg or the VT Drillfield.
You might wonder what the protest is going to be protesting.

This: Virginia Tech has a "Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy" (there's the first eye-opener; I wonder if Cho Seung-hui read it) that bans the university’s employees, students, and volunteers, or any visitor or other third party attending a sporting, entertainment, or educational event, or visiting an academic or administrative office building, dining facility, or residence hall, ... from carrying, maintaining, or storing a firearm or weapon on any university facility, even if the owner has a valid permit, when it is not required by the individual’s job, or in accordance with the relevant University Policies for Student Life."

The bigger eye-opener is the policy's "purpose":
It is the intent of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University to provide a safe and secure environment for university employees, students, and visitors by establishing preventative measures and providing assistance and support to victims.  
Translated, that means "Here's our gun ban policy, and when it fails, here's our victim support policy."

I'll leave it to the students and faculty at Virginia Tech to decide whether the first policy makes them feel safe, knowing the second.

To those who have to endure such frightening detachment from reality at VT, I'd suggest you join the protest.  And shout with everything ya got:

For the victims of Cho Seung-hui and Virginia Tech "violence prevention policies," we say ...


... NEVER AGAIN!

It Comes Down To This

When in human history has such a headline been written?

Obama's anti-energy agenda kills jobs

A president. Of the United States of America. With an anti-energy policy. That most assuredly kills American jobs.

Yet such we have.

May God have mercy on us.

Let Freedom Ring

The Tea Party, the revival of the concept of citizenship, and the ever-present reality that smacks us in the face each day - that reality being the fact that there are a whole lot of people out there - many now sitting in their own feces in a park in New York City - who want our possessions and want us dead - will have this effect on public perception of "our first freedom":

From Gallup:
Record-Low 26% in U.S. Favor Handgun BanSupport for stricter gun laws in general is lowest Gallup has measuredby Jeffrey M. Jones

Princeton, NJ -- A record-low 26% of Americans favor a legal ban on the possession of handguns in the United States other than by police and other authorized people. When Gallup first asked Americans this question in 1959, 60% favored banning handguns. But since 1975, the majority of Americans have opposed such a measure, with opposition around 70% in recent years.

Our freedom to keep and bear arms. That freedom that secures all others.


Here's to you, my bruthas.

Reality Comes To 'Occupy Wall Street'

What happens to their world when those who "occupy Wall Street" - who are content to talk in the abstract about "the rich" and their "paying their fair share" and "giving back to those less fortunate" - meet one of those "one-percenters" who's prepared top engage them in debate?

Peter Schiff, CEO and chief global strategist of Euro Pacific Capital Inc., and regular TV commentator, goes to the den of thieves and starts asking questions.

This is absolutely fascinating:





He doesn't get any straight answers but the way he cracks the Leftist worldview - and does it so easily - is a wonder to behold.

The moment of truth: Mr. Schiff tells the crowd gathered around him, in response to their telling him he needs to pay his fair share: "I'm probably paying more income taxes than everyone around me combined. So I'm paying more than my fair share now."

The reality in this debate?  The rabble don't want fairness. They want what others have without having to earn it.  It's that simple.

Not a bad trick. If you can get away with it.

Says The Man/Woman Who Disrespects The Human Species:

'I was called a basketball, a penguin and an Ewok': Chaz Bono blasts 'disrespectful' Dancing with the Stars judges for bullying him over his weight.

Whatever.

That Was Then ...

"Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity."
-- Candidate Barack Obama, March, 2008 --

"Obama was hailed as a healing president, promising peace and harmony. What we have seen, however, is a president distinctively divisive on racial issues, and instigating class warfare. His actions are a prescription for a violent revolution."
-- Mercer Tyson, October, 2011 --

All I Can Say Is ...

... no shit:

Hoyer on Outcome of Deficit Super Committee: 'I'm Not Optimistic'

The bald truth? Even those who came up with this bit of idiocy knew it wouldn't work. And they went with it anyway.

It was, you see, so much easier than governing responsibly.

Quote of the Day

From James Taranto:
Here's ABC News, reporting on the speech the president gave in Fog City: "At a million-dollar San Francisco fundraiser today, President Obama warned his recession-battered supporters that if he loses the 2012 election it could herald a new, painful era of self-reliance in America."

Oh no! Horror of horrors! Obama is the only thing standing between us and having to rely on ourselves! And do you know what they call people who rely on themselves?

Adults.

Obama explicitly rejects the American ethos of self-reliance. He sees dependence on government not as an evil, if sometimes a necessary one, but as a goal to be pursued.
In a democracy the people get what they ask for.  Ain't no complainin'.  We asked for this.

May God have mercy, we asked for this.

Giving Credit Where Credit's Due

I saw a brief segment on TV the other night that showed a campaign ad put out by the Democratic National Committee and being run in Las Vegas (which has been decimated by home foreclosures) that featured a clip of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney answering a reporter's question about the foreclosure issue.  The thrust of the hit piece was - in so many words - how could Romney be so heartless and cruel to all those people out there who are losing their homes?

I looked at Paula and said, "actually Romney's right; Obama trying to "help" those homeowners who are "under water" with their mortgages has only prolonged and worsened the problem."

The Wall Street Journal, as it turns out, agrees with me this morning:
Romney's Finest Hour
He speaks the truth about housing and foreclosures.
editorial

A friend of ours quipped recently that Mitt Romney could do his Presidential candidacy a lot of good if he took even a single position that is unpopular in the polls. Well, we can report that he has done that on housing policy, that he's being pummeled for it, and that it may be his finest campaign hour. It also contrasts favorably with the latest temporary, ad hoc and futile housing effort from President Obama.

Campaigning last week in Nevada, the epicenter of the housing bust, Mr. Romney was asked by the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board what he would do about housing and foreclosures. His reply:

"One is, don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom. Allow investors to buy homes, put renters in them, fix the homes up. Let it turn around and come back up. The Obama Administration has slow-walked the foreclosure processes that have long existed, and as a result we still have a foreclosure overhang."

How's that for refreshing? After five years of politicians trying without success to postpone disclosures and levitate the housing market, Mr. Romney dared to tell the truth. Parts of the U.S., including Nevada, still have too many homes, and that supply needs to be sold off and fixed up so the market can find a bottom before home prices can start to rise again. The faster that process proceeds, the faster the recovery will take hold.

For this apostasy, Mr. Romney is getting whacked by the Democratic National Committee in a 30-second TV ad that first aired Tuesday in Arizona: "Almost half of Arizona homeowners underwater. Foreclosures everywhere. And what's Mitt Romney's plan?" the ad intones. Then it quotes Mr. Romney: "Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom.'"

The attack ad doesn't quote the second part of Mr. Romney's Las Vegas answer, which spoke another truth: "Number two, the credit [that] was given to first time homebuyers was insufficient and inadequate to turn around the housing market. I think it was an ineffective idea. It was a little bit like the cash-for-clunkers program, throwing government money at something which was not market-oriented, did not staunch the decline in home values anymore than it encouraged the auto industry to take off."

All of these government plans used taxpayer cash to forestall foreclosures in an attempt to stop housing prices from falling from their manic heights. How's that working out? Five years into the housing bust, the U.S. still has 10.9 million "underwater" borrowers, whose homes are worth less than the original purchase price. States like Florida, Nevada and New Jersey have long foreclosure backlogs, and home prices still haven't begun to recover in much of the country.

Mr. Romney's advice to let the foreclosure and resale process take its course as rapidly as possible until the market finds a "bottom" couldn't possibly do any worse than the Obama Administration and its frenetic attempts to "save" homeowners have done. To the extent that it encourages a faster recovery it is also more compassionate. As the nearby chart shows, while the fall in home prices has been painful for current owners, it has also made housing far more affordable for new buyers. [link]
As it turns out, Obama's "help" has greatly hurt millions of homeowners in this country as property values continue to decline and home values become worth less than the amounts owed on them.

Obama and his ilk score big points by attacking smart policy.  As the country - following his policies - will soon be into its fourth year of massive unemployment, economic stagnation, and crushing debt.

If Obama wins in 2012, it won't be because he did anything right.  It'll be because he came up with nice attack ads.

As the United States of America slowly sinks into third-world status ...