Paranormal TAXivity

Halloween may be over, but that doesn’t mean that the scary movie season is finished yet. In a spinoff of box office hit Paranormal Activity, the National Republican Senatorial Committee has released a parody trailer of the film. Only this time, the scary people are represented by the stars of the Democratic Party.

I have to be honest. Past parody films that Republicans have put out have been quite lame (see my Lady Gaga post). Paranormal TAXivity actually happens to be quite good. It combines great graphics, great sounds, and (you gotta admit) the kids singing the Obama anthem at the end is a classic.

Any political party that can get it together when it comes to projecting quality, cleverness, and (most importantly) an effective message is bound to see some sort of positive return.

Billy Corgan Smashes Swine Flu Paranoia

Attention Pumpkin Heads! Billy Corgan, lead singer of Smashing Pumpkins, has sounded off about the swine flu that has made news headlines for the past few months. His verdict: Yeah people are sick, but the “swine flu” is nothing but a government tool of fear.

I don’t know what Mr. Corgan’s political affiliation is, but what’s interesting about his whole swine flu take is that it has a libertarian and spiritual bent to it.

Here are a few moneyquotes from his personal blog:

“I am not a doctor, and I am in no way suggesting that you should follow any medical advice from me. What you do with your body, what you put into it, who you allow to love it or hate on it, is your business. I am more focused on the vibration that has us all so fearful: both for how the fear affects our thinking, and how, in our fear, we attract the worst, and, in conjunction with that, how those fears are used by others without integrity to try to create a power against Us to promote discomfort and dis-ease.”

“I would suggest however that it is possible the virus is not a naturally occurring virus. I have read reports from people who say (as doctors) that there is evidence to suggest this virus was created by man; to call it Swine Flu is then a misnomer, as it really is Swine Flu plus some other stuff stitched together. These doctors said such genetic mutation was impossible in nature.”

“I for one will not be taking the vaccine. I do not trust those who make the vaccines, or the apperatus behind it all to push it on us thru fear. This is not judgment; it is a personal decision based on research, intuition, conversations with my doctor and my ‘family’. If the virus comes to take me Home, that is between me and the Lord. I have put up some of these links to inspire the question in you, so that perhaps you can make a better decision for yourself. That is what holistic life is about: a willingness to look at all the facts or opinions.”

So what we have here is another pop star sounding off about politics. I don’t care for following the personal lives of these people because I frankly have better things to do with my time. But when they speak about some hot political issue, whether it’d be out of ignorance or intelligence, its then that my interest peaks up. Why?

As Andrew Breitbart notes in a 30 minute interview concerning Politics and Hollywood, a lot of the overseas foreign markets pay attention to what the entertainment industry puts out. Translation: The entertainment industry is quite influential when it comes to influencing political opinion. It’s important for those passionate about political truth to hear what these pop stars have to say, to dispel their nonsense, or condone their well-reasoned thought.

In this case, I think Mr. Corgan hits it right on the money when it comes to government and swine flu.

Healthcare Reform…Iphone Style

How would people like it if the Apple iphone came pre-loaded with apps they couldn’t change or delete? How would people react to an iphone that didn’t allow users to add the apps that they needed or even wanted? (If you ask me, forget the iphone if it didn’t allow me to add the beloved Chipotle burrito app. But I digress…)

The common sense answer to the above questions is that the consumer wouldn’t be too fond of an iphone limiting their choices, an iphone putting all its users into one mold, crippling their flexibility when it comes to customization. If this would have happened, the iphone would have tanked on the market and Steve Jobs wouldn’t have made the profits to get that liver transplant he needed so badly. A one-size-fits all iphone…no bueno.

In the society that we live in, the success of the iphone is a reflection of people’s value for customizable choice. In English that means people value the power of making their own choices especially when it comes to everyday matters (be it the Tom-Tom app, Chipotle app, or the Facebook app). When it pertains to matters related to their own well-being, people prefer to be in charge of their own destiny.

Enter government-run-healthcare, which is a matter more significant than a customizable iphone (for some people at least).

Government-run healthcare is the bane of choice. After all, it is an old-school one-size-fits all piece of legislation. People aren’t likely to go for it if it is something that puts massive, ever-growing regulations on the individual. The crippling of choice is probably one of the main reasons why the recent Gallup poll reflects the American public’s deepening divide over such legislation (now so affectionately referred to as PelosiCare).

Daniel Henninger, opinion writer at the Wall Street Journal has a brilliant piece regarding Old Hat Democrats, the iphone culture, and healthcare. He makes all the points (and more) summarized above.

Moneyquote:

“If we were really living in the world of leading-edge politics that many people thought they were getting with Barack Obama, he would have proposed an iPhone for health care—a flexible system for which all sorts of users could create or choose health-care apps that suited their needs. Over time, with trial and error, a better system would emerge.”

His case and point: The Old Hat Democrat way of one-size-fits-all legislation won’t work with the American public anymore. People want their choices when it comes to healthcare. Government taking something like healthcare and making it bigger is not the ultimate solution. After all, there really isn’t an example of a massive government program that works efficiently. Bureaucracy stymies progress.

I personally think the apocolyptical 2012 will happen before a massive government program actually works efficiently*

*The whole Aztec 2012 thing is a hoax. Its never going to happen. Hence, a massive government program that works efficiently is nothing but laughable fantasizing about a utopian society that will never come.

Tagging Healthcare on the American Flag

I guess graffiti art is cool in some ways. When I was in elementary school, kids did it on pieces of lined paper to make their name look stylish. Meanwhile, the kids who did it on the mirrors of the school bathrooms got sent home. In Los Angeles, CA, the Crips and the Bloods do it on the walls of the downtown freeways, freeway signs, and Metro Buses to make their presence known….much like my dog who urinates on numerous trees to mark his territory.

Apparently it’s become cool and hip to tag the American flag with graffiti to tout healthcare reform. According to The Politico, those on the left think its hip that an American flag is desecrated with pro-healthcare reform messages (as shown in the video above). The particular video is one of twenty finalists in a contest put on by the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

First, there was Shepherd Fairey’s Obama Hope image. Now there’s this video. Is there some sort of connection between “political art” and left leaning groups? Not that the right is an anti-intellectual bunch and despises the use of art, but there just doesn’t seem to be as much as an emphasis on using art from the right side of the political spectrum.

The bigger and more significant question is: How are the merits of this kind of political art judged? Is there some objective standard deeming it as a piece of fine art? Or, is there some sort of post-modern, relativistic, and loose standard of judging such political art?

It would be a sad commentary of American society if relativism became the yard stick by which the value of art is measured. If the left uses relativism to judge the beauty or merit of their so-called art, then what does that imply about their method of making policy? Is the left’s method of art and public policy a matter of taste?

If the relativism of the left spills over into their way of public policy, we are indeed headed down a frightening path. It is a path that demotes the Constitution from a sacred document that limits government power to a document that grants a perilously broadened government takeover.

Oh wait, we seem to be headed in that direction already….

Hello, Mr. Government-run Healthcare Bill.

Healthcare in the USA!

The use of children to push President Obama’s agenda continues. First there was the children’s song in Venice, CA.  Then there was the school in New Jersey. With the video above, it gets even better when you have kids singing for healthcare reform and taking shots at Rep. Joe Wilson to the tune of Miley Cyrus’s current #1 hit.

In an age of the ever glorious invention of You Tube, it seems as if the pro Obama kiddie videos keep on coming. There’s no hard evidence suggesting that the Obama administration is directly involved with organizing these kid promo spots for healthcare. At the same time, he hasn’t come out to publicly condemn such videos. This leads me to believe that his silence approves them.

As immensely painful as it is to listen to Miley Cyrus, I personally prefer her version over the healthcare one.

President Carter vs. President Clinton

On tonight’s Larry King Live, former President Clinton weighed in on many Americans’ disapproval regarding President Obama’s  government healthcare plan. Particularly, he responded to former President Carter’s repeated assertions that those disagreeing with President Obama are racists.

President Clinton says that racism, while a part of some of Obama’s dissenters, isn’t so much the case with the vast majority of them.

President Clinton:

I believe that some of the right-wing extremists which oppose President Obama are also racially prejudiced and would prefer not to have an African-American president. But I don’t believe that all the people who oppose him on health care — and all the conservatives — are racists. And I believe if he were white, every single person who opposes him now, would be opposing him then.

Now if I were to take a side on this issue, I would go with President Clinton. He’s  the one with more credibility. After all, he’s the one that attempted to lead a comprehensive healthcare reform plan that was also opposed by conservatives. Racism? Not event close. While Mr. Clinton was called the first black president by a prominent author (mostly in reference to the way that he was treated during his sex scandal), he is a white man.

Government healthcare is the issue.

Sure, racism is still with us and unfortunately so. But this isn’t the underlying issue at the heart of the healthcare debate…even if Maureen Dowd wants you to believe that Representative Joe Wilson uttered the words “You lie…boy!”

What’s the heart of the matter? Its one of a big, empowered government vs. a small, limited government. Its one which questions whether government should be involved with distributing healthcare in the first place. It’s one that takes into account the Congressional Budget Office’s projections of what pending healthcare legislation will do to the already skyrocketing deficit.

The Constitution’s Preamble serves as a guide for the rest of the powers delegated in the Constitution. One of the phrases in the Preamble is to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity…”

One of the most important questions to ask about this legislation is whether it promotes or violates the principle of securing liberty’s blessings. Once that is answered in an objective manner, then (and only then) can we move forward with pending healthcare legislation.

Probably the most important question (and cliche) one to ask is WWTFFD?

What Would the Founding Fathers Do?

Do it for Teddy!

After Senator Ted Kennedy’s death less than 24 hours ago, Democratic leadership is already looking to capitalize on his legacy for healthcare reform by seeking a renewed sense of vigor in passing the current healthcare reform bill now sitting in the House of Representatives.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as quoted by the AFP: “Ted Kennedy’s dream of quality health care for all Americans will be made real this year because of his leadership and his inspiration.”

Senator Robert Byrd is calling for the Healthcare Bill to be renamed in honor of the now late Senator.

Will Senator Kennedy’s death give the Democratic leadership some fresh energy in pushing forward with the bill? Do you think that it is a disgrace that Democrats are invoking Kennedy’s name to pass their agenda? Is the Republican opposition now mean-spirited for opposing the dream of Senator Kennedy?

Happy Ramadan from President Obama

Today, President Obama released a message to Muslims for the holy month of Ramadan. By sharp contrast, the president didn’t do the same for the National Day of Prayer (a traditionally Judeo-Christian event celebrated in May).

In his break from the long-standing tradition of commemorating the National Day of Prayer, critics fear that the President is snubbing the importance of prayer in the nation’s heritage.

Those supportive of the president’s message to Muslims would say that he is broadening his outreach to a group that has been unfairly victimized after 9/11.

For Barry Lynn, founder of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, he would say that religion should have no place in government whatsoever. Church buildings (not government buildings) should be the only places for conducting one’s worship, he says.

What do you think about President Obama’s Ramadan message?

The Republican Nine

photo credit: cleveland.com

The dust has settled in the Senate chamber: Sonya Sotomayor has been confirmed by the Senate to become the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice. While all Democrats and Independents have cast a “yes” vote for her, only nine Republicans joined their alliance. The New York Times has done us the service of publishing a neat graphic breaking down how each Republican Senator voted on the new justice along with their statements regarding her qualifications.

Interesting to note: Mel Martinez, the only Republican Hispanic senator in the chamber, voted yes on her confirmation and is also stepping down from his post as Senator…as announced today.

What will be the repercussions from this vote? If there are some, on which side of the political aisle will they occur? Will the American people make Democratic senators seeking reelection suffer in 2010 for confirming who they perceive to be a radical judge? What will happen to the nine Republicans who sided with Sotomayor’s confirmation? Will Republicans be accused of racism for not supporting this Hispanic justice and hence be the ones to suffer in the 2010 midterm elections?

Insight into the complexities surrounding Republican opposition to Sotomayor can be found here.

How about a Magic Trick?

“I’m gonna make your money disappear”…

According to a Newsbusters blog post and as linked on the Drudge Report, posters of President Obama in Joker makeup with the word “Socialism” are popping up around Los Angeles. The artist of these posters is unknown.

Some think the poster is a parody of Shepherd Fairy’s Hope image.

One thing is for sure, whoever came up with the idea could definitely hit money in the bank by marketing the image on t-shirts, mugs, children’s toys…and whatever else. I’m guessing the buyers would primarily be conservatives…just a guess…

This isn’t the first time a United States President has been portrayed as the Joker. Former President George W. Bush was featured as the Joker in Vanity Fair. That image can be seen here.