Masters of Deceptive Persuasion

Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Gary VarvelPolitical Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The 2016 Dream Team

The following sarcasm is true. The names have not been changed to protect the innocent.

I have come up with a good President Team for the Republicans in 2016.

Marco Rubio and Mia Love.

Yes, we do have to forgive Rubio for falling of the Illegal Immigration bandwagon and Mia Love just got elected for the first time so she doesn’t have much experience, but by 2016 she’d have almost as much as Barack O did.

But this recommendation is made for several reasons, most of them to irritate Establishment Lifer Politicians.

The first obvious reason  would be to throw a huge monkey wrench in the Race Card Media and the Leftist obsession with evil White Republican Males.

Rubio is Cuban- American. Obama wants to “normalize” relations with Cuba and says that the olod embargos are from a bygone era so what’s more hip and trendy than…


He’s also more than nominally a Tea Party Candidate so he’ll annoy the RINOs and The Establishment Elite of The Grand Farts Party.

Not everyone is an Old White Establishment “Moderate” who will with great “bi-partisanship” give away everything to The Left so they can bitch about it to get re-elected over and over again by doing that.

Mia Love (R-UT), she could make up for that embarrassment from Utah the last time. But mostly, she’s Black!

Not one evil white males on the ticket!!

That would frustrate the Leftist hate machine. The “Uncle Tom” spew would be wonderfully contortionist. Hating on Love, what a perfectly Orwellian concept.

She would also be several Firsts, and the Politically Correct love Firsts.

The First African-American Vice-President.

The First African-American Republican.  (shows how “progressive” :) we are)

and The FIRST FEMALE VICE-PRESIDENT (who can Become The First Female President and a Black one to boot if you can just keep Hilary’s grubby little fingers off of it!)

And who doesn’t want a Vice President Love, how Orwell is that, the Politically Correct should just eat that up and she’s way prettier and way smarter than Biden (just about any multi-cellular life form is, but that’s another story).

So there you have it, the Perfect match for the Politically Correct, Passive Aggressive, Vote for Me The Other Guys an Asshole, “Bi-Partisan (really just BY-)”, apathetic, mind numbed times, we live in.

rubio love 2016

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Memorandum of Understanding From Your King

WASHINGTON — President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the “Do Nothing Congress” almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. He’s used presidential memoranda to make policy on gun control, immigration and labor regulations. Tuesday, he used a memorandum to declare Bristol Bay, Alaska, off-limits to oil and gas exploration.

Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don’t require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda.

Obama has made prolific use of memoranda despite his own claims that he’s used his executive power less than other presidents. “The truth is, even with all the actions I’ve taken this year, I’m issuing executive orders at the lowest rate in more than 100 years,” Obama said in a speech in Austin last July. “So it’s not clear how it is that Republicans didn’t seem to mind when President Bush took more executive actions than I did.”

Obama has issued 195 executive orders as of Tuesday. Published alongside them in the Federal Register are 198 presidential memoranda — all of which carry the same legal force as executive orders.

He’s already signed 33% more presidential memoranda in less than six years than Bush did in eight. He’s also issued 45% more than the last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who assertively used memoranda to signal what kinds of regulations he wanted federal agencies to adopt.

Obama is not the first president to use memoranda to accomplish policy aims. But at this point in his presidency, he’s the first to use them more often than executive orders.

“There’s been a lot of discussion about executive orders in his presidency, and of course by sheer numbers he’s had fewer than other presidents. So the White House and its defenders can say, ‘He can’t be abusing his executive authority; he’s hardly using any orders,” said Andrew Rudalevige, a presidency scholar at Bowdoin College. “But if you look at these other vehicles, he has been aggressive in his use of executive power.”

So even as he’s quietly used memoranda to signal policy changes to federal agencies, Obama and his allies have claimed he’s been more restrained in his use of that power.

In a Senate floor speech in July, Majority Leader Harry Reid said, “While Republicans accuse President Obama of executive overreach, they neglect the fact that he has issued far fewer executive orders than any two-term president in the last 50 years.”

The White House would not comment on how it uses memoranda and executive orders but has previously said Obama’s executive actions “advance an agenda that expands opportunity and rewards hard work and responsibility.”

“There is no question that this president has been judicious in his use of executive action, executive orders, and I think those numbers thus far have come in below what President George W. Bush and President Bill Clinton did,” said Jay Carney, then the White House press secretary, in February.

Carney, while critical of Bush’s executive actions, also said it wasn’t the number of executive actions that was important but rather “the quality and the type.”

“It is funny to hear Republicans get upset about the suggestion that the president might use legally available authorities to advance an agenda that expands opportunity and rewards hard work and responsibility, when obviously they supported a president who used executive authorities quite widely,” he said.

While executive orders have become a kind of Washington shorthand for unilateral presidential action, presidential memoranda have gone largely unexamined. And yet memoranda are often as significant to everyday Americans than executive orders. For example:

• In his State of the Union Address in January, Obama proposed a new retirement savings account for low-income workers called a MyRA. The next week, he issued a presidential memorandum to the Treasury Department instructing it to develop a pilot program.

• In April, Obama directed the Department of Labor to collect salary data from federal contractors and subcontractors to monitor whether they’re paying women and minorities fairly.

• In June, Obama told the Department of Education to allow certain borrowers to cap their student loan payments at 10% of income.

They can also be controversial.


Obama issued three presidential memoranda after the Sandy Hook school shooting two years ago. They ordered federal law enforcement agencies to trace any firearm that’s part of a federal investigation, expanded the data available to the national background check system, and instructed federal agencies to conduct research into the causes and possible solutions to gun violence.

Two more recent memos directed the administration to coordinate an overhaul of the nation’s immigration system — a move that congressional Republicans say exceeded his authority. Of the dozens of steps Obama announced as part of his immigration plan last month, none was accomplished by executive order.

Executive orders are numbered — the most recent, Executive Order 13683, modified three previous executive orders. Memoranda are not numbered, not indexed and, until recently, difficult to quantify.

Kenneth Lowande, a political science doctoral student at the University of Virginia, counted up memoranda published in the Code of Federal Regulations since 1945. In an article published in the December issue of Presidential Studies Quarterly, he found that memoranda appear to be replacing executive orders.

Indeed, many of Obama’s memoranda do the kinds of things previous presidents did by executive order.

• In 1970, President Nixon issued an executive order on unneeded federal properties. Forty years later, Obama issued a similar policy by memorandum.

• President George W. Bush established the Bob Hope American Patriot Award by executive order in 2003. Obama created the Richard C. Holbrooke Award for Diplomacy by memorandum in 2012.

• President Bush issued Executive Order 13392 in 2005, directing agencies to report on their compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. On his week in office, Obama directed the attorney general to revisit those reports — but did so in a memorandum.

“If you look at some of the titles of memoranda recently, they do look like and mirror executive orders,” Lowande said.

The difference may be one of political messaging, he said. An “executive order,” he said, “immediately evokes potentially damaging questions of ‘imperial overreach.'” Memorandum sounds less threatening.

Though they’re just getting attention from some presidential scholars, White House insiders have known about the power of memoranda for some time. In a footnote to her 1999 article in the Harvard Law Review, former Clinton associate White House counsel Elena Kagan — now an Obama appointee to the U.S. Supreme Court — said scholars focused too much on executive orders rather than presidential memoranda.

Kagan said Clinton considered memoranda “a central part of his governing strategy,” using them to spur agencies to write regulations restricting tobacco advertising to children, allowing unemployment insurance for paid family leave and requiring agencies to collect racial profiling data.

“The memoranda became, ever increasingly over the course of eight years, Clinton’s primary means, self-consciously undertaken, both of setting an administrative agenda that reflected and advanced his policy and political preferences and of ensuring the execution of this program,” Kagan wrote.


Presidential scholar Phillip Cooper calls presidential memoranda “executive orders by another name, and yet unique.”

The law does not define the difference between an executive order and a memorandum, but it does say that the president should publish in the Federal Register executive orders and other documents that “have general applicability and legal effect.”

“Something that’s in a presidential memorandum in one administration might be captured in an executive order in another,” said Jim Hemphill, the special assistant to the director for the government’s legal notice publication. “There’s no guidance that says, ‘Mr. President, here’s what needs to be in an executive order.’ “

There are subtle differences. Executive orders are numbered; memoranda are not. Memoranda are always published in the Federal Register after proclamations and executive orders. And under Executive Order 11030, signed by President Kennedy in 1962, an executive order must contain a “citation of authority,” saying what law it’s based on. Memoranda have no such requirement.

Obama, like other presidents, has used memoranda for more routine operations of the executive branch, delegating certain mundane tasks to subordinates. About half of the memoranda published on the White House website are deemed so inconsequential that they’re not counted as memoranda in the Federal Register.

Sometimes, there are subtle differences. President Eisenhower signed Executive Order 10789 in 1958 giving emergency contracting authority to the Department of Defense and other Cabinet departments. President Bush added other departments in 2001 and 2003, but he and Obama both used memoranda to give temporary authority to the U.S. Agency for International Development to respond to crises in Iraq and western Africa.

When the president determines the order of succession in a Cabinet-level department — that is, who would take over in the case of the death or resignation of the secretary — he does so by executive order. For other agencies, he uses a memorandum.

Both executive orders and memoranda can vary in importance. One executive order this year changed the name of the National Security Staff to the National Security Council Staff. Both instruments have been used to delegate routine tasks to other federal officials.


Whatever they’re called, those executive actions are binding on future administrations unless explicitly revoked by a future president, according to legal opinion from the Justice Department.

The Office of Legal Counsel — which is responsible for advising the president on executive orders and memoranda — says there’s no difference between the two. “It has been our consistent view that it is the substance of a presidential determination or directive that is controlling and not whether the document is styled in a particular manner,” said a 2000 memo from Acting Assistant Attorney General Randolph Moss to the Clinton White House. He cited a 1945 opinion that said a letter from President Franklin Roosevelt carried the same weight as an executive order.

The Office of Legal Counsel signs off on the legality of executive orders and memoranda. During the first year of Obama’s presidency, the Office of Legal Counsel asked Congress for a 14.5% budget increase, justifying its request in part by noting “the large number of executive orders and presidential memoranda that has been issued.”

Other classifications of presidential orders carry similar weight. Obama has issued at least 28 presidential policy directives in the area of national security. In a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit last year, a federal court ruled that these, too, are “the functional equivalent of an executive order.”

Even the White House sometimes gets tripped up on the distinction. Explaining Obama’s memoranda on immigration last month, Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the president would happily “tear up his own executive order” if Congress passes an immigration bill.

Obama had issued no such executive order. Earnest later corrected himself. “I must have misspoke. I meant executive actions. So I apologize,” he said.

Follow @gregorykorte on Twitter

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoyPolitical Cartoons by Robert Ariail
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Corn Ball Economics

A more appropriate color for those Americans who wear their green bonafides on their sleeves to show their moral superiority over the rest of us fossil fuelers is black — as in coal.

While this isn’t the direct finding of a University Of Minnesota study , it is the upshot.

“Vehicles powered by corn ethanol and EVs powered by coal are the worst” when it comes to “impacts on human health,” researchers found. They are even worse for the enviroment, they say, than gasoline-powered cars.

The trouble with electric plug-in cars is that, in some regions, the electricity pumped into the battery is generated by coal. As IBD colleague Terry Jones says, these are really coal-powered cars, not electric vehicles.

And just think of all the corn that goes into ethanol that isn’t going into some starving kids mouth., shame on you Liberals!! :)

But the eternal wisdom of government has deemed it wise and here we are. Government making more problems than solutions.

And the high-and-mighty oh-s0 sanctimonious Liberal.

See my old blog:

But we’re talking emotions over logic again. :)

A new study published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences echoes his finding that green cars aren’t very green at all.

The AP reports: 

“It’s kind of hard to beat gasoline” for public and environmental health, said study co-author Julian Marshall, an engineering professor at the University of Minnesota. “A lot of the technologies that we think of as being clean … are not better than gasoline.”

The key is where the source of the electricity all-electric cars. If it comes from coal, the electric cars produce 3.6 times more soot and smog deaths than gas, because of the pollution made in generating the electricity, according to the study that is published Monday by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. They also are significantly worse at heat-trapping carbon dioxide that worsens global warming, it found.

The study examines environmental costs for cars’ entire life cycle, including where power comes from and the environmental effects of building batteries.

“Unfortunately, when a wire is connected to an electric vehicle at one end and a coal-fired power plant at the other end, the environmental consequences are worse than driving a normal gasoline-powered car,” Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution for Science told AP.

Ouch. (townhall)

So you do what the Obama EPA wants to do, eliminate Coal. Problem solved! :)

The Associated Press is running a terrific and long investigative article, “The Secret, Dirty Cost of Obama’s Green Power Push,” on the environmental downsides of the ethanol fuel mandate. From the AP…

…the ethanol era has proven far more damaging to the environment than politicians promised and much worse than the government admits today.

As farmers rushed to find new places to plant corn, they wiped out millions of acres of conservation land, destroyed habitat and polluted water supplies, an Associated Press investigation found.

Five million acres of land set aside for conservation — more than Yellowstone, Everglades and Yosemite National Parks combined — have vanished on Obama’s watch.

Landowners filled in wetlands. They plowed into pristine prairies, releasing carbon dioxide that had been locked in the soil.

Sprayers pumped out billions of pounds of fertilizer, some of which seeped into drinking water, contaminated rivers and worsened the huge dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico where marine life can’t survive.

The consequences are so severe that environmentalists and many scientists have now rejected corn-based ethanol as bad environmental policy. But the Obama administration stands by it, highlighting its benefits to the farming industry rather than any negative impact.

Farmers planted 15 million more acres of corn last year than before the ethanol boom, and the effects are visible in places like south central Iowa. (Reason)

The Agenda is the Agenda and Liberals are never wrong because they always have the best of intentions. :)


So again, just eliminate Coal and the Problem is solved, right? :)

157454 600 Rolling Stone cartoons

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez




Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Good Old Fashioned Pork Fest

RINO UPDATE: A vast majority of the Senate disagreed with Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas) assertion that President Obama’s executive order on immigration is unconstitutional…

“If you believe President Obama’s executive order was unconstitutional vote yes,” Cruz said ahead of the vote on Saturday. “If you think the president’s executive order is constitutional vote no.”

Only 22 senators voted with Cruz and 74 voted against his point of order…

Many Republicans blasted Cruz and Lee’s “strategy” as being ill conceived and a waste of time.

In Washington, more and more Republicans and their pundit allies have decided poop sandwiches sure are tasty!


WASHINGTON — Health insurance companies preserved their tax breaks. Farmers and ranchers were spared having to report on pollution from manure. Tourist destinations like Las Vegas benefited from a travel promotion program.

Also buried in the giant spending bill that cleared the Senate on Saturday and is headed to President Obama for his signature were provisions that prohibit the federal government from requiring less salt in school lunches and allow schools to obtain exemptions from whole-grain requirements for pasta and tortillas.

The watered-down standards for school meals were a setback for the first lady, Michelle Obama, who had vowed to fight “until the bitter end” for tougher nutrition standards. But they were a victory for food companies and some local school officials, who had sought changes in regulations that are taking effect over several years.

When an omnibus spending bill pops onto the floor of the House or the Senate in the waning days of a congressional session, some lawmakers invariably express surprise and outrage at special-interest provisions stuffed into the package.

Representative Marcy Kaptur, Democrat of Ohio and a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, criticized the $1.1 trillion spending measure as “a Christmas tree bill,” decorated with “dangerous and unwelcome, nongermane riders.”

Such favors often have a long lineage. Lobbyists and lawmakers have, in many cases, been working on them for months or years. Some of this year’s provisions originated as free-standing bills, languished on their own and were then revived in the spending package. Others block regulations that have been proposed, adopted and sometimes upheld in court.

The School Nutrition Association, representing cafeteria directors, welcomed the bill’s language on sodium and whole grains. The lower sodium standards would have been “extremely difficult to achieve,” and the government needs more research before compelling schools to make such costly changes, said the association, which receives financial support from food companies.

Republicans like Representative Harold Rogers of Kentucky, the committee chairman, said the riders were needed to halt wasteful spending and “overreach” by agencies that generate rules harmful to the economy.

A typically arcane provision of the bill provides relief to nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans, which have special tax breaks that were threatened by the Affordable Care Act.

Blue Cross is not mentioned by name in the relevant section of the 2015 spending bill, titled “Modification of treatment of certain health organizations.” But the deduction in question is available only to Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans, which have been lobbying Congress for a clarification since the Affordable Care Act was signed in 2010.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association scored several victories that require the government to keep its regulatory hands off farms and ranches.

The bill says the government cannot require farmers to report “greenhouse gas emissions from manure management systems.” Nor can it require ranchers to obtain greenhouse gas permits for “methane emissions” produced by bovine flatulence or belching. The Environmental Protection Agency says on its website that “globally, the agriculture sector is the primary source” of methane emissions.

The spending bill requires the E.P.A. to withdraw a new rule defining how the Clean Water Act applies to certain agricultural conservation practices. It also prevents the Army Corps of Engineers from regulating farm ponds and irrigation ditches under the Clean Water Act.

“This is a major victory for farmers and ranchers, who consistently tell many of us that they are concerned about the potential of the E.P.A. and the Army Corps of Engineers’ overreach into their operations,” Representative Mike Simpson, Republican of Idaho, said.

The bill renews a travel promotion program championed by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, and by Las Vegas casinos.

“From the Las Vegas Strip to our pristine natural treasures like Lake Tahoe, tourists from all over the world want to visit Nevada,” Mr. Reid said, and the legislation encourages them to do so.

But Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, blasted this as “corporate welfare.”

“Last I checked,” Mr. Cruz said, “casinos were very profitable endeavors that didn’t need the taxpayers helping them out.”

The bill provides more than $550 billion for national defense, including money for warplanes, missiles and submarines. But mundane military matters also drew attention. The bill is accompanied by a “joint explanatory statement” that gives thousands of directives to federal agencies.

One directive deals literally with boots on the ground. It orders the Defense Logistics Agency to re-examine the way it defines “small business” when buying boots and other military footwear. A supplier can qualify for advantages as a small business if it has no more than 1,000 employees. The number doubled in 2012.

Lawmakers fear that the new size standards could harm “true small businesses” and “the domestic supply base for military footwear.” Michigan’s congressional delegation sought the legislative directive in response to concerns expressed by a Michigan company, Bates Footwear, which supplies combat boots and dress shoes to the military.

Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit research group that tracks federal spending, said the bill bestowed favors on all sorts of constituencies.

“Authors of the bill and lobbyists behind these provisions know they are in there,” Mr. Ellis said. “But the public will not find out about most of them for weeks or months, if ever.”

Congress supposedly forswore spending earmarks several years ago, after federal largess led to several scandals. But lawmakers can still steer money in less conspicuous ways.

For example, the 2015 spending bill authorizes additional money for an unnamed “heritage area” specified in Section 157 of title I of Public Law 106-291. That section of the law, enacted 14 years ago, established a national heritage area in Wheeling, W.Va., to celebrate the area’s role in American history. (NYT)

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Twas The Night Before Hillary

By Eric Scheiner

From a $300,000 “special rate” speaking fee to lemon slices, hummus and rectangular pillows – the meticulous details of negotiating a speaking engagement from Hillary Clinton could be a better story than any tale she spins onstage.

In fact, we think it may be. So in the spirit of the season (visiting season from possible presidential candidates, that is) sit back and enjoy “’Twas the Night Before Hillary”.

‘Twas the Night Before Hillary, and all across the university

was the frequent stirring of special security.

The 300 grand was laid out to be seen.

In hopes Hillary would soon come for the green.

The students nestled all together, ready to go

There’s only 30-minutes –pre-speech -for a photo

And mamma in her kerchief and I in my cap

know that there are rules – no more than 50 photos are to be snapped.

When out of the private jet there arose such a clatter!

You’ll pay for that jet – that’s a serious matter.

Away to the limo she flew like a flash.

To the ‘presidential suite’ – best paid for in cash.

With the moon shining atop the new fallen snow.

Wait, no moon – Team Hillary has discretion over set backdrops, banners, and any logo.

When she finally arrived–she did so appear.

Make sure you have water and lemon wedges near.

And diet ginger ale, sliced fruit and hummus nearby.

The hummus is best – it won’t stick to her thighs.

More rapid than eagles those students they came.

To sit behind twenty staffers and special guests to be named.

Now she’ll talk about inequities that now she does see.

Not likely a mention of Gruber or a Lewin-sky.

Making her points, laying a finger aside of her nose.

Remember onstage to have two long rectangular pillows.

She’ll speak of the future within America’s reach.

And you’ll pay for a stenographer to transcribe her speech.

The Republicans, will cringe at her barks.

As she’s the only one allowed on stage during remarks.

And when she was done to her team gave a whistle.

No after speech photos! They just make her bristle.

But I heard her exclaim as she drove out of sight.

Bill and I are dead broke – I’ll be back in two nights!

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


The number of beneficiaries who receive compensation from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps, has topped 46,000,000 for 37 straight months, according to data released by the Department of Agriculture (USDA).

In September 2014, which is the latest data from the USDA, there were 46,459,998 Americans who received assistance from the SNAP program. The number of beneficiaries has exceeded 46 million since September 2011, a total of 37 months, or more than three years.

In September, the number of beneficiaries was down from the 46,476,410 beneficiaries there were in August, a decline of 16,412. During that same time frame, the number of families receiving SNAP benefits increased from 22,724,624 in August to 22,750,019 in September, an increase of 25,395.

Households on food stamps in September got an average of $252.69 during the month, and the program benefits cost taxpayers $5,748,809,023.

In 1969, the average participation in the SNAP program stood at 2,878,000. In 2014, average participation grew to 46,536,000 showing an increase of 1516.96 percent.

The federal government collected a record amount of taxes in fiscal year 2014, topping $3 trillion in revenue for the first time in its history, according to Treasury Department and that trend has continued into FY 2015!!

The participation rate, which is the percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population who participated in the labor force by either having a job during the month or actively seeking one, was 62.8 percent in November which matches the percentage since March 1978.


In November, according to BLS, the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population, consisting of all people 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 248,844,000. Of those, 156,397,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.


The 156,397,000 who participated in the labor force was 62.8 percent of the 248,844,000 civilian noninsttutional population, which matches the 62.8 percent rate in April, May, June, August and October of 2014 as well as the participation rate in March of 1978. The participation rate hit its lowest level of 62.7 percent in September 2014.


Another 92,447,000 people did not participate in the labor force. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to find one. When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 80,529,000 Americans who were not participating in the office, which means that since then, 11,918,000 Americans have left the workforce.

participation rate

Of the 156,397,000 who did participate in the labor force, 147,287,000 had a job, and 9,110,000 did not have a job but were actively seeking one -– making them the nation’s unemployed.


The 9,110,000 job seekers were 5.8 percent of the 156,397,000 Americans actively participating in the labor force during the month of November. Thus, the unemployment rate was 5.8 percent, the same as it was in October.

But as we know the “uneployment rate” only counts people looking for a job.

Well, Obama has 5 million new Welfare Democrats, fully funded by RINOs so everything good right? :)

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Glib Profession

I am never short on appreciation for a David Rutz Supercut. Here is one we can all enjoy as Jonathan Gruber, after being caught on tape confessing his contempt for the American people and bragging about his intellect, must pretend that, yes, he is indeed contemptuous of the American people and callous about their lives, but that contempt is born of carelessness and ignorance, not calculation and superiority. I have to imagine that was the worst part of this for Gruber—for a man of such high self-regard to lower himself to careless and ignorant to excuse his actions.

He knew exactly what he was saying when he said it the first time. It’s essentially the job description of someone like Gruber to have the utmost confidence in his superiority to the hoi polloi and confer upon them his wisdom in the form of policy. Gruber stays one step away from the electoral accountability the now-decimated Democratic Senatorial ranks must face and gets paid well for sending them into battle with his flawed plan. Now, I concede we need people who study policy, who know the byzantine ins and outs of the federal government, and know how to make some policies succeed within its often toxic confines and turf wars. Even if a policy, say a simple regulatory revision that takes down some barriers, doesn’t attempt outsized social engineering, someone has to know how to usher it through the monster we’ve created.

This is why I tend to think one should keep his goals simpler when navigating the bureaucratic mess that is the federal government than bringing in some 35 agencies to totally remake 1/6 of the American economy while promising every single person in the country their costs will go down and they’ll see zero negative effects. Gruber and his allies did anything but keep it simple, but they believe in themselves and the infallible ability of the federal government to “do big things.” They lied about the things Americans wouldn’t like, which Americans sniffed out from Day One, and epically botched one of the arguably simpler parts of the process. Ironically, a conservative in charge of building would have doubted the federal government’s ability on this front a whole lot sooner (like someone I know did in 2012…)and maybe been able to salvage at least a working website for under $1 billion in taxpayer money.

But it’s Gruber’s job to know what’s best for you, and he’s rather glib about the consequences. He has the money to avoid them because Congress paid him a bunch of money to create them. It’s his job just like it’s IRS Commissioner John Koskinen’s job to be utterly contemptuous of the American people and the damage the IRS may have done to them.

A Washington Post reporter wrote up Congresswoman’s Cynthia Lummis’ story about her husband fairly after the Gruber hearing, calling it the most emotional moment of the day. It was because it connected Gruber with the potential human consequences of all his faulty architecture. Get over your damn glibness, Lummis told Gruber. He can’t. It’s his job. (IBD)

Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

When RINO’s Attack

The Republican leadership in the House of Representatives has cut a deal with Senate Democrats on a government funding bill that will permit funding for the implementation of President Obama’s unilateral amnesty of as many as five million illegal aliens through at least Feb. 27, 2015.

Jar Jar Boehner and the RINO chickensh*ts didn’t have any courage or convictions, yet again.

They kicked the can down the road so they could have the rest of the month off. Gee, I wish my job was that easy.

Just feed your grandmother to the Raveneous BugBlatter Beast of Traal and call it a day. Victory is ours…

By contrast, the bill also uses Congress’s power of the purse to prohibit the administration from moving forward with regulations that would effectively outlaw incandescent light bulbs.

In short, the deal says: Yes to amnesty, no to light bulb regulations.

Well, incandescent bulbs are so much more important than ILLEGAL aliens and so much easier to stand on principle for on the weak minded Republican RINOs.

Maybe we should just start calling them the “Dem Bulb” Republicans. :)

House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers and Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski issued a joint statement applauding their “bipartisan” accomplishment in completing the spending deal.

And yet again, Bi-Partisan means the Democrats got everything they wanted and the RINO’s caved like a House made out of rice noodles.

The minority will be running Congress by February 2015. Bet on it. And when they are totally ineffectiveb the Democrats will blame them for it. Gee, I wonder if the RINOs could see that coming?

“After months of thorough, business-like, sometimes tough but always civil negotiations, we have reached a responsible, bipartisan and bicameral agreement on funding for government operations for 2015,” said Rogers and Mikulski in their statement. “This bill fulfills our constitutional duty to fund the government, preventing damage from shutdown politics that are bad for the economy, cost jobs and hurt middle class families.”

Civil? “Do what we want or you’ll get the blame for a government shutdown” is not “civil” but it is by-partisan. :)

The last shutdown cost 1 job. ONE!

So do you think the middle class will be hurt by 5 million new Welfare families and their cheap labor??

Naw..Never happen… :)

By cutting a deal with Senate Democrats to fund almost all of the government through the end of fiscal 2015, the House Republican leadership has taken away from the incoming Republican majorities in both houses of Congress any control over spending in those parts of the government through Sept. 30–and also any leverage that the Republican Congress could have derived from its power of the purse over these parts of the government to force the administration to alter its policies.

They effectively self-neutered themselves into ineffectiveness.

By cutting a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 27, the House Republican leadership has given President Obama more than two and a half months to move forward with his unilateral amnesty of illegal aliens. During that time, Obama will be able to give illegal aliens visas and Social Security Numbers. (CNS)

No harm there, right? :)

So the RINOs have effectively done a self-mutilation so they can complain about how bad Obama is, but when  it comes to actually DOING ANYTHING, that’s the last thing they wanted to and now the last thing they will do.

It’s much safer than standing on principle. Don’t want to make the tyrannical bullies mad at you, now do we?

No Leadership. No initiative. Just play nice with the authoritarian-bomb wheedling psycho Democrats. You don’t want to upset them.

Let’s all just try and get along…

It will be a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

Then they we self-sabotage themselves for the 2016 Presidency with some milktoast “moderate” RINO and Queen Hillary and the Democrats will have a “miraculous” comeback and the Republicans will be history.

And they did it to themselves, and by extension, The American People.

But they saved the incandescent light bulb! Hurray!!

After all, that’s what they were elected for, right? :)

man's in-laws in Lebanon have cut off his penis because they ...
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hi! I’m with Dishonest!

Well, the Democrats proved just how petty, petulant, and completely untrustworthy they are for the non-ignorant world to see when they released the so-called “torture” report. So called by them, of course.

They proved they cannot be trusted with anything. They will sell you out in a heart beat for political advantage or just petty vindictiveness.

This was a “screw you” move designed to embarrass their devil incarnate, George W Bush, but make them look like Edward Snowden in their heads. They were “exposing” the real truth.

The real truth is, they exposed that they are totally untrustworthy. They are vindictive, petty, petulant and will stab you in the back in a micro-second for any political advantage or petulant “payback”.

The report spends little time condemning torture on moral or legal grounds. Instead, it addresses mainly a practical question: Did torture accomplish anything of value? Looking at case after case, the report answers with an unqualified no. (NYT)

SHOCK AND AWE! The Democrats found that Bush “torture” was ineffective! Never heard that narrative meme before now… :)

Former Sen Bob Kerry (D): “I do not need to read the report to know that the Democratic staff alone wrote it. The Republicans checked out early when they determined that their counterparts started out with the premise that the CIA was guilty and then worked to prove it.” (USA Today)

A U.N. human rights expert said a report that the U.S. Senate released on Tuesday revealed a “clear policy orchestrated at a high level within the Bush administration” and called for prosecution of U.S. officials who ordered crimes, including torture, against detainees. (Reuters)

So what do we get? Exactly what the Democrats wanted. Gee, I wonder how that happened. And the UN spouts off yet again. Surprise!

And proves the Democrats will do or say anything to get what they want, when they want it, and because they want it, and if you get in their way they will stab you in the back in a heartbeat. It’s all about them.

On Tuesday morning, the C.I.A. acknowledged problems in the early months of the program but suggested that they had been fixed. “The study as a whole leads the reader to believe that the management shortcomings that marked the initial months persisted throughout the program, which is historically inaccurate,” the agency said. (NYT)

Geez, it’s not like it was an Internet Video that caused it and they tried to cover it up!! :)

Gee, It’s not like Obamacare, after all, where NO Republican actually voted for it and we got it anyways. :)

Or Jonathan “You’re Stupid” Gruber. :)

“As far as I can tell, we are here today to beat up on Jonathan Gruber for stupid — I mean absolutely stupid — comments he made over the last few years,” he began, staring angrily at the hapless professor.

“Let me be clear, I am extremely frustrated with Dr. Gruber’s statements,” Elijah Cummings (D) continued. “They were irresponsible, incredibly disrespectful, and did not reflect reality. And they were, indeed, insulting.”

“I was in Congress when this law was debated, and Dr. Gruber does not speak for me, or the chairman of the other committees who worked tirelessly on this bill,” he said. “We debated this legislation for nearly a year before it was finally passed and signed by the president! Never once did I believe or did anyone suggest that we were somehow hiding our goals from the American people.

Oh, but you were Congressman, that was the point. But at least time your goal was very, very clear….Almost TRANSPARENT! :)

“But worst of all,” the ranking member concluded, “Dr. Gruber’s statements gave Republicans a public relations gift in their relentless political campaign to tear down the ACA and eliminate health care for millions of Americans!”

Yes, Congressman, opposing ObamaCare means we want people to have no insurance whatsoever and “just die” just like interrogating captured terrorists didn’t lead to information that saved American lives like getting Bin Laden.

Yes, Congressman, The Democrats have been laid bare for all to see. Those that want to see and but also what the Liberal Media will allow them to see. :)

Now’s that “transparency” :)

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Dim Sum Gain

Remember a few weeks ago, when Barack Obama triumphantly declared a deal with China to cut greenhouse gas emissions? We expressed deep skepticism at the time. As it turns out, our skepticism was warranted.

When Obama struck his epic climate deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping, we suggested the American leader was engaged in self-delusion while the Chinese were laughing at us.

Because they were, but our self-righteous “look at me” King was too busy to notice.

Nothing would stop China from moving full speed ahead with its economic development plans that rely heavily on cheap and abundant fossil fuels.

Well, surprise, surprise. This week the South China Morning Post announced that Chinese negotiators have “rejected the scrutiny of (plans) to limit carbon emissions.” The Chinese refuse to agree to measurable and enforceable carbon reduction targets.

So much for the Reagan maxim of “trust but verify.”

Even more demoralizing for the White House was the Reuters headline from last week on climate change talks: “Obama’s China Deal Backfires.”

It turns out that Beijing is much more interested in the Western nations ponying up a promised $100 billion in aid to developing countries to fight global warming than cutting emissions now. The U.S. and EU have offered $10 billion in immediate aid, to which Su Wei, China’s lead climate negotiator, scoffed: “$10 billion is just one-10th of that objective.”

You go ahead and spend your money, we’ll be happy to loan it to you! :)

The other big new greenhouse gas emitter in the world, India, has flatly said no to emissions caps. And like China, it insists on cash payments from the west.

Meanwhile, the United Nations’ climate change spokeswoman, Christiana Figueres, dismissed the U.S. commitment of $10 billion as “a very, very small sum.”

It will take trillions of dollars, she says, to decarbonize the planet. And guess who she has in mind to pay that steep price tag?

The US!! :)

This is sounding more and more like an old-fashioned green shakedown for money, not an enforceable treaty commitment by Beijing or any of the developing nations to lower their greenhouse gases.

As feared, President Obama has struck a historic climate change deal with … himself. Neither China nor India has any intention of cutting back, and those, like Obama, who think they will are delusional.

America will give up jobs and money (eventually trillions of dollars) and pay higher energy prices, and the rest of the world will do nothing. What a deal. (IBD)


So what if it’s a total bust,and a waste of time and money, at least they feel good about it and got a lot of power of it, that’s what’s really important.

We don’t need unhappy Leftists, now do we… :)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Uber Capitalism

Uber is a classic disruptive technology. The ride-sharing app has revolutionized the moribund taxi cab business model by providing better service for a lower price. The Uber model is so new that existing taxi regulations by local governments are, in many cases, inoperative.

This upsets bureaucrats greatly. Who does Uber think they are to improve the lives of consumers and providers without getting government approval first? Exhausted at the wait for the city of Portland to rewrite its rulebook to allow the popular service, Uber launched today without the city’s blessing:

“I don’t think we’re going against the city’s wishes,” [Uber’s Brooke Stever] said. “We hope the city embraces this and listens to their constituents, the people of Portland and drivers partnering with us.”

Drivers often supplement their income by moonlighting with Uber, using their own vehicles. But Portland and other cities have regulations that classify Uber in the Town Car category, meaning riders must wait at least an hour after scheduling a ride before the driver shows up and paying a premium price over what cabs can offer.

In a (nominally) free country, why must citizens ask permission from the government before serving their fellow citizens? Uber has decided to ask forgiveness later instead of seeking permission first:

“We feel it’s our duty,” she said. “It’s the holidays, a popular season to go out, there are a lot of DUIs. We really feel like now is the right time, we want to meet the public’s demands and meet safety needs of the city and offer one of the safest and reliable rides around.”

“I love this model, your neighbors driving you around,” said Uber driver Eric Hansen. “That’s what this is, anybody with a few hours a day to make some extra money.”

Good for them. Now it’s up to the Portland bureaucrats to see if they want to kick Eric Hansen out of his holiday job and force their voters into overpriced cabs. (Jon Gabriel)

Now whether its safe or not, that’s a totally different question.

From Uber: If you’re taking a ride requested through UberBLACK, UberSUV, or uberTAXI, your livery or taxi transportation provider carries a commercial insurance policy in at least the minimum amount required by local regulations. If you didn’t get his or her insurance information at the time of the accident, please reach out to us so we can connect you.

If you’re taking a ride requested through uberX, some transportation providers are rideshare drivers providing transportation with their personal vehicles. Rideshare providers carry personal insurance policies. However, there’s a commercial insurance policy for ridesharing with $1 million of coverage per incident. This policy covers drivers’ liability from the time a driver accepts your trip request through the app until the completion of your trip. This policy is expressly primary to the driver’s personal auto policy. An additional insurance policy covers drivers when they are logged into the Uber app but have not yet accepted a trip request.

There is also uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage (UI/UIM) of $1 million per incident for bodily injury, in case another motorist causes an accident and doesn’t carry adequate insurance. So, for example, injuries caused by a hit-and-run accident would be covered by the UI/UIM.

But some personal insurance companies will not cover such activities so you need to beware.

Caveat emptor.


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Giveth X and Taketh Away

John Ransom:

Swift Boat Captn wrote: And things were so great before Obama took over. Let’s go back to the Chimp’s economy that he started by turning surpluses into deficits then finished by losing 800,000 jobs per month and Wall Street on the brink of extinction. – This Won’t End End Well: Obama Giveth X and Taketh Away 7.6 Percent More

Sounds like a LOT of liberals I run across. Mindless, disrespectful, and full of their own childish narcissism.

Dear Comrade Kerry,

In February 2007, when the terrible, evil George W. Bush was president, there were 2,427,000 more jobs than there are today.

In February 2007, when the terrible, evil George W. Bush was president, there were 5,167,000 fewer unemployed.

There’s more money in the system, going to fewer people than ever before.

The average American can’t afford to buy a new car now. Thanks GM/Obama.

The average American is watching as home prices climb for rich Americans, but stagnate for everyone else.

Top tier homes are selling- and have been selling since Obama became pope- outpacing middle tier and lower tier homes.

The rest of us have to make due with home prices that equal those seen in 1894…That’s 1894…not, 1994.

“Whether real or manufactured by record-low foreclosures, bank supply withdrawals, and fed-subsidized cash REO-to-rent trades,” writes Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge, “the sad truth is that jobs (and the GDP-enhancing multiplier effect that they create) are just not coming. Even Bob Shiller prefers the potential for 4% gains in stocks over housing risk in the medium-term as he points out that – inflation-adjusted – house prices are back at levels first seen in 1894… now that is a long-term investor. “

And just because the Dow’s making new highs, you think everything is wonderful. What happened to Occupy Wall Street?

This is a system that was deliberately crafted by your buddy BHO.

Congrats Comrade Kerry!

You’re right: In America, you in particular, have a right to be stupid.

With Democrats it’s an absolute must. Your brain is not allowed to question the Doublespeak BS coming out of your mouth.

The others are silly too, but they are more than just silly; they are deceptive. And they mean to be deceptive too.

Let’s look at the unemployment claims for example.

The real story there is that the trend for unemployment claims is dropping over a longer period of time.

“First-time jobless claims unexpectedly fell by 7,000 to 340,000,” reports Bloomberg “in the week ended March 2, the lowest since the period ended Jan. 19, according to data today from the Labor Department in Washington. The median forecast of 50 economists surveyed by Bloomberg called for an increase to 355,000. The four-week average dropped to a five-year low.”

Now that’s a good story.

Jobless claims are now on par with the worst of the Bush administration!

Congrats Mr. Obama.

But that’s not all that he’s accomplished.

The sudden, Fed-induced lunge in stock prices and home prices has restored the wealth of the national household back to levels not seen since 2007.

“Surging stock prices and steady home-price increases have finally allowed Americans to regain the $16 trillion in wealth they lost to the Great Recession,” reports CNBC. “The gains are helping support the economy and could lead to further spending and growth.”

And just in time too.

At a time when tax hikes, oil prices and stagnant wages are eating up families, more and more families are dipping into savings in order to pay the bills…just like the federal government is doing.

According to Zero Hedge, American household debt has actually gone down since the last time the stock market was at these levels.  In 2007, total household debt was $13.5 trillion, while today it stands at $12.87 trillion, says ZH’s Tyler Durden.  Households, it seems, have been able to accomplish what the government can’t do namely: Cut debt as household revenues stagnate. 

That’s good, because Americans are saving less and dipping into assets like 401(k)s and home equity in order to keep up with the government tax and spending jones.

“A new national study shows that too many of us are cashing out 401(k) accounts to pay bills,” reports a CBS News local affiliate in Pennsylvania. “If that retirement account is calling your name, a financial expert advises you to stop listening.”

The reason why families are dipping into retirement savings is because Obama’s tax hikes have wiped out any gains that they’ve made on the wage front.

“The good news,” says the Washington Post, “Many Americans saw their paychecks get fatter in 2012, as average weekly earnings rose 2.4 percent over the course of the year. The bad news: The expiration of the payroll tax cut this January will basically wipe away all of last year’s gains.”

The Post goes on to explain that the payroll tax hike “could” hurt the economy in 2013 because consumers will have less to spend.  What the Post didn’t reckon on, however, was that households would mimic Big Brother and just borrow from Peter to pay…um…Pelosi?

From Daily

Americans saw their income drop so dramatically in January that it marked the deepest one-month decline in 20 years. Personal income decreased by $505.5 billion in January, or 3.6%, compared to December (on a seasonally adjusted and annualized basis). That’s the most dramatic decline since January 1993, according to the Commerce Department. 

Yet still, consumer spending on the whole was not much affected.

Spending still increased although the increase wasn’t very fat.

And where, pray tell, did the magical money come from?

…consumers are benefiting from a housing recovery and rising stock prices….

They’re not able to save much, though. On average, people saved about 2.4% of their disposable income in January, down from 6.4% in December. That marks the smallest saving rate since November 2007.

So 3.6 percent wage decrease plus 4 percent less savings…carry the two, divide the whole number…is… 7.6 percent less for you!   

Now this is all so clear: So the Fed is printing money, which drives household wealth up, so that the government can raise taxes, so that families spend a little more and save a whole lot less, while wages go down and household debt starts to climb back up.

Now all we need for this genius plan to work out is for housing prices and the stock market to continue to climb forever, so that the government budget can always ask for a more of your wages in either taxes or borrowing even at a time when wages are shrinking the fastest in 20 years!  

A one-month high!  

Oh, and, this time it’s totally different.

This won’t end well a lot quicker than it did last time.  

As Mark Twain once observed of his misshapen theatrical production Ah Sin:

When this play was originally completed it was so long, and so wide and so deep–in places–and so comprehensive that it would have taken two weeks to play it…. [B]ut the manager said no, that wouldn’t do; to play two weeks was sure to get us into trouble with the Government, because the Constitution of the United States says you sha’n’t inflict cruel and unusual punishments. So he set to work to cut it down….I never saw a play improve as this one did. The more he cut out of it the better it got right along. He cut out, and cut out, and cut out; and I do believe this would be one of the best plays in the world to-day if his strength had held out, and he could have gone on and cut out the rest of it.

If Congress just had just half of the strength of that theater manager, I’d feel less cruel and unusual toward the government.

Half of sequester is aimed at money that is an increase in spending over what we are spending today rather than true cuts.

But then you’ll have all the gored ox’s screaming that Grandam was going to dy in the street and children will starve to death and dirty dirty water and breath nothing but dirty air, ad nauseum. The Apocalypse will be upon us all!

Government does not invest; it spends.

Government does not say, “Let’s take a trillion dollars and make it turn into five trillion dollars worth of value.” If they did, you wouldn’t have guys like Obama making the case that tax rates should go up based on “fairness,” while admitting that higher tax rates will lower government revenue.

That would be like a computer company arguing that, yes, profits will go down on computer sales, but prices must be lowered based on “fairness.” Government instead says, “Let’s spend a trillion dollars on highways, because construction contractors need the work and that money will come back from construction contractors to fund political campaigns.”

The return on capital to the overall economy is both incidental and accidental when government spends money.

And boy do Politician love to spend! Bribes don’t come cheap. :)

A government that controls your mortgage, your student loan, your car loan, your retirement savings, your healthcare, your right to own property and to defend your liberties- with a gun if necessary- is a government that owns your liberty and just rents it back to you for a while at election time.

Vote for Me, the Other Guy’s an Asshole! Or in the case of Queen Hillary, ignore everything that has ever happened prior to election day 2016 and just vote for the First Female President ever…Voting for the First Black because he was Black worked out so well! :)

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Squeeze

Data on consumer spending show that spending on health insurance surged 42 percent from 2007 to 2013, according to analysis by the Wall Street Journal. The rise reflects the increasing cost of health insurance and the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that everyone buy extensive health insurance.

The American middle class has absorbed a steep increase in the cost of health care and other necessities as incomes have stagnated over the past half decade, a squeeze that has forced families to cut back.

Another feature shown by the data is the movement away from home ownership and associated costs. Families are more likely to rent than in 2007, so mortgage spending is down and rent spending is up. Some of the other categories where spending fell – appliances and furniture – are complements to home-owning.


Spending increases are not the same as cost increases. Home internet and mobile phones are the fastest growing expenditure categories because new services are available, not because of rising costs on old services. It’s a good thing when increased spending comes from more people choosing to buy better services.

As any Black Friday shopper can tell you, consumers are happy when they get more goods for lower unit costs. Congress can augment buying power by repealing policies that raise costs, such as trade barriers, the fuel ethanol mandate, and of course Obamacare. Reducing the cost of food, gasoline and health insurance would give American consumers more choice and extra disposable income. (DS WSJ)

Naturally, the Leftist (say at the Daily Kos) when on a rant about this study and railed against an “economy based on consumerism” and how pay inequity and low pay were the real problem.

The Agenda is the Agenda and don’t let the truth hit you in the face because you can’t see it.

The recent decrease in gasoline was by the Saudi’s to drive the fracking in the US out of business. You also notice the fossil fuel hating Left has been silent about this economic gain for the consumer.

Nope, it the greediness of Corporate America the Left will preach.

And Then the Feds are getting more tax money than ever before…

Party like its 1929, S&P hits 49th closing high.

We are From The Government and we are here to help you..:)

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Meesa No Think So…

Messa called Jar-Jar Boehner. Messa your humble servant.

That’s our Johnny, Boehner that is!

Hmmm… yousa point is well seen, Mr President.

It’s a longo taleo buta small part of it would be mesa… clumsy
Jar-Jar Boehner.

“There are a lot of options on the table,” said Boehner in response to a question from THE WEEKLY STANDARD. “I’m not going to get into hypotheticals of what we could or couldn’t do. But I do know this. Come January, we’ll have a Republican House and a Republican Senate, and we’ll be in a stronger position to take actions.”

Boehner and House Republican leaders are pushing to pass a short-term funding package before the end of the current budget resolution next week. The package would allow Congress to revisit the funding for DHS, which is implementing the order, early next year. The Ohio Republican emphasized the current plan to address the immigration executive order in the next Congress gives the GOP the best chance for “keeping our leverage.” But, Boehner said, “we have limited options in how we can deal with this.” 

A senior White House official says the implementation of President Obama’s executive order on immigration is “well underway” and that the administration would “proceed” regardless of congressional efforts to block the order.

Translation: Fuck you Jar Jar!  The Agenda is The Agenda!

The official added that the DHS implementation would be “based on what they learned on the successful implementation of DACA,” the acronym for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The department has already secured office space in Arlington, Virginia, and plans on hiring 1,000 employees and contractors to process the qualifying illegal immigrants.

Administration officials also pushed back against the passage in the House of Representatives of a bill to roll back the executive order. “The United States House of Representatives is voting to prioritize of breaking up families,” said an official. The White House issued a veto threat on the bill earlier Thursday.

And asked about efforts by Republicans to block or strip funding from the executive order’s provisions, the White House insisted, “We are going to proceed with implementation.”

Republicans hate families AND are Racists!

“I haven’t seen the details of a plan to confront this unprecedented power grab,” <Senator Jeff> Sessions said in a phone interview Thursday evening. He added that while plenty of his Republican colleagues have released “tough” statements following Obama’s announcement, he hasn’t seen the party coalesce around a plan.  (Weekly Standard)

So the Republicans are picking at their but and checking out their shoes while the Democrats are sharpening their axes and getting the trebuche’ out. The Media is sharpening their knives, the Republicans are dulling theirs.

That’s out Jonnie, bringing Hot chocolate and s’mores to a Nuke Fight.

Maybe Boehner is just Hydra, after all. Hmmm…

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Uncle Dave

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke, who happens to be black, is a true patriot who is tired of President Barack Obama’s racial politics. Watch (above) as he explains – without “sugar-coating things” – why Attorney General Eric Holder should be held in contempt and why professional race agitator Al Sharpton should be prosecuted.

Sheriff Clarke is furious at all of the unnecessary exploitation of racial tensions in Ferguson, Missouri:

I sat up and watched, as events unfolded in Ferguson, Missouri–unfortunate situation, obviously. Anytime a law enforcement officer uses force that takes a life, it deserves a thorough, transparent vetting–investigation. We all agree with that. But then some groups began to converge on the small town of Ferguson, Missouri, like vultures on a roadside carcass… people like Al Sharpton.”

(Hey that’s Obama’s Virtual VP you’re talking about!!)

“To come and exploit that situation, and instead of coming into help and restore calm, poured gas on that fire with some of their inflammatory and irresponsible rhetoric.. [Missouri Governor Jay Nixon and Senator Claire McCaskill, both Democrats] threw law enforcement under the bus for political expediency”…

“I expected that from Governor Nixon. I expected that from Claire McCaskell. Those are nothing but two-bit politicians… but I did not expect that from Eric Holder, who calls himself a law enforcement officer”…


“Wait a minute. Mr. Attorney General, if you felt those officers had violated your Fourth Amendment, and you’re a federal prosecutor, and you didn’t say anything at the time? On behalf of everybody in the United States, you could have done something if you felt that. You could have made a complaint–because all of us kind of realize in law enforcement, right, we testify–what do they say in court? If you didn’t write it down, if you didn’t report it, it didn’t happen.”

“Really, Mr. Attorney General? You didn’t report it then. You didn’t write it down. But you’re telling us some 10-15 years later for self-serving purposes. I thought, ‘Why did you do that?’ You insulted every law enforcement officer, every man and woman who puts on that badge and uniform everyday, risks their lives in service to their community.”

via YoungCons and TPNN

These bold, conservative statements from a tough talking Sheriff are what America needs to hear. This is not the 1950s, and Ferguson is not the Jim Crow south. Instead, this was an isolated incident of a young street thug robbing a store who started an altercation with a police officer. Then, race hustlers used the optics of this story to incite riots and profit.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Want Ad

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

And end racial quotas by demanding them. :)

After all, if blacks are “underrepresented” in the Ferguson Police force then the obvious Liberal Progressive answer is quotas.

So you might see in The Sty. Louis Papers: (for the humorless the following is called satire, look it up).

Wanted: Police Officers, Ferguson Police Department.

MUST BE BLACK, Latino acceptable but not preferred.

If you’re White, you’re a racist so you do not need to apply, and why would you anyways your life will be  hell anyways because if you even look at a Black person the wrong way the Vice President-in-effect Al Sharpton and Attorney General Eric Holder will be crawling up your ass and you’ll be working at a Dairy Queen in Butte, Montana within weeks just like Darren Wilson probably will so don’t bother.

Oh, and I’m sure we’ll have to get rid of a bunch of white racist cops to make room for you in the budget. Who cares about their records or years of service. Who cares about their racist families. They deserve to be let go, those damn racists!

Oh, and you must be an emotionally brainwashed Liberal. We don’t want any of those Uncle Tom Conservatives sneaking in on us.

Contact: The Reverend Al Sharpton for a screening interview.

Hands Up! Don’t Shoot! That’s our Motto!

(even if Michael NEVER did this it fits the narrative and the agenda to say he did and look we got the St Louis Rams on board with us too!)

When it comes to the challenges of urban crime, law enforcement, racial friction and seemingly intractable poverty, one objective should top the list for our elected leaders: Keep innocents who live and work in places like Ferguson, most of whom are black, safe from criminals, most of whom are black.

To that way of thinking, a youth who steals cigarillos from a convenience store, then roughs up the clerk, is the enemy of the community — not the police officer who, sadly, ends up shooting him.

But that’s not the mindset of this president. To him, the killing of Michael Brown “laid bare” an age-old national problem: “a simmering distrust that exists between too many police departments and too many communities of color.”

And boy do we want to exploit that!!

We created their bed, now we want them to pee in it and blame whitey! Oh happy days!

We don’t want to “fix” the problem, we want to use it to our advantage.

And the Truth, man, that is magnificently irrelevant. Emotional exploitation is so much better for The Agenda.

If you listen to the president’s latest long-winded speech — Monday’s was 1,450 words — this great national problem exposed by Ferguson is all about “people feeling marginalized and distrustful.” Feelings?

The president even concedes that “there have been commissions before, there have been task forces, there have been conversations, and nothing happens.”

That about says it all. (IBD)

But they “feel” your pain. Vote for them. Unlike Republicans and White People who just can’t understand because they are actually interested in The Truth, the silly buggers!

I get warm and fuzzy “post racial” feel don’t you?

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne






Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Ponzi Debt

The Daily Treasury Statement that was released Wednesday afternoon as Americans were preparing to celebrate Thanksgiving revealed that the U.S. Treasury has been forced to issue $1,040,965,000,000 in new debt since fiscal 2015 started just eight weeks ago in order to raise the money to pay off Treasury securities that were maturing and to cover new deficit spending by the government.

During those eight weeks, Treasury took in $341,591,000,000 in revenues. That was a record for the period between Oct. 1 and Nov. 25. But that record $341,591,000,000 in revenues was not enough to finance ongoing government spending let alone pay off old debt that matured.


The Treasury also drew down its cash balance by $45.057 billion during the period, starting with $126,568,000,000 in cash and ending with $81,511,000,000.

The only way the Treasury could handle the $942,103,000,000 in old debt that matured during the period plus finance the new deficit spending the government engaged in was to roll over the old debt into new debt and issue enough additional new debt to cover the new deficit spending.

This mode of financing the federal government resembles what the Securities and Exchange Commission calls a Ponzi scheme. “A Ponzi scheme,” says the Securities and Exchange Commission, “is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors,” says the Securities and Exchange Commission.

“With little or no legitimate earnings, the schemes require a consistent flow of money from new investors to continue,” explains the SEC. “Ponzi schemes tend to collapse when it becomes difficult to recruit new investors or when a large number of investors ask to cash out.”

In testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in October 2013, Lew explained why he wanted the Congress to agree to increase the federal debt limit—and why the Treasury has no choice but to constantly issue new debt.

“Every week we roll over approximately $100 billion in U.S. bills,” Lew told the committee. “If U.S. bondholders decided that they wanted to be repaid rather than continuing to roll over their investments, we could unexpectedly dissipate our entire cash balance.”

“There is no plan other than raising the debt limit that permits us to meet all of our obligations,” Lew said.

“Let me remind everyone,” Lew said, “principal on the debt is not something we pay out of our cash flow of revenues. Principal on the debt is something that is a function of the markets rolling over.”

The vast amount of debt that the Treasury must roll over in such a short time frame is driven by the fact the Treasury has put most of the debt into short-term “bills” and mid-term “notes”—on which it can pay lower interest rates—rather than into long-term bonds, which demand significantly higher interest rates.

At the end of October, according to the Treasury’s Monthly Statement of the Public Debt, the total debt of the federal government was $17,937,160,000,000.

Of this, $5,080,104,000,000 was what the Treasury calls “intragovernmental” debt, which is money the Treasury has borrowed and spent out of trust funds theoretically set aside for other purposes—such as the Social Security Trust Fund.

The remaining $12,857,056,000,000 was “debt held by the public.” This part of the debt included $517,029,000,000 “nonmarketable” Treasury securities (such as savings bonds) and $12,340,028,000,000 in “marketable” Treasury securities, including bills, notes, bonds and Treasuring Inflation-Protected Securities.

But only $1,547,073,000,000 of the $12,857,056,000,000 in marketable debt was in long-term Treasury bonds that mature in 30 years. These bonds carried an average interest rate of 4.919 percent as of the end of October, according to the Treasury.

The largest share of the marketable debt–$8,192,466,000,000—was in notes that mature in 2,3,5,7 or 10 years, and which have an average interest rate of 1.807 percent as of the end of October.

Another $1,412,388,000,000 of the marketable debt was in Treasury bills, which carry “maturities ranging from a few days to 52 weeks,” says the Treasury. These $1.4 trillion in short-term Treasury bills had an average interest rate of 0.056 percent as of the end of October, according to the Treasury.

The continual rolling over of these short-term, low-interest bills helped drive over the $1-trillion mark the new debt the Treasury had to issue in the first eight weeks of this fiscal year.

The Treasury has taken out what amounts to an adjustable-rate mortgage on our ever-growing national debt.

If the Treasury were forced to convert the $1.4 trillion in short-term bills (on which it now pays an average interest rate of 0.056 percent) into 30-year bonds at the average rate it is now paying on such bonds (4.919 percent) the interest on that $1.4 trillion in debt would increase 88-fold.

But if we don’t spend more we’re going to hurt the poor, crush the middle class , steal candy from babiesand we’re racists! :)

Peter:  look up in the sky, what is it?

Paul: It’s $18 Trillion (16 ton weight)

and we’re Wile E. Coyote!

Beep Beep! :)

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Agenda of Local News

Last year, Philadelphia abortionist Dr. Kermit Gosnell stood trial in Philadelphia for the deaths of one woman and seven babies who had their throats slit, but national reporters didn’t want to cover it. It’s a “local crime story,” they said.

Ferguson, Mo., is merely the latest proof that a “local crime story” can be elevated to national news — when it’s the liberal media’s favorite kind of “agenda-driven stuff.”

The white kid killed by a black cop in Utah is not newsworthy.

A local story about a white cop fatally shooting an unarmed young black man in one St. Louis suburb has dominated the national news, to the point that the networks interrupted primetime TV for an announcement on whether the policeman would be indicted.

These are the same networks that refused to air President Obama’s speech the week before on his immigration end-around. The entire nation couldn’t wait two hours for the local news, or turn to cable news? It seems like an attempt to create an episode for the history books — making Ferguson a destination in black history like Selma, Ala., or Sanford, Fla., where Trayvon Martin was shot.

Why is this story so much more portentous in meaning than others? It fits a narrative that America — and its justice “system” — is racist.

Well, after all, there are only 3 black cops in Ferguson and 49 White Cops so it’s not “representative” of the population. Which means 2 things (but I bet the Liberal won’t go there)- a) Quotas. b) Segregation. Only White Cops can arrest or interact with white people and only Black cops…You get the picture. True, it is absurd, but that’s the Left for you. :)

As with George Zimmerman, it seems not to matter what the actual evidence is. No rioter put down a rock or a Molotov cocktail to read the grand jury report. When the prosecutor’s speech aired on a split screen with a “riot cam” on the Ferguson streets, the networks were not expecting calm. They were too eager to chronicle a riot and squeeze ratings from the mayhem.

Mayhem= Money! And if it also suits The Agenda, then so much the richer for them.

For those who argue that Ferguson isn’t an “agenda” story, let’s consider some other recent stories that the media won’t touch.

In Milwaukee, Antoine Devon Pettis, a 20-year-old black male, was charged with raping a 101-year-old woman after the crime scene DNA matched a paternity test sample. Pettis smiled broadly in his mug shot, and later in the courtroom, when he told the media, “Y’all gonna make me a celebrity.”

Making this story national for even a minute would apparently be too racist, just like the Gosnell story, though the victim’s race is less than relevant considering the horror of the crime.

In Akron, Ohio, white police officer Justin Winebrenner — off-duty and unarmed — was shot by a black man, Kenan Ivery, at Papa Don’s Pub, where he was seated with other cops. Ivery had pulled a gun and the pub staff looked to Winebrenner, a regular customer, to try and calm Ivery. Winebrenner was shot in the torso and died. Four others, including another off-duty cop, were wounded.

So far in 2014, 45 police officers have been fatally shot (and 111 overall have died). None got a fraction of the attention or sympathy that America has offered to Michael Brown’s family.

The “wealth” of national publicity on local crimes is distributed with remarkable inequality. The exercise of “news judgment” is performed with extreme prejudice, and there will be no attempts at redistribution. (IBD)

The White House says the president will also meet with young civil rights leaders to discuss the challenges posed by “mistrust between law enforcement and communities of color.” He’ll then meet with government and law enforcement officials, as well as other community leaders, to discuss how to strengthen neighborhoods. (Townhall)

I wonder if he meet with the business owners who were looted and burned down by the “protestors”. Naw, this is a photo-op. Then, it’s back to Golf.

The Agenda is The Agenda. And you’re a Racist! That’s just it. Welcome to Obama’s “Post Racial” Society. :)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment