Waffles not just a tasty breakfast, anymore
John Kerry - Presidential candidate and man of principles. What those principles are, no one knows. Hell, Kerry doesn't even know.
The man has accused US corporations of being "Benedict Arnolds" for outsourcing to increase their income. Of course, the major reasons for outsourcing jobs are high minimum wages for low skill job, high taxation and out of control unions.
Hmm, I don't think that Kerry has voted against a minimum wage increase - ever. Whoops, that might lead to outsourcing of jobs.
I don't think that John Kerry has ever seen a union he didn't like because, after all, corporations are evil and unions are good. Interestingly, it was unions that made a couple of supermarket chains go belly up in the midwest, recently. It seems that the Supermarkets couldn't make enough of a profit to stay in business. Oh, and right across the street is another non-union supermarket chain thriving. I wonder how that could be.
And, doesn't Kerry want to raise taxes on corporate America? Isn't higher taxes in California what drove Lockheed to move to Georgia where they got a tax break?
So, John Kerry - sorry, John F. Kerry - is accusing these businesses of being Benedict Arnolds when he was a large reason that they had to outsource - if they wanted to stay in business.
And, if he believes that these companies are "Benedict Arnold" companies because they outseource, why hasn't he made his wife "Ms. Heinz" pull all of her companies facilities out of other countries and into the US? That does seem a bit odd, doesn't it?
And another thing - doesn't the president have to swear to defend the US Constitution? And, didn't John Kerry say that he thinks that there should be "reasonable" controls on guns and their availability? I am really curious to know what "reasonable" means to him.
Also, the last time I checked, owning a gun was a RIGHT granted to us by the US Constitution. How do you limit a right? And if you do, doesn't that violate the US Constitution? And, if he is going to defend it, how can he do so if he promotes violating it? That sure sounds like a bit of a contradiction, to me.
Now, if he promotes "reasonable" violations of our 2nd Amendment rights, will he also promote other "reasonable" controls of our other Constitutional rights? Where will "reasonable" limitations of our rights end?
Finally, I don't think I want my safety or rights in the hands of a man who critisizes our intelligence gathering after voting to cut the intelligence budget. How can he critisize the intelligence agencies that he handcuffed? It's sort of like suing an alarm company for the theft of your car after you disconnected the alarm.
Well, my time here is
up - I am off to have some waffles.
