The Rabid Conservative

Think Right, Act Right, Be Right.

Archive for the ‘Underground’ Category

Pentagon May Court Martial Soldiers Who Share Christian Faith

with 5 comments

I can hardly believe that the Pentagon would criminalize soldiers who would share their faith.  People like Mikey Weinstein represent the evil in this country, for idiot crackpots like him would put George Washington in the stocks for sharing his faith with his soldiers – a faith that kept hope alive for those wintered over in Valley Forge.

And the haters of God and Christ call us intolerant, declaring us enemies of the Constitution and no better than sex offenders.


Written by The Rabid Conservative

May 1, 2013 at 6:33 pm

The Conservative Underground – Reagan’s Wisdom on Taxes

leave a comment »

Hopefully all of you had the opportunity and attended a TEA party yesterday.  Today, I am reminded a number of things that President Reagan said on the subject of taxation and government spending.  Rather than adding my own commentary, I would rather just sit and listen to words that have been said before and need to be repeated – over and over and over, until we understand them enough to excite us to action. 

I think there are some people here who met a tax they didn’t hike.

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it.  If it keeps moving, regulate it.  And if it stops moving, subsidize it.

The taxpayer; that’s someone who works for the federal government, but doesn´t have to take a civil service examination.

I just wanted to speak to you about something from the Internal Revenue Code. It is the last sentence of section 509A of the code and it reads: ‘For purposes of paragraph 3, an organization described in paragraph 2 shall be deemed to include an organization described in section 501C-4, 5, or 6, which would be described in paragraph 2 if it were an organization described in section 501C-3.’ And that’s just one sentence out of those fifty-seven feet of books.

Our federal tax system is, in short, utterly impossible, utterly unjust and completely counterproductive, [it] reeks with injustice and is fundamentally un-American… it has earned a rebellion and it’s time we rebelled.

The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the Constitution.

We need true tax reform that will at least make a start toward restoring for our children the American Dream that wealth is denied to no one, that each individual has the right to fly as high as his strength and ability will take him. . . . But we cannot have such reform while our tax policy is engineered by people who view the tax as a means of achieving changes in our social structure.

Have we the courage and the will to face up to the immorality and discrimination of the progressive tax, and demand a return to traditional proportionate taxation? … Today in our country the tax collector’s share is 37 cents of every dollar earned. Freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp.

Government does not tax to get the money it needs; government always finds a need for the money it gets.

Are you entitled to the fruits of your labor or does government have some presumptive right to spend and spend and spend?

Written by The Rabid Conservative

April 16, 2009 at 2:04 pm

Posted in Political, Underground

Tagged with , ,

TRC – Don’t Mess With Texas

with one comment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. – Amendment X, United States Constitution

The tenth amendment says very plainly:

  1. If a power is not explicitly granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution, it is reserved by the States and by the people.
  2. If a power of the Federal Government is prohibited by the States, it is reserved by the States.

The 10th Amendment is a very key amendment because by it, the states make the rules of what goes on in the states, not Washington DC. What it does is it enumerates who actually wears the pants in the US.

For example, take Alaska. Alaska has the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) and they would love to bolster their economy by drilling for oil up there. But folks 5000 miles away are telling them that they can’t use the resources of their state for their own purpose. There is no provision in the Constitution telling Alaska they can’t drill for oil. If the Alaskan legislature wants to drill, they should be allowed. Washington can go pound sand.

Several states, such as Texas, South Carolina, and others have refused stimulus money because with that money, there are mandates from the Federal Government. Yet the Federal Government is trying to impose its will in saying that these states have to take the money. They do NOT! They can send that money right back to Washington and tell them what to do with their crazy regulations.

Many states have passed laws outlawing or allowing same-sex marriage. This is definitely not covered in the constitution and therefore a decision of the states. If Vermont wants gay marriage, let the voters and the state decide. If Iowa doesn’t want it, they should not be required to recognize it, even if a gay couple from Vermont comes to Iowa.

If the Dakotas want to pass laws outlawing abortion, they should be allowed to do just that. Remember, Roe v. Wade can be challenged when a state decides to answer the question of when life actually begins. (BTW – that was part of the decision back in 1973.)

Folks, we are the *United States*. That means we are a republic (not a democracy) of fifty sovereign states that have joined together to make a nation. We are one country, but we are fifty separate individual states.

We have appointed a federal government to handle matters that occur between states. The founders recognized that there would have to be a strong federal government to regulate interstate commerce, negotiate treaties on behalf of the United States, and raise a military. The Constitution clearly enumerates what the Federal Government is supposed to do. If it’s not enumerated in the constitution, it’s up to the States to decide for themselves.

If the Civil War taught us anything, it taught that states have the right to determine largely what goes on in their own borders. Washington DC has no right to impose its will upon the state.

Yet, ahead of all the Tea Parties that are going to be held tomorrow, protesting all the insane government spending that is going on in Washington, we now get a report from the Department of Homeland Security that warns of all us ‘Right Wing Radicals’ and wraps us up amongst those who would-be white supremacists and religious abortion-clinic bombing whackos, just because we’re getting sick and tired of the federal government sticking its fat nose where it doesn’t belong.

I wonder if DHS will start putting me on a watch list because I dare show that I am a patriot, a lover of the original constitution, and a protector of what the founders created, not what the so-called progressives have perverted.

Anyway, in the below video, Texas Governor Rick Perry has announced his support for HCR 50, a resolution in the Texas legislature does four things:

  1. Affirms Texas’ sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution
  2. Demands the Federal Government cease and desist any activity or mandate that is outside the scope of the constitutionally delegated powers.
  3. All compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under the threat of sanction or penalty from the federal government is prohibited and repealed
  4. The resolution be presented to the President Obama, Vice-President Biden, and Speaker Pelosi, as well as to the entire Texas delegation to Congress with instruction to enter it into the Congressional Record.

I’ve never lived in Texas and have only been there a few times. I’m going back in October on business. But the one thing you gotta appreciate is the Texas spirit. And I say with a hearty whoopie:

Don’t Mess With Texas!

Written by The Rabid Conservative

April 14, 2009 at 12:34 pm

The Conservative Underground – The Loser Nation

leave a comment »

Lately, since we’ve seen our new president make sweeping changes to the way our country does business. We’ve watched him take over a major American company, fire it’s CEO and add "back your car warranty" to the list of governmental responsibilities.  We’ve watched him threaten small businesses by hiking up taxes on their owners, making the spectre of bankruptcy.

All of this, in this Rabid Conservative’s opinion, has to do specifically with the abundance of sentiment that is feeding what I call, the Loser Nation. Here are the symptoms:

1. The potential for failure is being replaced with an abundance of safety nets.

2. Getting ahead because of hard work, ingenuity, talent, and a little luck (or God’s grace), is being replaced with people working at different levels of difficulty and skill, yet all getting the same result, mostly undeserving of the results they receive.

3. The government enabling and rewarding those who have made poor decisions with opportunities to continue to make poor decisions, even if those decisions cause damage to others.


I told my kid once that failure is just as essential success, because without it, there are lessons we just cannot learn. Science is all about understanding what fails and what succeeds. Abe Lincoln failed at most everything he attempted. Failure has a place in our lives and it’s how we learn what doesn’t work.

But today, we’re trying to eliminate failure from our lives. More and more, people cannot stand the prospect that if they attempt something, they may fail.

Take school, for example. Today, the liberals are saying that failure, namely the "F" grade is psychologically scarring and things like red pens hurt kids.  I had two college students in my classes just this quarter, one who didn’t turn in a final exam, another who turned in no work since Week 2 of a 12 week course.  When both were faced with either F or D- grades, they complained to the department chairs and I was forced to grant them concessions. Why? Because both of these two lacked the intestinal fortitude to accept their failure – failure they brought upon themselves.

When I played little league softball, we kept score. There wasn’t any of this rubbish about how "we’re just playing to have fun"; we kept score!  And while we were disappointed when we would lose the game, we knew that meant we needed to play harder, try new things, and do better the next time.  It’s not like today where kids don’t improve because there is no motivation for them to do so.

Failure is a necessary part of life. When we get an "F", it means, "you didn’t do it right". Red pens are

And by the way, a dirty little secret, even during those YMCA kids games where they "don’t keep score", well, they’re keeping score. The kids, the parents, the officials…everyone is.  So the sentiment is dishonest at best. More like total crap to me.

Hard Work

America was built on blood, sweat, and tears, hard work done by the hands of many created the golden city on the hill that is the envy of all the world. It wasn’t built by the government handing out money to people. It was built by the people, daring to dream of something far bigger than what they had and what they were.

Does the world clamour on about the Spanish, French, or Croatian Dream? No. Not to say that Spain, France, or Croatia aren’t good places to create a life, but we don’t see flocks of people beating on the doors to enter those countries.  However, the hope of the American Dream has been in the eyes of millions for over two hundred years.

Yet today, the American Dream is fading away because there are forces at work that seek to dispel the concept of hard work, personal sacrifice, and life’s reward.

You see, I was taught in school that if you were willing to work hard for something, you could get it, which also meant the inverse was also true. However, today the hard work of millions is being taken and given to those who aren’t working as hard.

Those that work hard produce. Those that don’t work hard have nothing. So those that don’t have anything complain about not having anything, yet are not willing to get up and make something happen. They cry foul about how unfair the system is or how that they didn’t lose, they were cheated. And like little bratty children, they complain to the only power capable of giving them something for nothing, the government.

So the government sees the product of those hard working people and determines that they have too much – that they don’t deserve the reward from the sweat of their brow. And out of a false sense of compassion, wealth is spread around…from the winners to the losers, so that the losers won’t clamour on to the government – or worse, politicians will get their vote.

The Loser Nation

Today, we are rewarding those who fail, either because they made poor decisions, such as buying a house they couldn’t afford, investing in this fund or that market that turned out to be a bad choice

You see, losers clamour on about intentions rather than results. Losers gripe and whine because they don’t have, rather than pulling up their bootstraps and making something happen. Losers offer excuses about their failures and don’t take ownership and responsibility for their own incompetence and ineptitude. And yet, today, we are giving into losers.

Losers do nothing but consume the product that is created by those who win and cry like a newborn when they don’t get what they want. They come to hate the winners, to resent them, and to strip them of their product because losers can’t exist on their own. They consume themselves into oblivion, while the winners build greater.

We are slowly becoming the Loser Nation.

The Signs You Are a Loser

1) If you refuse to hold to your conviction, but rather change because it makes you feel better, you’re a loser.

2) If you complain about life’s difficulty, rather than realise that it’s no one’s fault but rather, it’s your challenge before you, you’re a loser.

3) If you make excuses for your own stupidity, incompetence, or ineptitude, you’re a loser.

4) If you blame others when things go wrong for you, particularly when you screwed them up, you’re a loser.

5) If you afraid to ask someone else if you do these things, for fear that they will say yes, you might just be a loser.

I challenge you – think about how you perceive life and whether or not this mentality is present in your mind.

If America is ever to succeed through the tribulation of a poor economy, we have to stop acting and thinking like losers. We have to take responsibility and stop empowering people who continuously fail and empower those who are succeeding. No company is too big to fail, but we all will fail if we don’t turn away from this madness and get back to what we do best – winning.

Written by The Rabid Conservative

March 31, 2009 at 11:09 am

Posted in Political, Underground

Tagged with , , , ,

The Conservative Underground – Liberals vs. Embryos

with 2 comments

The one question that liberals simply will not answer – the one in which they fear: “When does life begin?”

As many of you have read, somberly, President Obama signed an Executive Order to reallocate federal funding for Embryonic Stem Cell (ESCR) research.  It’s a sad day because now the human embryos who are being held in frozen stasis will be used for experimentation in hopes of bringing a cure to Type 1 Diabetes, cancer, or the like.  Essentially, as far as this Rabid Conservative is concerned, ESCR is nothing short of murder.

Now before the haters start going all in a tizzy, I’m not against stem cell research. I’m against harvesting embryos for it. In fact, there is a wealth of information out there that reports the advantages of adult stem cells over their embryonic counterparts. Read this article to understand more: The Case for Adult Stem Cell Research.

Anyway, my point here today is not to do the comparative but rather, to talk about the reason why liberals have to have embryonic stem cells. Liberals aren’t looking at the research about adult stem cells because, to the liberals, the subject of stem cells isn’t about saving lives, curing disease, or relieving infirmity; it’s about maintaining some sort of precedent with respect to the legal status of an embryo.  From all the rhetoric, I’ve been able to boil down to two fundamental reasons why liberals are determined to maintain ESCR:

  1. Losing the ESCR war would lead to a serious undermining of the entire abortion issue as far as liberalism is concerned.
  2. The embryo is not a human being and not entitled to rights or protections.  As such, the embryo can be used for things for which a regular human being with legal protection cannot be used.

ESC is Linked to Abortion

You see, abortion and ESC research are linked.  If the liberals get disproven that an embryo is, truly, a human life, they have to concede that an embryo in a womb is also a human life, which then, causes the abortion issue to fall apart.

Many people who argue over the abortion issue do so without a clear understanding of science – it’s all emotionalism to them.  To liberals, the question of abortion is ‘doing what is right in one’s own eyes’, never once considering the destruction of humans as embryos in favor of sexual freedom.

One of the little known aspects of Roe v. Wade is the challenge provision. Basically, Roe v. Wade was passed because the court could not fully agree on when, exactly, life begins – or more appropriate to legal precedent, no definitive recognition in the eyes of the law that life begins at conception.  Because of this, abortion was allowed by the High Court.

Recently, in North Dakota, the state House voted to declare that a fertilized egg is indeed human life and deserves the same protections under the law.  This is significant because, if the ND Senate votes passage, North Dakota will be the first state in the Union to effectively bring a challenge against Roe v. Wade.  Proponents against the measure whined that they ‘didn’t want to drag North Dakota into a legal fight with Roe v. Wade’.  This tells me  that the ND House liberals just don’t want to touch the issue in fear of losing their position on it.

And then, we get an interview like this with Der Schlick-meister that, once again, doesn’t seem to understand the fundamentals of basic reproductive biology.


Dude, an embryo is a fertilized egg.  So, by your very own statement here, it’s a ‘little baby’.  If that’s truly the case in your ‘more-than-once’ stated opinion, killing a fertilized egg is something that we do not want to do because it would grow to be a little baby or a human being, which is why they are ‘embryos’.

Again, Bill, embryos ‘are’ fertilized already.

Embryos Are Not Human (or Human Enough to be Protected)

One thing that Slickster does make in distinction, that somewhere along the way, there is a point when a human embryo is not a human being.  He says twice – grow into a little baby/human being.  Liberals must agree on this point so that they aren’t forced to concede to admit the humanity of an embryo.

The thing is, it stands in the face of sensible logic.  For example, even a liberal couple that is desirous to have a baby will become pregnant – and what will they call that which grows within the mother?  Will they say how proud they are of their ‘fetus’ or ‘embryo’?

“Hey Denise, you look great! When is your fetus due?”

Or, more somberly, if the couple loses the child to miscarriage or something, they don’t talk about losing the ‘embryo’; they lost the baby.

But yet, when the same is within a mother that doesn’t want to have the child, it’s not a baby – it’s not even considered human. It gets labeled as a fetus or embryo so the mother and doctor don’t have to deal with the moral implications of destroying a human life.

By not affording protection to the human embryo, what effectively is being said here is that embryos are not human, or human enough, and as such, justifies the using of these embryos for scientific research.

So When Does Life Begin

If you’re a man or woman of faith, life begins at conception, was created by God, and deserves to be protected like any other innocent life. However, I can also work with a secular definition, since many things occur in early gestation that have legal precedent for defining life.

For example, brain activity can be defined as a start of life.  It can be argued that the human mind is encased in the human brain.  If we go back and remember the case of Terri Schaivo, we remember that liberals clamored on about how she was not alive, because she was clinically brain dead.  So, if we take that assumption that brain death is the cessation of life, then life must begin at the first signs of neurological activity.  And if that is the case, any embryo greater than 24 days in age would have to be considered a life.

Perhaps the point in which life begins is when the baby can survive outside of the womb without the mother. Well, if we take that point, life would begin somewhere around, say age five. Previous to that, a toddler cannot last very long without intervention by a parent. And thinking along those lines, there are plenty of people who cannot survive without some sort of assistance. Does that mean they aren’t alive?


The one question that liberals simply will not answer – the one in which they fear: “When does life begin?”  Liberals in support of abortion, ESCR, and the like avoid this question because to make a definitive statement of when life begins would cause them to give up something, in order to remain consistent.  With a relative definition of when life starts, liberals can slide things around to fit the theory in which they are holding in order to permit the activity that they decide is right at the time.

The sad truth is that pro-choice liberals avoid even the accountability associated with changing the rules all the time.  And with all rule changing, human embryos are the ones caught in the middle, and doomed to have their lives taken before ever getting the chance to live.

Written by The Rabid Conservative

March 14, 2009 at 10:54 pm

TRC – No Kool-Aid For Me, Thanks.

leave a comment »

A number of people over the last couple days have adm0nished me because of my apparent lack of sensitivity about the inauguration. I’ve been called ignorant, bigoted, and harsh.

But I won’t back down from my position. I won’t drink the kool-aid and sniff the faerie dust.  I’m a conservative and I refuse to give up my positions because people find them offensive.  I refuse to apologize for my beliefs.  I believe that the individual has the power over his own destiny with hard work and God’s blessing, not because some liberal speech-writer, by proxy through Obama, tells us that we’re entitled to happiness.

With God’s permission, I make my own way in the world, and that offends people who would rather that I validate their need for entitlement by laying down, sticking a funnel in my gullet and letting some government bureaucrat pour the kool-aid in.  I don’t need the government in my business, my life, my health-care decisions, or telling me what is right and wrong.  In fact, it’s government that needs to be told how to do it’s business and what is right and wrong.

So, if I offend you with my words, I offer no apology to you, for it’s not me at which you’re anger is directed, but rather, my positions.  And if you hate me for my positions, well, don’t even consider us equals in the marketplace of ideas, because I still can still love you and do so because God has shown me the way.   You, however, in your intolerance, cannot.

Now, onto my rant:

Yesterday, I got a number of incendiary comments regarding my so-called “lack of sensitivity” regarding the inauguration.  I was told things like:

“this is an important moment for some”
“why do you have to rain on their parade. Let them have their day”
“you’re so heartless, this is an important step for humanity!”

Ugh…all the kool-aid is going to make me sick.

I take issue with all the pomp surrounding this event because people are so enamored with the man, as if he is anything more special than any of his collegues and peers in government.

“oh, Rick! But he represents CHANGE!!”

“Just what does he plan on changing and how will he change it? He has yet to articulate those what those changes are and what they mean to us.”

“That’s not what I meant.  I mean all the world is happy and smiling again, it’s wonderful!”

Why is it so wonderful?  What the heck is so wonderful about Barack Obama?  Yes, the people elected him and yes, he is the president.  But why are these people so gushy gushy over him?  I still remember the pictures of women crying profusely during his acceptance speech back in November, crying like they had just been given $20 million dollars, tax-free.

Is it because he’s not George Bush?  Well, we knew that.  Is it because he’s a liberal?  Well, we knew that too, even though we don’t really see the ramifications because the mainstream media treats Obama with kid gloves.

Hopefully, it’s not because he’s a man of color, because that would really just torque me off.  While I’m a firm believer in civil rights for all citizens, if a man of color was what they wanted in office, rather than someone whose policy decisions would be good for the country, that tells me that America didn’t listen to Dr. King’s statements about judging people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Maybe it’s because of entitlement – that the people who elected him will have a president who will, in their perception, give them their hearts desire. I heard one woman remark on the radio, “I won’t have to worry about paying my rent anymore!” *gush gush* These people cannot be seriously thinking that electing Obama will absolve them of the responsibilities and hardships of life.

What ever the reason, well, I’m not buying it.  I’m not going to go all gushy gushy over Obama because I will judge him by the content of his character and by the things he will do while in office. If he refuses to protect the unborn, if he fails to protect the sanctity of traditional marriage, if he decides to crank up my taxes to pay for all the entitlement spending and bailout programs, he won’t earn anything but my harsh criticism.

And, God forbid, if we get attacked by some terror group because he felt the need to pull our troops back, thus taking the pressure off of Al Qaida and the Taliban, you can believe I’m going to scream at the top of my lungs, calling everyone who voted for him a blooming idiot.

However, if he starts reducing government interference in people’s lives, keeps taxes for EVERYONE, rich and poor, nice and low, protects the traditional family vehemently, repairs the business of America by letting the market sort itself out, and brings Osama Bin Laden’s head in on a silver charger, well, he’ll earn my respect.

“Well, Rick, you may not like the guy, but you have to respect him now – he’s our President”.

Oh really, if I’m supposed to be so respectful to our new President, then how about letting the the mobs of disrespectful protesters in Washington that were singing, “nyah nyah nyah nyah, hey hey, good bye” to President Bush during the inauguration ceremony show me how to do it?

I think not.  My respect for Obama is tied to what he does while in the Oval Office, not because I’ve got so much faerie dust in my eyes that it makes me cry.  I’ll still pray for him, though.

*sips tea*

Written by The Rabid Conservative

January 21, 2009 at 11:58 am

The Conservative Underground – Day 75

leave a comment »

I am so sick of hearing about this inauguration.  I’m already going to boycott the whole darned thing, since nothing new will come out of it.  We think we’re getting a new president, full of fresh ideas on change and hope, but all I see is the same stuff that made up the Clinton hype back in 1992, when Der Schlick was playing his saxophone on MTV and VH1 in order to enamor the dumbkopfs who elected him based on feelings, rather than cogent policy.   While Obama isn’t the same as Bush, he’s quite the same as Clinton.  So, all we’ve done is pushed the ball back to the liberal faction for a ‘more-of’-the-left’s-same’.

In 2005, the Associated Press slammed George Bush’s $40 million inauguration party and parade, saying that it was far too pricey. In fact, AP writer Will Lester griped about “better uses” for the money, saying it should go to getting armor on Humvees in Iraq, sending it to tsunami victims, or even paying down the national debt (like 40 million would even make a dent in the national debt).  Lester argued, “The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?”

Here’s an excerpt of the slam: Click Here

But where are the likes of Will Lester now?  Well, Associated Press has yet to release a single contrary argument about B. Hussein’s $45 million party, five mill more than Bush’s, and that’s not counting the security for the sheer record numbers of groupies that show up to gush all over the Ba-rockstar.

Some things never change, even for a president who argued a platform of change. Yet as I’ve blogged before and many others have reported, the Obama administration is filling up with many of the same old lackies that had a prominent role during the Clinton years.

Obama stated, “We can’t take the same old politics and the same old players and expect a different result”. But yet, we see that stance is contrary that.

Here’s a short-list of recycles:

– Leon Pinetto – CIA  – Chief of Staff under Clinton
– Rahm Emanuel – Chief of Staff – Senior Advisor under Clinton
– Robert Reich – Economy Advisor – Sec Labor under Clinton
– Eric Holder – Attorney General – Deputy Attorney General under Clinton
– Cheryl Browner – Environmental Advisor  – Ran EPA under
– Susan Rice – UN Ambassador – Deputy Secretary of State under Clinton
– Hillary Clinton – Secretary of State – Former First Lady under Clinton, Democrat Senator
– Tom Daschle – Secretary of HHS – Former Senate Minority Leader

So, I guess we’re just about ready to say, Barack Hu-same Obama.  And to think, they called McCain, McSame.

Washington was right – and we just didn’t listen to him.


Written by The Rabid Conservative

January 18, 2009 at 10:44 pm

%d bloggers like this: