Thursday, December 18, 2014

The Queen & Dolly Go To Heaven !!

Queen Elizabeth and
Dolly Parton die on the same day and they both go before an Angel

to find out if they'll be admitted to Heaven.
Unfortunately, there's only one space left that day,
so the Angel must decide which of them gets in.
The Angel asks Dolly if there's some particular reason why she
should go to Heaven..

Dolly takes off her top and says,
'Look at these, they're the most perfect breasts 
God ever created, and I'm sure 
it will please God to be able to see them every day, for eternity.'
The Angel thanks Dolly, and asks Her Majesty the same question.
The Queen takes a bottle of Perrier out of her purse, drinks it down.
Then, wees into a toilet and pulls the lever.
The Angel says, 'OK, your Majesty, you may go in.'

Dolly is outraged and asks,
'What was that all about?
I show you two of God's own perfect creations
and you turn me down. She wees into a toilet and she gets in!
Would you explain that to me?'

'Sorry, Dolly,' says the Angel, ‘but even in Heaven,
a Royal Flush
beats a Pair - no matter how big they are.

Thanks Dan !

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Monday, December 15, 2014

The History of Racial Profiling

The day it all started was MARCH 6, 1836.

On that fateful day, Davy Crockett woke up and rose 
from his bunk on the main floor of the Alamo and 
walked up to the observation post along the west wall 
of the fort.  William B. Travis and  Jim Bowie were 
already there, looking out over the top of  the wall.  
He joined them.

These three great men gazed at the hordes of Mexicans 
moving towards the Alamo.

With a puzzled look on his face, Crockett turned to 
Bowie and said, "Jim, are we, by any chance, 
having any landscaping done today?"

Tell the truth, are you now suffering
from white guilt after reading this?

Thanks Mr. Trailbee!

Sunday, December 14, 2014

The Year 2017

One sunny day in January, 2017, an old man approached
the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue
where he'd been sitting on a park bench.

He spoke to the U.S. Marine standing guard and said,
"I would like to go in and meet with President
Obama." The Marine looked at the man and said,
"Sir, Mr. Obama is no longer President and no longer
resides here." The old man said, "Okay," and
walked away.

The following day the same man approached the
White House and said to the same Marine, "I would like
to go in and meet with President Obama." The Marine
again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr.
Obama is no longer President and no longer resides
here." The man thanked him and again just walked away.

The third day the same man approached the White House and
spoke to the very same U.S. Marine, saying, "I would like to go
in and meet with President Obama."

The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at
the man and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have
been here asking to speak to Mr. Obama. I've told you
already that Mr. Obama is no longer the President and no
longer resides here. Don't you understand?"

The old man looked at the Marine and said, "Oh, I understand.
I just love hearing it."

The Marine snapped to attention,
saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow, Sir."

Thank You Mr. Trailbee!

Friday, December 12, 2014

Oops I'm Late . . .

David thanks for the first, and Harold thanks for the last.

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Not The Brightest Bulbs

I love Christmas lights! They remind me of

the people who voted for Obama.

They all hang together, half of them don't work,

and the ones that do, aren't all that bright.

Thanks Mr. Trailbee

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Two Americas

Want to know why citizens who work for a living dislike those who vote for a living? This guy hits the nail on the head! In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk-radio personality on WHAM 1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income inequality speech": Two Americas.

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works, and the America that doesn't. The America that contributes, and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves and the have-nots, it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, and contribute to society, while others don't. That's the divide in America.

It's not about income inequality, it's about civic irresponsibility. It's about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It's about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That's not invective, that's truth, and it's about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged to spend the rest of his term to fighting "income inequality." He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that's not just.

That's the rationale of thievery! The other guy has it, you want it, and Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat! That's the philosophy that produced Detroit. It's the electoral philosophy that's destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but betraying them. The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president's premise - that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful - seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Income variations in society are, for the most part, a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. If you choose to drop out of high school or skip college, you're likely to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education. Have children out of wedlock and your life is apt to take one course; have them within a stable marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take and the choices we make. My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives have also had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made one choice, I made another, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we're both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It's not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it's freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.
There is no true option for success if there's no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.... even if the other guy sat on his ass and did nothing... even if the other guy made a lifetime's worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest: "As ye sow, so shall ye reap" is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and the productive to foster equality through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of "two Americas" and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it's divided by the differences in our efforts. It's a false philosophy to say one man's success comes unavoidably as the result of another man's victimization.

What Obama offers is not a solution, but a separatism. He has fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That's what socialists offer. Marxist class-warfare wrapped up with a bow.
Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln's maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

Thank You David