Saturday, March 31, 2007

Pelosi to speak with our enemy

Nancy Pelosi is a woman; you know how I know? she told us so….

“This is an historic moment - for the Congress, and for the women of this country. It is a moment for which we have waited more than 200 years. Never losing faith, we waited through the many years of struggle to achieve our rights. But women weren't just waiting; women were working. Never losing faith, we worked to redeem the promise of America, that all men and women are created equal. For our daughters and granddaughters, today we have broken the marble ceiling.”

Did anyone tell her about Condoleezza Rice? Rice broke the ceiling awhile ago, and guess what she is black. She didn’t even have to tell me. There is only one difference – I like Condoleezza. It would be a distressing thought to even think about a Nancy or Hillary presidency. This country would be in a world of hurt.

But, Pelosi is under the belief that both the president and vice president have died. How do I know? She has left the comfort of her home to engage in talks with the brutal Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad. You know - that guy who has assisted in the killing of our troops by supporting Hezbollah, and has helped Iran supply arms to Syria, that rogue state complicit in helping Iran supply rockets to Hezbollah that were used against Israel. Syria also allows foreign fighters through its borders into western Iraq for the purpose of killing American troops.

Nancy and her cohorts are following the same policy of appeasement that ended in the deaths of millions in World War 11. This policy of appeasement enacted after World War 1 and used by Neville Chamberlain provided for an artificial peace and allowed the British and French to ignore the threat posed by Hitler, and it resulted in many deaths. This policy is once again rearing its ugly head. Pelosi took along her pal Keith Ellison, the first Muslim congressman who was allowed to say his oath of office with his hand on the Koran instead of the Bible (imagine using the Bible in an Islamic country). The reason it took the United States so long to enter World War II was because of this policy of appeasement. This was the foreign police of England and France toward Germany. This policy emboldened Hitler and allowed him to rebuild the German army and navy in direct violation of the Versailles treaty and gave him the wherewithal to invade the Sudetenland and Czechoslovakia, and he did not stop there. There would be no peace. The same liberals protested against entering the war then as those who protested against Vietnam and those who protest the war today. Both World War 11 and Vietnam resulted in the deaths of millions as a by-product of the appeasement efforts of the liberal left. It was only until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor that forced the U.S. into World War ll. Of course, Rosie O’Donnell would probably say that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was a conspiracy concocted by the United States so we would enter the war. Allowing Keith Ellison to use the Koran as he said his oath of office was just another example of this continuing policy of appeasement.

The solicitous nature Democrats like Jimmy Carter and Nancy Pelosi show today’s dictators is disconcerting. Imagine Roosevelt having talks with Hitler during World War 11. The Nazi-Soviet Nonaggression pact with the Soviet Union was theoretically intended to prevent the Nazis from invading Russia. In exchange, Hitler would give Stalin control of Eastern Poland and the Baltic States. Of course, we now know Hitler never intended to keep his promise. He had always intended to invade Russia and we know where that lead to. As early as the 1920s, Hitler indicated his desire to acquire land in the east (Russia). Notice the similarity with Clinton and North Korea and now dare I say Bush and North Korea. After Hitler took over the Sudetenland, a hastily arranged conference was arranged in Munich with British, French and Italian representatives. Nevelle Chamberlain returned to Britain from Munich boasting that an agreement had been made and it meant, “Peace in our time.” Imagine “Peace in our time” with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Virtually all of Hitler’s demands were met. Hitler was basically given the Sudetenland in northwestern Czechoslovakia, and the Czechs, abandoned by their western allies, stood helplessly as the Nazis marched in with virtually no resistance.

So why do these analogies not fit today? Is evil any different now than it was then? The liberals are clueless on how to confront the evil today as they were then.

This policy of appeasement includes the new surrender date Pelosi introduced. Before the last elections, the Democrats were careful not to call it “cut and run”, it was “redeployment.” Of course, they never said what that meant. Now we know exactly what they meant – “surrender”. The former hippie generation is now calling for a surrender date by August 2008. There is also a lot of pork attached to this surrender-date bill. Al-Qaeda must be rubbing their hands in anticipation for when we raise the white flag.

On Pelosi’s official website she writes:

“The President’s escalation plan to send more U.S. troops to Iraq is out of step with the American people and our allies. Why are thousands of additional American troops being sent to Iraq at the same time that British troops are planning to leave? (my comment: the fact the British let their 15 sailors be kidnapped shows where they stand).

“The President’s escalation plan has been rejected by bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate and opposed by Americans all across the country. The announcement by the British government confirms the doubts in the minds of the American people about the President’s decision to increase the number of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.”

Has anyone told Pelosi, the surge has decreased casualties in Baghdad by 80%?

And in another statement she writes

“As is appropriate, my first trip outside of the United States as Speaker of the House was to visit our men and women in uniform – to thank them for their courage, their patriotism, and their sacrifices that they are making and that their families are making for our country.
“As a tribute to them, I wanted to bring the highest-level delegation possible – people who are respected for their commitment to our national security and their concern for the welfare of our troops – Members of Congress who understand how America must protect its power and project its values.”

So that is why she wants to cut off the funding?

This begs the question; do we want a woman for president? Dick Morris says that single women are desperate to put a woman in the White House but I ask to the peril of the United States? Nancy Pelosi already thinks she is president and she is a grave danger to America. Women like her should be kept at home baking cookies like the good little grandmother she wants to portray. As Senator Lloyd Bentsen once said to Dan Quayle, “Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy.” In the same vein, I would say to Nancy Pelosi, “Speaker of the house, you are no Margaret Thatcher,.” I have yet to see a qualified woman who would fit the bill for the presidency. I would vote for a woman if I saw a qualified one. Even the Democrats are running away from Hillary. Hillary is a danger to America as is Obama. I thought maybe Condoleeza Rice might be a viable candidate until she convinced Israel to surrender to Hezbollah. If it be a woman that leads this country in these troubled times, let it be a Margaret Thatcher. But I don’t see it yet.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Sobre las bitácoras

He vuelto, llegué a la conclusión de seguir con mi bitácora después de mucho cavilar. ¿Debo? O ¿No Debo? Y luego me vino a la mente. Vivimos en un mundo irracional que necesita una mente racional, y sabemos que no hay nadie mejor a este mundo irracional que yo – alguien siempre dispuesto a aceptar las opiniones de otros pues si están de acuerdo con las mías.

Lo bueno sobre las bitácoras es que los sitios de las bitácoras integran a unas miríadas de estadísticas que permiten ver al escritor el tráfico en su sitio. Todavía estoy debatiendo si eso es una buena idea o no. Las aportaciones que contribuimos a esta nueva tecnología pueden ser una experiencia digna de elogio o pueden ser una experiencia desalentadora; todo depende de cuanta gente visita la bitácora.

En mi última bitácora, sé que tuve por lo menos un lector que nunca estaba de acuerdo conmigo, pero le gustaba comentar sobre mis opiniones. Estoy eternamente agradecido por sus comentarios, porque cualquier atisbo de autoestima que mantenía, la mantenía a causa de él, pues vamos, aunque siempre escribía comentarios irracionales y erróneos, por lo menos comentaba. Pasamos horas nosotros los escritores escribiendo en nuestras bitácoras (un poco de hipérbole) (y digo bitácora y no blog, porque bitácora es el vocablo aceptado por la Academia Real de España), y ¿Quién las lee? Voy a procurar compartir cosas en español y en inglés. Ahora, inglés es mi idioma natal, por eso todavía no sé en que idioma voy a escribir más. Todo depende de ustedes (vosotros en España) quien lea mi bitácora más.

Pero si hay algún hiato en mis aportaciones, no es que he parado porque nadie está leyendo mi bitácora (aunque eso puede ocurrir), no es porque soy haragán (aunque eso puede ser la verdad) ni es porque no tengo nada que decir (algunos pueden alegar que eso es cierto de todas maneras). Es posible, en todo caso, que me ha llevado la ambulancia a la sala de emergencia y me están llenando con morfina y antivan. Pues, todo es posible ¿No?

Por eso, hagan comentarios para que así se eleve mi autoestima.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

The commonality of Tony Snow and Elizabeth Edwards

There is one undisputed statistic that always holds true whether you are Democrat, Republican, liberal or conservative and that is that ten out of ten people die. In the last week, we have heard the news that both Tony Snow and Elizabeth Edwards have an incurable form of cancer. Both cancers were in remission, both cancers have come back with a vengeance. When cancer enters the bones, it can be an excruciating ordeal. Both individuals must recognize their own mortality regardless of their pecuniary resources.

I never thought much good about the politics of John Edwards and his two Americas. Jesus once said "the poor will always be with us." So in a sense, the United States will always have two Americas. But the great thing about America is that you do not have to stay poor. There is always a way out by the choices you make in this great country of ours. I tell my kids they do not have to play the lottery, because by being born in the United States, they have already won the lottery. One in four people of the world live in absolute poverty. This is not because of a dearth of resources in the world, but it is because of the human condition (i.e.: greed, corruption, political instability, etc). Education, perseverance and a good work ethic allows everyone to make it in this country. But, it’s too bad that much of the youth don't realize it until it’s too late. The liberals, however, believe that the ones who make it by following the rules should pay for the bad choices of others in this country. The ones we should take care of are the truly disabled, and others who may find themselves in a situation where they need a helping hand albeit temporarily. My wife is from Nicaragua, and if you are born poor in Nicaragua, that is where you stay. There are but a few exceptions, but in those third world scenarios, the only way to make money is through political connections, owning your own business or through the most pervasive way, corruption.

With my children, higher education is not a choice it is an assumption (that is it is assumed they are going to college). If they make the choice of not going - that is their decision - it is not the government's responsibility to bail them out. Within my own family, I would probably be more of a Democrat, because I find myself doing things I would not have done in the past (ie: helping my kids out of difficult situations when they find they screwed something up because of a lack of their own acumen). But, the Democrat mentality should stay in one’s own family.

The inclination when you are poor is to lean towards philosophies such as Socialism, Marxism and Communism, and dictatorships that encourage such philosophies. This is because the poor look to someone who will help them out of their current situation, and it also fosters the hope that the wealth will be shared by all not just the rich. Socialism might work in a utopian society, but we do not live in a utopian society. We live in a world where avarice and covetousness are the norm. Socialism in its truest form has proven time and time again to be ineffective. Where capitalism allows the individual to rise above his/her circumstance depending on his/her own ambition, socialism foments laziness and corruption directly attributable to the human condition.

I digressed a little. It is hard to understand the decision process that the Edwards must have gone through to continue John Edward’s run for the presidency. Maybe he truly does desire to lead this country through these difficult times even though he is misguided. But, in any event even though I disagree with 99% of the politics of Edwards, my heart goes out to Elizabeth. I have a neurological disorder and as I get older and the disorder progresses, I feel my own mortality. She must realize that her life will no longer be as long as she would like. My heart also goes out to the family of Tony Snow. I like Tony Snow.

So in the end what is it that counts. Family, faith, and integrity are what count the most, because when it comes time to meet your creator, I want to be able to say to our creator the words the apostle Paul said in the book of Timothy, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day."

Monday, March 26, 2007

A must read for all you lefties out there

So why is the left not in the streets protesting the kidnapping of 15 British Sailors?

Friday, March 23, 2007

My Pet Peeves

I have picked up a new hobby – buying aerobic DVDs with Latin beats and doing my thing insofar as cardiovascular exercise is concerned. I have noticed I do sweat and it seems to build up my endurance, but here is my pet-peeve. These DVDs are geared towards women. The ones I have purchased so far only include women in the videos. Now, don’t get me wrong I do not mind working out with nice looking women, but can they include a token male salsa dancer or two, preferably not gay. I exceptionally feel out of place when the lead instructor says, “How are you girls doing?” But I continue feeling the beat and doing my exercise, but my kids keep giving me the eagle eye, and my daughter snickers, “Dad, maybe there is a reason only women are dancing.”

Salsa and Latin dancing are performed by men and women alike, so I cannot believe that there is not a market for men. Tae bo should not be the only cardiovascular exercise for men.

Here is my second pet-peeve. When I was in eighth grade, I was in the Acapella choir, and our teacher loved Broadway musicals, so we sang many of the songs from these musicals. Since then, I have always loved the Broadway musical. A side point – my kids hate them. I turn on Sirius satellite radio at times to listen to the Broadway station, and I have to admit, every disk jockey (male) sounds like he is gay. Why do Broadway musical tunes seem to only be relegated to gays? Now admittedly, in my earlier years, I would never have admitted to anyone I liked Broadway tunes.

There are a lot of things one never would admit to among his peers. In the early 60s, one never admitted that he was a Munster’s fan or an Addam’s family fan even though virtually everyone watched one or the other. I was an Addam's family fan - I think I liked Morticia, even with all her eccentricities, with her long black and flowing silky hair. If you were an Addam’s family fan, you hated the Munsters, if you were a Munsters fan; you hated the Addam’s family. What that meant, I don’t know but no one watched both shows.

You also never admitted (at least in the West) that you ever listened to country music or you would have been chastised to the nth degree by your peers.

This was the same with the Beatles and the Rolling Stones although you did admit which one you listened to. I was more of a Beatles fan in those days. If you were a Rolling Stones fan, you were a rebel, if you were a Beatles fan, you were more of a staid, calm and collected type of character. Al Gore was posed this question when running for the presidency, but clueless Al didn’t even understand the meaning of the question. He rambled on why he liked both of these groups.

So, in essence, I am not even sure of why I posted this blog entry. I guess it was when I turned on Sirius satellite to the Broadway stations, and I heard the continuous obnoxious voices of the stereotypical gay disc jockeys. I knew instinctively there had to be other fans out there that are not gay. I am one although if you ask me if I like broadway tunes, I won't admit to it.

PS: I have nothing against gays, this is just an observation.

Monday, March 19, 2007

60 minutes continues to undermine the war

As I was watching 60 minutes last night, I thought, “Not again!” In CBS’ first segment, ‘The Killings in Haditha” Correspondent Scott Pelley interviewed Sgt Frank Wuterich about the 24 killings of apparently innocent civilians in the town of Haditha, Iraq last December.

In my daughter’s world history class, they debated whether or not there should be rules in war. I told her, rules are fine. You have to have some rules of engagement to prevent rape or true mass murder. But, there is a fine line between rules that maintain our humanity and rules that hinder our progress in the war. Right now, we are afraid to stub anyone’s toes in Iraq. We are not fighting a war, we are playing games, and we are giving the radical Muslims the advantage – and they know it. If we are going to fight a war, we should go in and fight a war, or else we should never go in – that is why we are losing the propaganda war which could easily turn into a complete loss in Iraq and a victory for the terrorists..

Pelley asked Sgt Wuterich if he had to do it over again would he, and the sergeant responded, “I would do the same thing”, Looking aghast, Pelley retorted, “You can’t mean that! Is a sorry in order?” The inflection in his voice reflected the disgust he felt towards the Sergeants’ response. What was the Sgt suppose to say to a question like that. Of course, He said what any soldier would say, “I’m absolutely sorry.” He, along with the other marines involved, are facing life in prision.

Can someone tell Pelley and the other correspondents in 60 minutes that we are in a war and war is brutal? The good we are doing in Iraq is honorable and noble. The Iraqis are in a better situation than they ever were under the banner of Sadaam Hussein.

Instead, the far left, the media and even the leadership in the Democratic party want the United States to lose – it is evident by their actions, and the propaganda emanating from these groups is no less disingenuous than the propaganda that emanated from Joseph Goebbells in Nazi Germany, and the irony is the polls show that many are falling for it. History once again is repeating itself.

The main problem is that Bush and his administration have become listless in fighting this propaganda war. Bush needs to be out there on a daily basis and present the good he is doing in Iraq. The Commanders on the ground have said the surge is working, and that the killings in Baghdad have been reduced by 80%. That sounds good to me. Why hasn’t Bush said anything about it? Just tell the truth.

Friday, March 16, 2007

My daughter as a bridesmaid.

Here is my daughter ready to be a bridesmaid in her cousin's wedding. A break from the morass of politics. Isn't she cute?

You can go to Youtube and rate this video, make sure all ratings are five stars, I mean really can you expect anything less.

Stay tuned for the next blog entry. I will be posting on the nightmare of upgrading to Windows Vista.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Book Review - Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Infidel is the story of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, born in Somalia and a naturalized citizen of Holland and member of the Dutch Parliament, who after years of abuse left her family and her Islamic faith. It is the story of a woman that put her life in danger to tell the world what the Islamic faith really is. She was a close confident of Theo Van Gough, the outspoken filmmaker and advocate for Muslim women's rights, who was brutally murdered. After his death she went into hiding because she was trying to expose the reality of the Islamic faith.

Ayaan speaks about the grotesque procedure of infibulation, the mutilitation of a young girl’s genitalia under the guise of keeping the girl pure. This procedure happens to thousands of young women a year.

Infidel dispels several myths about Islam

1) Islam is a religion of peace
2) The Islamists attacked us because we support Israel
3) The fundamentalists in the Christian faith are as dangerous as the fundamentalists in the Islamic faith
4) Islamic terrorism is the result of poverty

In her book, she says, “Most articles analyzing Bin Laden and his movement were scrutinizing a symptom, a little like analyzing Lenin and Stalin without looking at the works of Karl Marx.”

Islam is a totalitarian religion…”The prophet did teach us a lot of good things. I found it spiritually appealing to believe in a Hereafter. My life was enriched by the Quranic injunctions to be compassionate and show charity to others. There were times when I, like many other Muslims, found it too complicated to deal with the whole issue of war against the unbelievers. Most Muslims never delve into theology, and we rarely read the Quran; we are taught it in Arabic, which most Muslims can’t speak. As a result most people think that Islam is about peace. It is from these people, honest and kind, that the fallacy has arisen that Islam is peaceful and tolerant.

This book reminded me of a Muslim Afghanistan family who lived down the street from us when the attack on 9/11 occurred. My daughter was tutoring the daughter in Math. It was commonplace to observe the parents pulling their daughter’s hair and striking her, and at the same time yelling, why can’t you be more like “insert my daughter’s name.” American children lie and can sometimes be manipulative, but nothing equaled the lying and manipulation of these children, but this is what they are taught. It is endemic in the Islamic culture.

This is a book every person should read, because it will open your eyes.

Monday, March 12, 2007

60 Minutes Sunday Coal Miners

60 minutes had a report on Sunday about the coal we are using and how coal miners seem to be dying. The US is a vast consumer of Coal to keep our houses warm. Al Gore runs around the world touting his "Inconvenient Lie", but neither one gives the obvious solution.

As Reagan once said, "It's the economy stupid." Well, if you want to prevent coal miners from dying and if you want to continue the propaganda that CO2 is going to kill humanity, then the apothegem should be "It's nuclear power stupid." Nuclear power is the cleanest source of fuel, and you wouldn't have coal miner's dying. The following link shows France is definitely in the lead as using Nuclear Power for its energy (using US technology). The US is way down on the bottom. What is wrong with this picture? The lefties still control the agenda of the global warming lie, nuclear power is dangerous and drilling for oil will ruin our landscape. This is their continued goal of destroying capitalism and their continued goal of a one world socialist government

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

The forgotton part of the immigration debate

The Bush administration still continues to ignore the closing of the Mexican Border. Remember the signing of the bill for an immigration wall? Has anyone seen the beginning of its construction?

What happens when you have the working force of an entire country leave somewhere else to find work. The economy of the country will certainly suffer. Fathers will leave wives, abandon children and many will end up shacking up with women in the country to which they have gone.

A website by abandoned wifes in Tecapulco Mexico has been set in English pleading for their husbands to return and pleading for Bush to close the borders. Who would have expected this turn of events? Click on the link Wetbacks Wives, Wetback Widows, Wetback Orphans of Tecalpulco, Municipio de Taxco Mexico - Dear Pedro how I miss you. you sai... On the home page is a scanned letter written in Spanish which I have translated below:

I hope upon receiving my letter you find yourself in good health now that it has been five years since you left and we have missed you a lot. I want to ask you to return although I know you went to Los Angeles because your friends convinced you you were going to do fine. I have learned that you cannot leave and you work day and night, and you are constantly vigilant for the immigration patrols that patrol the city of Los Angeles. I am asking you to return to Mexico because we have a little more work here and you don't always have to be watching out for immigration. You will be in your own land which is where your family is who loves and misses you very much. If you return your family will be once again united and together again like before, my brother we love you

Attentively: Your sister Manuela

Return soon

There are a couple of things that struck me about this letter. First, it is evident it is written by a native born citizen so all you naysayers are out of luck as to the authenticity of this letter.

I have been reading Spanish for many years, and the normal orthographic errors that one would find in a letter written by a native born citizen of Mexico with little education are present. I do not know Manuela's age, but it is evident she has not had many years of schooling.

So when Bush refuses to close the border, it is rather selfish on his part. Instead of the Mexicans building the infrastructure in Mexico, the manpower leaves Mexico and Mexico becomes a poorer nation.

My wife is from Nicaragua, and this is similar to what happened after the revolution although in Nicaragua it was the elite that left. After Ortega took power in Nicaragua after the 1979 coup, made possible by the worst president the US has ever had and beloved friend of dictators Jimmy Carter, there was a brain drain. This caused Nicaragua's economy to fall to World War 2 levels from which it has yet to recover.

So the solution is not to bring the Mexicans here, but for them to return to Mexico and build up the infrastructure in Mexico. Mexico has plenty of natural resources that could make them a first world country. Would that not be the most humane of all solutions?

Maybe Calderon might be good for Mexico. We shall see - This is an about face from the way Fox treated illegal immigration

From the Tucson Citizen

Mexican President Felipe Calderon won't be fighting for migration reform when he meets with President Bush next week. Instead, he will be be spelling out what he intends to do to keep Mexicans at home.
Calderon, who was inaugurated on Dec. 1, has pledged to take 100 actions in his first 100 days in office, many of which represent the first steps toward "curing" Mexico's long tradition of illegal migration to the U.S.
If implemented, his proposals could help transform Mexico from a labor-exporting country with relatively low growth, productivity and wages into an investment-rich, job-producing economy with better living standards for its 107 million people, nearly half of whom still live in poverty.
"We are laying the foundation for a more just, healthy society with better and more equal opportunities for all," he said.
Even a modicum of success for Calderon would improve on the record of his predecessor Vicente Fox, who failed to persuade the United States to accept Mexican guest workers and also could not put in place proposed reforms.

Nice seeing you comment Dave.

Monday, March 5, 2007

Oh the Hypocrisy of it all!!!!!!

Republicans are outraged by Ann Coulter's "Faggot" comment. I agree with Edwards in that it has no place in political discourse. Oh but the hypocrisy of it all! Edward's has the gall to start a cash coulter fund to raise money for his lanquishing campaign under the guise of fighting against political bigotry, this after he hires two bloggers who with four letter words in every breath rail against the Catholic church, christians, etc. and whomever they didn't like. He then fires the bloggers, rehires them, and then after O'reilly exposed them, they resigned. Do we really think Edward cares what Coulter says or does he just see this as an opportunity to raise funds for a campaign that is going no where.

Maybe Edwards wants to use this Coulter Cash to hire two new hate-filled bloggers to rail against the Catholic church. You think? There was not only no outcry to these two bloggers by the liberal establishment, but the liberals defended these bloggers as free speech. Oh and, where was the outcry when Bill Maher made known his dissatisfaction that the suicide bombers missed Dick Cheney. Oh the hypocrisy!

The difference between a conservative and a liberal is conservatives use a moral compass. When Ann Coulter or any other conservative makes an outlandish remark, we will denounce it. Conservatives and Liberals should be accountable for what they say. Liberals, however will support these individuals who make derisive remarks and hire these persons of interests (politically correct term) to their campaigns and some (name not disclosed to protect the innocent) will be allowed to remain in office while interns continue to satisfy them in order to educate our youth what sex is and what sex isn't. The liberals will defend any kind of behavior as long as they are liberals to their dying breath. Oh the hypocrisy of it all!

What Ann Coulter said was indefensible, and she will be held accountable not by the liberal establishment but by the conservative establishment

The stock market continues downward

When Greenspan speaks everyone listens. Does it really matter if Greenspan is the current Fed Chairman or not? I think not. He still has the power to affect markets. Greenspan says there is a possibility of a recession by year end, and the market immediately reacts, and the stock market begins a downward spiral. However, what did Greenspan really say? He said there was a possiblity of a recession, not a probability. If we parse, what Greenspan really said, we find, there is always a 100% chance of a possibility of a recession at any moment in time, however the probability is remote.

When emotion hits the stock market, which is what happened last week and continues this week, the market corrects. This of course is always healthy for the market. The economy is humming along and there is no recession in sight.

If you are a trekkie, become a vulcan when it comes to investing. Remove emotion - emotion needs to always be removed from the equation. Conventional wisdom says "panic when the market goes down", but as an investor, you need to look at this as an opportunity and start looking at stocks which have hoards of cash flow, good business models and well run. Start picking out stocks and be ready to pounce on them when their prices drop. I am going to wait a few more days to see if the prices drop further. Companies I am currently looking at are the following: (note: these are already in my portfolio, and I am looking to buy more)

1) Carmax KMX (down 11.89% in a week)
2) Compas Minerals (CMP) (down 7.41% in a week)
3) Cemex (The premier Mexican cement company) (CX down 11.8% in a week)
4) Fastenal FAST (down 6.46% in a week)
5) Ebay (ebay) (down 7.3% in a week)
6 ) Novartis (NVS) (down 6.38% in a week)
7) Johnson and Johnson (JNJ) (down 3.43% in a week)

Happy Investing!
Republican Party Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory DeeperLeft member