Systemic Failure

Are you too picking up on the widening Obama administration pattern here of mismanagement, incompetence, no accountability and completely wasted taxpayer money?

We are from The Government and We are here to Help You… :)

Yet another government audit out Wednesday, this one dissecting last fall’s ObamaCare roll-out debacle. Everyone except Obama, he claims, knew about it instantly on Oct. 1 when the half-billion dollar website collapsed, over and over, after three years of development, as in 36 months.

The new report from the nonpartisan General Accounting Office blames systemic problems such as poor planning, lack of follow-up, ineffective oversight and chaotic coordination. Expenses for the website alone stand at $840 million — and that was last March!

“As the cost of the (website) closes in on a billion dollars,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton said, “even to this day the system is not fully built.” GoDaddy.com could have done it for much less.

But ObamaCare is just the latest failure. Remember that awful Benghazi night of 9/11/12 when the president was somewhere unknown while four poor Americans died at the hands of a terrorist mob with zero rescue effort attempted?

The Accountability Review Board that investigated that scandal without talking to the woman in charge that night, Hillary Clinton, found systemic failures of management, planning and oversight by the Obama administration crew. But no one was held accountable.

Remember the IRS scandal where high-handed agents illegally targeted Obama’s political opponents and even religious groups for audits and long-term hassles? If these were rogue agents, as Democrats claim, they were rogues who reported regularly to higher-up politicos in Washington during the 2012 campaign. But, wouldn’t you know, all of their computers coincidentally crashed, swallowing many incriminating emails.

Obama runs the White House as such a tight ship that his own lawyer just down the hall neglected to inform her boss of the unfolding political scandal, he claims.

Remember the Veterans Administration scandal? That’s where an unknown number of vets died for lack of timely medical care, workers forged false schedules and accounts to protect their performance bonuses and Obama’s pick, a combat veteran who ran the entire Army, could not figure it out.

VA problems are long-standing. In fact, Obama ran on a promise to fix them seven years ago. But last spring he professed ignorance until CNN’s exposes gained media traction. Now, Obama’s turned to a veteran of corporate wars to attempt reforms.

Obama was off in Kansas City yesterday at another pep rally, mocking House Republicans as his go-to excuse for government paralysis. That doesn’t explain Obama’s first two years when Republicans controlled zip and Democrats couldn’t spend a trillion in stimulus money so it created millions of promised jobs.

For $840 million we can maybe deliver it in a year or two.For $840 million we can maybe deliver it in a year or two.

At the more than 400 fundraisers that Obama does run efficiently, he dismisses these systemic administration failures as phony scandals. But a growing number of investigative agencies within the federal government seem to disagree.

Obama’s serial scandals and his tardy, begrudging responses inevitably blaming others are fast creating the image of Democrats as the folks who can win the White House but can’t run anything once they’re in. Obama can only have Osama bin Laden killed once.

More importantly, the Obama administration’s chronic pratfalls raise serious questions about the viability of his vaunted welfare state where big government takes on more concerns and responsibilities with more regulations, taxes and spending.

Maybe all this will teach American voters not to elect as the nation’s leader an inexperienced, unvetted rookie legislator who hadn’t managed a lemonade stand.

But then, looking at the choice they could have made for president in 2012, maybe not. (IBD)

So here’s a fright f0or 2016 for you…

Somebody actually put this on their car and may have officially invented vision pollution in the process. Be Afraid…

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

Public Servant

Lois Lerner — faithful, impartial public servant:

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

Job Creation Myth

Remember when ObamaCare was going to CREATE jobs? When unemployment was good for economic growth (“Unemployment Benefits ‘One of the Most Important Stimuli for the Economy”) well now we have the latest in the Democrat Ideological Job Creation Myths.

Illegal Aliens!! (aka Future Welfare Voting Democrats).

When asked whether legalizing illegal immigrants would help unemployed Americans, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D.-Md.) responded by pointing to testimony from the director of the Congressional Budget Office that Van Hollen said indicated enactment of the Senate immigration bill (which gave illegal aliens a “path to citizenship’) would “reduce the deficit and increase long-term economic growth.”

Van Hollen responded: “I think what we need to do is pass comprehensive immigration reform, and I just came from a hearing with the non-partisan director of the Congressional Budget Office, who testified that if you passed the Senate bipartisan bill, you will reduce the deficit and increase long-term economic growth in the United States,” Van Hollen replied.

This would be the latest in the “CBO says…” line of  Democrat ‘arguments’ for their ideological needs.

Mind you ever since the CBO gave the Dems the green light on ObamaCare (with fake the false numbers provided by the Dems) the CBO has been whithering bad to the Democrats.

But THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

So the CBO is good when they agree with The Agenda, and are ignored when they don’t.

Just like most Democrat Agenda items. The ‘evidence’ is always in their favor and any evidence to the contrary is a lie, “racist” or some other form of contempt is heaped upon it.

It’s all too predictable really.

After all, Foster parents have the ability to collect more than $7,400 per month, considering that they can house six immigrants at any given time.

So Illegal Aliens are a stimulus. Just like Unemployment. So what we need is even more of them!

Don’t worry, be happy. We are from the Government and we are here to help you! :)

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 

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

Give Us Everything

Give us your poor, your tired, your future Democrats waiting to be registered. That’s what some in the party are saying as they urge the president to pursue immigration goals even if it hurts in the ’14 midterms.

In other words, damn the political torpedoes and full speed ahead in the fundamental demographic and political transformation of America.

“You’ll always have members whose political vulnerability they tie entirely to immigration,” said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz. “We didn’t make progress when we were in the majority because we were being protective of those (members) on immigration reform. At some point do you worry more about the future or do you continue to put off the inevitable by not taking action?”

For Democrats such as Grijalva and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., amnesty and the political benefits stemming from it are inevitable. They are quite willing to use children to exploit the inherent compassion of the American people if it means ensuring the political future of the Democratic Party through the gratitude of millions of illegal aliens allowed to come here and stay.

Gutierrez recently told a La Raza conference that it was only a “down payment” that President Obama gave the Latino community with his Deferred Action for Children Arrivals (DACA) program that halted the deportation of 600,000 of “our people”:

“Now it is time for the president in the United States … (to) free the mom and dads of the DREAMers and to go further — be broad and expansive and generous.”

And just how many would he eventually like to sign up? “I think we can get 3 or 4, maybe even 5 million people,” he said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” If you can’t persuade voters, you can always import them.

As Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has noted, “the president is considering a grant of ‘work authorization for perhaps several million undocumented immigrants.’ He says DACA has been widely misinterpreted as applying only to children. But in fact, DACA applies to individuals up to 30 years of age and provides actual amnesty papers, photo ID and work permits to illegal immigrants who can then take any job in America.”

Now we have the president proposing to Central American leaders that we send the equivalent of college recruiters down to their countries with applications and “permisos” and to transport, presumably at taxpayer expense, those who would otherwise sneak past the Border Patrol — sort of a Berlin airlift for illegal aliens.

All of which is designed to fundamentally transform the demographics and politics of the United States and to punish Americans who believe, as President Reagan did, that a country without borders is not a country. (IBD)

But it is an exclusive Democrat oligarchy. Now that can’t be all bad, could it? :)

After all, THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!!

Even as they grapple with an immigration crisis at the border, White House officials are making plans to act before November’s mid-term elections to grant work permits to potentially millions of immigrants who are in this country illegally, allowing them to stay in the United States without threat of deportation, according to advocates and lawmakers in touch with the administration.

Such a large-scale move on immigration could scramble election-year politics and lead some conservative Republicans to push for impeachment proceedings against President Barack Obama, a prospect White House officials have openly discussed.

Yet there’s little sign that the urgent humanitarian situation in South Texas, where unaccompanied minors have been showing up by the tens of thousands from Central America, has impeded Obama from making plans to address some portion of the 11.5 million immigrants now in this country illegally. Obama announced late last month that congressional efforts to remake the nation’s dysfunctional immigration system were dead and he would proceed on his own authority to fix the system where he could.

Since then he’s asked Congress for $3.7 billion to deal with the crisis of unaccompanied youths, a request that’s gone unmet even as the House and the Senate scramble to see if they can vote on some solution to the crisis this week before adjourning for their annual August recess.

Meanwhile, White House officials led by Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Munoz and White House Counsel Neil Eggleston, along with Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, have been working to chart a plan on executive actions Obama could take, hosting frequent meetings with interest groups and listening to recommendations from immigration advocates, law enforcement officials, religious leaders, Hispanic lawmakers and others.

Advocates and lawmakers who were in separate meetings Friday said that administration officials are weighing a range of options including reforms to the deportation system and ways to grant relief from deportation to targeted populations in the country, likely by expanding Obama’s two-year-old directive that granted work permits to certain immigrants brought here illegally as youths. That program, called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, has been extended to more than 500,000 immigrants so far.

Advocates would like to see deferred action made available to anyone who would have been eligible for eventual citizenship under a comprehensive immigration bill the Senate passed last year, which would be around 9 million people. But Obama told them in a meeting a month ago to “right-size” expectations, even as he pledged to be aggressive in steps he does take.

That’s led advocates to focus on other populations Obama might address, including parents or legal guardians of U.S. citizen children (around 3.8 million people as of 2009, according to an analysis by Pew Research’s Hispanic Trends Project) and parents or legal guardians of DACA recipients (perhaps 500,000 to 1 million people, according to the Fair Immigration Reform Movement).

“Our parents deserve to live without the fear of deportation,” Maria Praeli, a 21-year-old from New Haven who came to the United States from Peru 16 years ago, said at a protest outside the White House on Monday. “It is time for the president to go big and to go bold.”

Another focus could be the potentially hundreds of thousands of people who might be eligible for green cards today if current law didn’t require them to leave the country for 10 years before applying for one.

At the same time, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says it is actively working to determine whether there are steps Obama could take by executive action that could help the business community.

For Obama, the political repercussions of broad executive action on immigration could be unpredictable, and extreme.

Republicans are warning he could provoke a constitutional crisis.

“It would be an affront to the people of this country which they will never forgive, it would be a permanent stain on your presidency,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said on the Senate floor Monday, while urging language to block such executive action be made part of any legislation to address the border crisis.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced plans to use an oversight hearing on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency Tuesday to raise questions about Obama’s plans, which he warned could “worsen the border crisis and encourage many more to come.”

On the other side, some Democrats have debated the best timing for Obama to take executive action, raising questions as to whether acting before the midterms could hurt vulnerable Senate Democrats in close races while boosting turnout among the GOP base.

But liberal advocates noted that Obama’s move on deferred action two years ago gave him a boost heading into his re-election and could help this year with Latino voters discouraged over the failure of immigration reform legislation and record-high deportations on Obama’s watch. Republicans would be in a position of deciding whether to come out in favor of deporting sympathetic groups, such as parents, and many liberals say impeachment talk would only shore up Democratic base voters.

“Most Democrats will be thrilled” if Obama acts boldly on immigration, said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, a leading advocacy group. “And Republicans will keep lurching to the right and cementing their reputation as the anti-immigrant party.”

Vote for a Democrat or be a RACIST!  :)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

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

Welfare Babies

Leadership: Rep. Paul Ryan has stepped forward with a bold plan to reform the welfare system so it’s more fair and effective — which is why the Democratic Party will oppose it.

After all, the Democrats hate “fairness”. :)

Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican, has become one of the most passionate critics of our dysfunctional, politically driven welfare system — which means he’s a real danger to the liberal politicians who profit from its existence.

Like Obama and his Illegal Alien Welfare Democrat invasion that he wants to grant Amnesty to so they can vote for him and his buddies.

His new plan, “Expanding Opportunity in America,” isn’t radical, though it’s already being called that by the left-leaning media and Democrats in Congress.

It’s radical to them. After all, they think Obama is a “centrist” politician.

Indeed, his plan is completely commonsensical and premised on one big idea: Take welfare out of the hands of the uncaring, incompetent federal bureaucracy in Washington, and give it back to the states — where things like welfare and education properly belong.

OMG! You mean the States get to choose what THEY want to do!!! OH NO! That can’t happen, The Federal Government is Supreme in ALL things according to the Left.

Ryan would do this by giving the money now spent on welfare back to the states in the form of Opportunity Grants. But it’s not just money. It’s also the flexibility to shape spending and programs to meet local needs.

OMG! No Centralized Bureaucratic Control from Washington! How will the universe survove such a “radical” concept!!

“My thinking is, get rid of these bureaucratic formulas,” Ryan said. “Put the emphasis on results.”

Results! OMG! How radical is that. The only result the Democrats want is more or them dependent on them so they’ll vote for more of it.

Makes sense. By replacing 11 different government welfare programs that don’t work with state-based programs that do, the Ryan plan would encourage those on the dole to be more productive.

Productive! How dare he cut into their video gaming and watching Judge Judy and The View with something as draconian as work! He’s obviously a callous, mean, heartless right-wing extremist!!

Key to Ryan’s innovative plan is that states and welfare recipients will together shape an individual plan so that welfare doesn’t become a way of life.

Now that’s just wrong. They like being lazy, “entitled”, layabout spending other people’s money.

A recipient might agree, for instance, to apply for a job. Or stay off drugs. Or go to school. The point is, the old “money for nothin'” welfare model would die.

HOW EVIL IS THAT. Heartless, mean, gruel right-wingers who just hate women and children and want grandma to starve!!

Washington Post: “But economists and researchers now question whether the availability of generous benefits for people in low-wage jobs also became an incentive for employers to pay less, especially for workers who have few skills and little education. Since the law was enacted, low-wage jobs with no health care or other benefits that barely provide enough for workers to sustain themselves have proliferated.”

The increase in low-wage jobs and the accompanying explosion of benefits were key factors driving federal deficits of more than $1 trillion annually during and after the recession.

Welfare-to-work law encourages low wages, raises dependency on federal benefits.

It wasn’t just spending more than you took in, it was Corporate America’s Fault and reforming the welfare system to make them more productive makes them worse off.

So that’s why it’s must be $15.hr or nothing! :)

That’s the Orwellian Perversity of the Left for you.

“What do we know about the poor?” Ryan asked earlier this year. “They’re less likely to have graduated from high school. They’re less likely to work full time. And they’re less likely to have gotten married before they had kids.”

Yet our current welfare system encourages all these negative behaviors by punishing work.

But the alternative is that right wingers want children to starve and parents to struggle! :)

Even though we’ve spent over $20 trillion on welfare since the War on Poverty began in 1964, today, in the richest nation on Earth, 47 million people remain poor — about 15% of the population.

Yeah, because we haven’t spent enough! :)

Just as bad, nearly half of all Americans get a check from the government. This seems benign, but it’s a recipe for growing dependence on government — contrary to our nation’s founding principles, which encouraged self-reliance, hard work and individual responsibility.

But it works well for Democrats, so it must be good.

Our current welfare system is inexcusable. We’re wasting people’s lives — and making all of us poorer.

But makeing the DSemocrats richer and more powerful. What could be wrong with that? :)

It’s time to end the cycle of dependency that our system breeds. And Ryan’s plan would do just that.

Which is why the Democrats will fight you tooth-and-nail with every Nuclear Illogic Bomb in their arsenal. It’s their turf you’re cutting into.

So why are the media already calling Ryan’s plan radical, while his so-called progressive congressional colleagues say they won’t even consider it?

This is craziness. Our welfare system is, at best, dysfunctional, and, at worst, cruel, trapping millions of Americans in dead-end lives and making them virtual wards of the federal government.

Time for the welfare state as we know it to end. Ryan’s plan is a great place to start.

But the Democrats want more candy, not less, because it works for THEM. Screw what it does to you or your kids or grandkids. If it’s good for them, it MUST be good for everyone. They will be happy to tell you so, over ,and over, and over again until you believe them.

Then anything else is just “radical”. :)

151431 600 Quit Your Laughin cartoons

 

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

Go ahead, make my day…

Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, concluded, “President Obama is begging to be impeached.”

“For all I know, Obama is preparing to process five million illegal immigrant kids and teenagers into the United States,” Stockman said upon observing border operations near McAllen, Texas.

“He wants us to impeach him now,” Stockman theorized, “before the midterm election because his senior advisors believe that is the only chance the Democratic Party has to avoid a major electoral defeat. Evidently Obama believes impeachment could motivate the Democratic Party base to come out and vote.”

Egging on the mindless to do their Kings bidding? Yeah, I do think he’s that calculating. And yes, I think the Republicans are that stupid.

Imagine how much “right wing extremist” bashing the Liberal media could get out of that circus?

And that’s what they want. The results of King Fiat’s immigration policy, plus ObamaCare failures would fade to black as the Liberal Media when on an all out Nuclear Annihilation Attack against these “extremists”.

They would be Liberal slob heaven.

Vote you us, we aren’t that “extreme”. They are worse, but by Orwellian Doublethink comparison and 24/7 Alinsky bashing they just might win.

And that is all that matters.

The country and it’s people sure as hell don’t.

But I doubt “jar jar” Boehner and company smart enough not to take the bait. And there is a nagging doubt in the back of my mind that says that they want to deliberately lose but look “patriotic” and “strong” while doing it.

That voice won’t go away.

Stockman observed that rather than begin impeachment proceedings now, what the House of Representatives should do is to take away money from the Obama administration.

“The only way we’re going to stop Obama from opening the border is to take away the money he needs to operate,” Stockman concluded. “What we should do is shut down the White House.” (WND)

The House controls the money. Use that power, if your smart enough and brave enough because the Liberal will come at you with Annihilation in their eyes.

The beautiful thing about the Left is that they’ve trained the general public, via the public school system for the last four decades, to believe their blather; and thus anyone who disagrees with “them” is deemed by their ubiquitous foot soldiers to be the scourge of the earth.

Which brings me to their latest bunkum they’ve been bantering about, namely, if you aren’t cool with this tsunami of illegals then you must hate babies and Latinos. Yep, you are an infantophobe and a xenophobe and you must repent, you evil spawn of Satan.

Y’know, if it were just a bunch of nursing infants and their milking mamasitas that are pouring through the mesquite and prickly pear down on the Rio Grande, I might feel a little weird about wanting to send them back to their dreaded casa in their suck-ass country. But what I keep seeing, via the images that have slipped through the cracks of the heavily guarded media, is not a bunch of babies. That is, unless of course, the definition of “baby” has changed to include scruffy gangbangers who’re sporting more tats than a Maori warrior.

Another thing that’s difficult to swallow in their heavily invested and publicly foisted fairy tale is, according to law enforcement and white crackers like the “suspicious” Governor Rick Perry, if that is indeed his real name, is that these “poor babies and their mommies” have committed 8000 rapes and 3000 murders in the last five years in Texas alone. So, if we are to believe the Left regarding who’s coming over the border, then that sure is strange behavior for infants and their nursing moms. (Doug Giles)

So “impeachment” is precisely what they want you do. Go ahead, make their day!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

 

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

Fair & Balanced

Radical Notion: “The most dreaded disease in America today is political correctness. We need to inform our students of our whole history, and teach them how to think, not what to think,” Hays said. “Let them talk with their teachers, their peers and their parents, then draw their own conclusions. But they need both sides, and this movie shows a side they just aren’t seeing.”-Republican Alan Hays who proposes to show “America: Imagine a World Without Her” in schools.

But will they have any room after the Michael Moore & Al Gore Film Fest? :)

Actually, he has no objection to showing these films, just show this one as a “balance”. Something a Liberal would never conceive of.

Oops, sorry, there have a been a rash of film projector breakdowns and “blue flu” can’t show it. Sorry… :)

“I’ve looked at history books and talked to history teachers and the message the students are getting is very different from what is in the movie,” Hays said. “It’s dishonest and insulting. The students need to see the truth without political favoritism.”

But that’s not how Liberal America works. How dare you try to confuse the children when we are indoctrinating them, how rude, you NAZI! :)

*****

Richocet.com: While at the Netroots Nation conference in Detroit last week, I attended a few panels on public education. I’ve kept up to date on the school choice movement for the past few years, but hadn’t witnessed an anti-choice meeting for quite some time.

Compared to the education reformers’ message of optimism, enterprise and fresh thinking, the Netroots discussions seemed like an alternate universe — and a grim one at that.

The session “Reclaiming the Promise of Public Education” had a hopeful title, but ultimately revealed a movement in steep decline. Perhaps the anti-reform agenda shouldn’t be called a “movement” at all since it offers only inertia. Each panelist betrayed a siege mentality, admitting they are being hit with the school choice message from all sides, even from traditional allies.

There was much lashing out, but precious few solutions. The primary complaint, as in most Netroots sessions, was racism. The moderator, Zerlina Maxwell, maintained that focus every time there was a pause in the action.

“I’m glad you brought up racism,” she said as the first speaker wrapped up his talk on race, “that was where I wanted to go next.” After the second speaker talked more on the issue, Maxwell notified the third, “but I want to talk about racism.” She then prefaced her question to panelist number four with, “Still talking about racism…”

“I’m really excited that we’re really tackling this topic,” offered Mary Cathryn Ricker, president of a teachers’ union in St. Paul, Minn. She was quite apologetic about her whiteness but claimed one of education’s main problems is semantics.

Ricker asked the audience to expose the “bootstraps/individualism narrative.” She claimed this was important because “underneath that premise is that everybody has equal access to the same boots and the same straps. Or even has boots!”

She also was frustrated at the use of the term “racial isolation” in describing inner-city schools. “We’re using dominant-narrative language to create an otherness,” she said, prompting nods from her fellow panelists.

Joe Bishop, Director of Policy with the National Opportunity to Learn Campaign, continued the farrago of soft-science buzzwords. “We have to link Economic Justice to Education Justice,” he declared, defining neither term nor presenting a roadmap to achieve the goal.

Bishop also insisted that government vastly increase the definition of education to include “access to child care, family medical leave, and broad-based support from the time a person enters the world.”

Panelist Helen Gym offered a sprawling indictment of American society based on what she considers inadequate school budgets. Apparently taking her cue from If You Give a Pig a Pancake, the retired Philadelphia educator said, “it starts out with funding” which leads to “depleted resources” then “depletion of teachers” and losing “our teachers of color.” This results in excessive student discipline, too much testing, school closings and “massive segregation.” Somehow, this trail of societal ills ultimately ends with “prisons, casinos… and fracking.” (No flowchart was provided.)

Chicago community organizer Jitu Brown said the supposed lack of funds was the “intentional sabotage of schools” intended to fill the “school-to-prison pipeline.”

“They are building prisons while they are shutting down the schools of the children they anticipate will fill those prisons,” Brown said. “That’s not greed, that’s evil.” Why anyone in government or business would want more people in prison was never explained, but Brown further developed the conspiracy theory.

“America has always hated its darker citizens,” he said. “We are treated as sheep and the country we helped build are the wolves. They feed on us, they feed on our spirit, they rob our creativity, and they benefit off our genius.” The audience and fellow speakers applauded Brown’s disturbing analysis.

“We have to kill the privatization movement,” he concluded. “We have to kill it!”

If these are the issues on which our public education thought leaders are focused, it’s no wonder public school kids fail at reading, writing and arithmetic. Most jarring was the dearth of solutions offered.

Much time was spent railing against incompetent government officials, especially Arne Duncan and Rahm Emanuel. But the only fix offered was to give these officials vast increases in money and authority to double-down on the existing government school system.

Advocates of the status quo in public education are losing badly and they know it. If the panels at Netroots Nation are representative, they can expect many more losses to school choice fans. This is bad news for some unions, but great news for students, parents and teachers.

So it’s time to knuckle down and protect our mindless turf (the left might say) from those evil right-wingers! Time for a dictatorship, at least then we won’t lose out to rational thought. :)

Theatre Screening of note:

http://www.fathomevents.com/event/we-will-not-conform-second-showing

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

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

The King’s Speech

Obama’s pledge to use his executive powers by the end of the summer marked both a dramatic reversal in rhetoric and a major strategic shift on immigration. The president is no longer emphasizing his own powerlessness but rather his determination “to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress.”

The administration is examining how far it can go, legally and politically, to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation. Despite the flow of young Central American children across the southwestern border, Obama remains committed to taking significant action, according to senior advisers and advocates who have attended recent meetings with White House officials.

In other words, Obama has signaled that he intends to do the exact opposite of what he’s long said he’s unable to do.

“I take executive action only when we have a serious problem, a serious issue, and Congress chooses to do nothing,” Obama said last month in his Rose Garden announcement. “And in this situation, the failure of House Republicans to pass a darn bill is bad for our security, it’s bad for our economy, and it’s bad for our future.” (politico)

The Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.

If approved, the plan would direct the government to screen thousands of children and youths in Honduras to see if they can enter the United States as refugees or on emergency humanitarian grounds. It would be the first American refugee effort in a nation reachable by land to the United States, the White House said, putting the violence in Honduras on the level of humanitarian emergencies in Haiti and Vietnam, where such programs have been conducted in the past amid war and major crises.

Critics of the plan were quick to pounce, saying it appeared to redefine the legal definition of a refugee and would only increase the flow of migration to the United States. Administration officials said they believed the plan could be enacted through executive action, without congressional approval, as long as it did not increase the total number of refugees coming into the country.

This plan contradicts initial claims by the administration children in the United States illegally will be sent back. Not only is the White House not stopping the flow of illegal alien children, they’re planning to increase the number of unaccompanied children in the U.S. with President Obama’s pen. (Townhall)

Alinsky would be proud.

Keep the mounting the pressure higher and higher until your opponent breaks and gives in to whatever you want to do.

Who the f*ck cares if it’s good for the country, it’s good for The Agenda! That’s most important.

He’ll show you who’s THE KING and has the absolute power around here.

ALL HAIL KING OBAMA!  (or else!) :)

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

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

Why I left The Left

Weekend Must-Read: Ten Reasons Why I Am No Longer a Leftist

How far left was I? So far left my beloved uncle was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party in a Communist country. When I returned to his Slovak village to buy him a mass card, the priest refused to sell me one. So far left that a self-identified terrorist proposed marriage to me. So far left I was a two-time Peace Corps volunteer and I have a degree from UC Berkeley. So far left that my Teamster mother used to tell anyone who would listen that she voted for Gus Hall, Communist Party chairman, for president. I wore a button saying “Eat the Rich.” To me it wasn’t a metaphor.

I voted Republican in the last presidential election.

Below are the top ten reasons I am no longer a leftist. This is not a rigorous comparison of theories. This list is idiosyncratic, impressionistic, and intuitive. It’s an accounting of the milestones on my herky-jerky journey.

10) Huffiness.

In the late 1990s I was reading Anatomy of the Spirit, a then recent bestseller by Caroline Myss.

Myss described having lunch with a woman named Mary. A man approached Mary and asked her if she were free to do a favor for him on June 8th. No, Mary replied, I absolutely cannot do anything on June 8th because June 8th is my incest survivors’ meeting and we never let each other down! They have suffered so much already! I would never betray incest survivors!

Myss was flabbergasted. Mary could have simply said “Yes” or “No.”

Reading this anecdote, I felt that I was confronting the signature essence of my social life among leftists. We rushed to cast everyone in one of three roles: victim, victimizer, or champion of the oppressed. We lived our lives in a constant state of outraged indignation. I did not want to live that way anymore. I wanted to cultivate a disposition of gratitude. I wanted to see others, not as victims or victimizers, but as potential friends, as loved creations of God. I wanted to understand the point of view of people with whom I disagreed without immediately demonizing them as enemy oppressors.

I recently attended a training session for professors on a college campus. The presenter was a new hire in a tenure-track position. He opened his talk by telling us that he had received an invitation to share a festive meal with the president of the university. I found this to be an enviable occurrence and I did not understand why he appeared dramatically aggrieved. The invitation had been addressed to “Mr. and Mrs. X.” Professor X was a bachelor. He felt slighted. Perhaps the person who had addressed his envelope had disrespected him because he is a member of a minority group.

Rolling his eyes, Prof. X went on to say that he was wary of accepting a position on this lowly commuter campus, with its working-class student body. The disconnect between leftists’ announced value of championing the poor and the leftist practice of expressing snobbery for them stung me. Already vulnerable students would be taught by a professor who regarded association with them as a burden, a failure, and a stigma.

Barack Obama is president. Kim and Kanye and Brad and Angelina are members of multiracial households. One might think that professors finally have cause to teach their students to be proud of America for overcoming racism. Not so fast, Professor X warned.  His talk was on microaggression, defined as slights that prove that America is still racist, sexist, homophobic, and ableist, that is, discriminatory against handicapped people.

Professor X projected a series of photographs onto a large screen. In one, commuters in business suits, carrying briefcases, mounted a flight of stairs. This photo was an act of microaggression. After all, Professor X reminded us, handicapped people can’t climb stairs.

I appreciate Professor X’s desire to champion the downtrodden, but identifying a photograph of commuters on stairs as an act of microaggression and evidence that America is still an oppressive hegemon struck me as someone going out of his way to live his life in a state of high dudgeon. On the other hand, Prof. X could have chosen to speak of his own working-class students with more respect.

Yes, there is a time and a place when it is absolutely necessary for a person to cultivate awareness of his own pain, or of others’ pain. Doctors instruct patients to do this — “Locate the pain exactly; calculate where the pain falls on a scale of one to ten; assess whether the pain is sharp, dull, fleeting, or constant.” But doctors do this for a reason. They want the patient to heal, and to move beyond the pain. In the left, I found a desire to be in pain constantly, so as always to have something to protest, from one’s history of incest to the inability of handicapped people to mount flights of stairs.

9) Selective Outrage

I was a graduate student. Female genital mutilation came up in class. I stated, without ornamentation, that it is wrong.

A fellow graduate student, one who was fully funded and is now a comfortably tenured professor, sneered at me. “You are so intolerant. Clitoredectomy is just another culture’s rite of passage. You Catholics have confirmation.”

When Mitt Romney was the 2012 Republican presidential candidate, he mentioned that, as Massachusetts governor, he proactively sought out female candidates for top jobs. He had, he said, “binders full of women.” He meant, of course, that he stored resumes of promising female job candidates in three-ring binders.

Op-ed pieces, Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show,” Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon posts erupted in a feeding frenzy, savaging Romney and the Republican Party for their “war on women.”

I was an active leftist for decades. I never witnessed significant leftist outrage over clitoredectomy, child marriage, honor killing, sharia-inspired rape laws, stoning, or acid attacks. Nothing. Zip. Crickets. I’m not saying that that outrage does not exist. I’m saying I never saw it.

The left’s selective outrage convinced me that much canonical, left-wing feminism is not so much support for women, as it is a protest against Western, heterosexual men. It’s an “I hate” phenomenon, rather than an “I love” phenomenon.

8.) It’s the thought that counts

My favorite bumper sticker in ultra-liberal Berkeley, California: “Think Globally; Screw up Locally.” In other words, “Love Humanity but Hate People.”

It was past midnight, back in the 1980s, in Kathmandu, Nepal. A group of Peace Corps volunteers were drinking moonshine at the Momo Cave. A pretty girl with long blond hair took out her guitar and sang these lyrics, which I remember by heart from that night:

“If you want your dream to be,

Build it slow and surely.

Small beginnings greater ends.

Heartfelt work grows purely.”

I just googled these lyrics, thirty years later, and discovered that they are Donovan’s San Damiano song, inspired by the life of St. Francis.

Listening to this song that night in the Momo Cave, I thought, that’s what we leftists do wrong. That’s what we’ve got to get right.

We focused so hard on our good intentions. Before our deployment overseas, Peace Corps vetted us for our idealism and “tolerance,” not for our competence or accomplishments. We all wanted to save the world. What depressingly little we did accomplish was often erased with the next drought, landslide, or insurrection.

Peace Corps did not focus on the “small beginnings” necessary to accomplish its grandiose goals. Schools rarely ran, girls and low caste children did not attend, and widespread corruption guaranteed that all students received passing grades. Those students who did learn had no jobs where they could apply their skills, and if they rose above their station, the hereditary big men would sabotage them. Thanks to cultural relativism, we were forbidden to object to rampant sexism or the caste system. “Only intolerant oppressors judge others’ cultures.”

I volunteered with the Sisters of Charity. For them, I pumped cold water from a well and washed lice out of homeless people’s clothing. The sisters did not want to save the world. Someone already had. The sisters focused on the small things, as their founder, Mother Teresa, advised, “Don’t look for big things, just do small things with great love.” Delousing homeless people’s clothing was one of my few concrete accomplishments.

Back in 1975, after Hillary Rodham had followed Bill Clinton to Arkansas, she helped create the state’s first rape crisis hotline. She had her eye on the big picture. What was Hillary like in her one-on-one encounters?

Hillary served as the attorney to a 41-year-old, one of two men accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. The girl, a virgin before the assault, was in a coma for five days afterward. She was injured so badly she was told she’d never have children. In 2014, she is 52 years old, and she has never had children, nor has she married. She reports that she was afraid of men after the rape.

A taped interview with Clinton has recently emerged; on it Clinton makes clear that she thought her client was guilty, and she chuckles when reporting that she was able to set him free.  In a recent interview, the victim said that Hillary Clinton “took me through Hell” and “lied like a dog.” “I think she wants to be a role model… but I don’t think she’s a role model at all,” the woman said. “If she had have been, she would have helped me at the time, being a 12-year-old girl who was raped by two guys.”

Hillary had her eye on the all-caps resume bullet point: FOUNDS RAPE HOTLINE.

Hillary’s chuckles when reminiscing about her legal victory suggest that, in her assessment, her contribution to the ruination of the life of a rape victim is of relatively negligible import.

7) Leftists hate my people.

I’m a working-class Bohunk. A hundred years ago, leftists loved us. We worked lousy jobs, company thugs shot us when we went on strike, and leftists saw our discontent as fuel for their fire.

Karl Marx promised the workers’ paradise through an inevitable revolution of the proletariat. The proletariat is an industrial working class — think blue-collar people working in mines, mills, and factories: exactly what immigrants like my parents were doing.

Polish-Americans participated significantly in a great victory, Flint, Michigan’s 1937 sit-down strike. Italian-Americans produced Sacco and Vanzetti. Gus Hall was a son of Finnish immigrants.

In the end, though, we didn’t show up for the Marxist happily ever after. We believed in God and we were often devout Catholics. Leftists wanted us to slough off our ethnic identities and join in the international proletarian brotherhood — “Workers of the world, unite!” But we clung to ethnic distinctiveness. Future generations lost their ancestral ties, but they didn’t adopt the IWW flag; they flew the stars and stripes. “Property is theft” is a communist motto, but no one is more house-proud than a first generation Pole who has escaped landless peasantry and secured his suburban nest.

Leftists felt that we jilted them at the altar. Leftists turned on us. This isn’t just ancient history. In 2004, What’s the Matter with Kansas? spent eighteen weeks on the bestseller lists. The premise of the book: working people are too stupid to know what’s good for them, and so they vote conservative when they should be voting left. In England, the book was titled, What’s the Matter with America?

We became the left’s boogeyman: Joe Six-pack, Joe Hardhat. Though we’d been in the U.S. for a few short decades when the demonization began, leftists, in the academy, in media, and in casual speech, blamed working-class ethnics for American crimes, including racism and the “imperialist” war in Vietnam. See films like The Deer Hunter. Watch Archie Bunker on “All in the Family.” Listen to a few of the Polack jokes that elitists pelted me with whenever I introduced myself at UC Berkeley.

Leftists freely label poor whites as “redneck,” “white trash,” “trailer trash,” and “hillbilly.” At the same time that leftists toss around these racist and classist slurs, they are so sanctimonious they forbid anyone to pronounce the N word when reading Mark Twain aloud. President Bill Clinton’s advisor James Carville succinctly summed up leftist contempt for poor whites in his memorable quote, “Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.”

The left’s visceral hatred of poor whites overflowed like a broken sewer when John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate in 2008. It would be impossible, and disturbing, to attempt to identify the single most offensive comment that leftists lobbed at Palin. One can report that attacks on Palin were so egregious that leftists themselves publicly begged that they cease; after all, they gave the left a bad name. The Reclusive Leftist blogged in 2009 that it was a “major shock” to discover “the extent to which so many self-described liberals actually despise working people.” The Reclusive Leftist focuses on Vanity Fair journalist Henry Rollins. Rollins recommends that leftists “hate-fuck conservative women” and denounces Palin as a “small town hickoid” who can be bought off with a coupon to a meal at a chain restaurant.

Smearing us is not enough. Liberal policies sabotage us. Affirmative action benefits recipients by color, not by income. Even this limited focus fails. In his 2004 Yale University Press study, Thomas Sowell insists that affirmative action helps only wealthier African Americans. Poor blacks do not benefit. In 2009, Princeton sociologists Thomas Espenshade and Alexandria Radford demonstrated that poor, white Christians are underrepresented on elite college campuses. Leftists add insult to injury. A blue-collar white kid, who feels lost and friendless on the alien terrain of a university campus, a campus he has to leave immediately after class so he can get to his fulltime job at MacDonald’s, must accept that he is a recipient of “white privilege” – if he wants to get good grades in mandatory classes on racism.

The left is still looking for its proletariat. It supports mass immigration for this reason. Harvard’s George Borjas, himself a Cuban immigrant, has been called “America’s leading immigration economist.” Borjas points out that mass immigration from Latin America has sabotaged America’s working poor.

It’s more than a little bit weird that leftists, who describe themselves as the voice of the worker, select workers as their hated other of choice, and targets of their failed social engineering.

6) I believe in God.

Read Marx and discover a mythology that is irreconcilable with any other narrative, including the Bible. Hang out in leftist internet environments, and you will discover a toxic bath of irrational hatred for the Judeo-Christian tradition. You will discover an alternate vocabulary in which Jesus is a “dead Jew on a stick” or a “zombie” and any belief is an arbitrary sham, the equivalent of a recently invented “flying spaghetti monster.” You will discover historical revisionism that posits Nazism as a Christian denomination. You will discover a rejection of the Judeo-Christian foundation of Western Civilization and American concepts of individual rights and law. You will discover a nihilist void, the kind of vacuum of meaning that nature abhors and that, all too often, history fills with the worst totalitarian nightmares, the rough beast that slouches toward Bethlehem.

5 & 4) Straw men and “In order to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs.”

It astounds me now to reflect on it, but never, in all my years of leftist activism, did I ever hear anyone articulate accurately the position of anyone to our right. In fact, I did not even know those positions when I was a leftist.

“Truth is that which serves the party.” The capital-R revolution was such a good, it could eliminate all that was bad, that manipulating facts was not even a venial sin; it was a good. If you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs. One of those eggs was objective truth.

Ron Kuby is a left-wing radio talk show host on New York’s WABC. He plays the straw man card hourly. If someone phones in to question affirmative action – shouldn’t such programs benefit recipients by income, rather than by skin color? – Kuby opens the fire hydrant. He is shrill. He is bombastic. He accuses the caller of being a member of the KKK. He paints graphic word pictures of the horrors of lynching and the death of Emmett Till and asks, “And you support that?”

Well of course THE CALLER did not support that, but it is easier to orchestrate a mob in a familiar rendition of righteous rage against a sensationalized straw man than it is to produce a reasoned argument against a reasonable opponent.

On June 16, 2014, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank published a column alleging that a peaceful Muslim was nearly verbally lynched by violent Islamophobes at a Heritage Foundation-hosted panel. What Milbank described was despicable. Unfortunately for Milbank and the Washington Post‘s credibility, someone filmed the event and posted the film on YouTube. Panel discussants, including Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel, made important points in a courteous manner. Saba Ahmed, the peaceful Muslim, is a “family friend” of a bombing plotter who expressed a specific desire to murder children. It soon became clear that Milbank was, as one blogger put it, “making stuff up.”

Milbank slanders anyone who might attempt analysis of jihad, a force that is currently cited in the murder of innocents — including Muslims — from Nigeria to the Philippines. The leftist strategy of slandering those who speak uncomfortable facts suppresses discourse and has a devastating impact on confrontations with truth in journalism and on college campuses.

2 & 3) It doesn’t work.  Other approaches work better.

I went to hear David Horowitz speak in 2004. My intention was to heckle him. Horowitz said something that interrupted my flow of thought. He pointed out that Camden, Paterson, and Newark had decades of Democratic leadership.

Ouch.

I grew up among “Greatest Generation” Americans who had helped build these cities. One older woman told me, “As soon as I got my weekly paycheck, I rushed to Main Ave in Paterson, and my entire paycheck ended up on my back, in a new outfit.” In the 1950s and 60s, my parents and my friends’ parents fled deadly violence in Newark and Paterson.

Within a few short decades, Paterson, Camden, and Newark devolved into unlivable slums, with shooting deaths, drug deals, and garbage-strewn streets. The pain that New Jerseyans express about these failed cities is our state’s open wound.

I live in Paterson. I teach its young. My students are hogtied by ignorance. I find myself speaking to young people born in the U.S. in a truncated pidgin I would use with a train station chai wallah in Calcutta.

Many of my students lack awareness of a lot more than vocabulary. They don’t know about believing in themselves, or stick-to-itiveness. They don’t realize that the people who exercise power over them have faced and overcome obstacles. I know they don’t know these things because they tell me. One student confessed that when she realized that one of her teachers had overcome setbacks it changed her own life.

My students do know — because they have been taught this — that America is run by all-powerful racists who will never let them win. My students know — because they have been drilled in this — that the only way they can get ahead is to locate and cultivate those few white liberals who will pity them and scatter crumbs on their supplicant, bowed heads and into their outstretched palms. My students have learned to focus on the worst thing that ever happened to them, assume that it happened because America is unjust, and to recite that story, dirge-like, to whomever is in charge, from the welfare board to college professors, and to await receipt of largesse.

As Shelby Steele so brilliantly points out in his book White Guilt, the star of the sob story my students tell in exchange for favors is very much not the black aid recipient. The star of this story, still, just as before the Civil Rights Movement that was meant to change who got to take the lead in American productions, was the white man. The generous white liberal still gets top billing.

In Dominque La Pierre’s 1985 novel City of Joy, a young American doctor, Max Loeb, confesses that serving the poor in a slum has changed his mind forever about what might actually improve their lot. “In a slum an exploiter is better than a Santa Claus… An exploiter forces you to react, whereas a Santa Claus demobilizes you.”

That one stray comment from David Horowitz, a man I regarded as the enemy, sparked the slow but steady realization that my ideals, the ideals I had lived by all my life, were poisoning my students and Paterson, my city.

After I realized that our approaches don’t work, I started reading about other approaches. I had another Aha! moment while listening to a two minute twenty-three second YouTube video of Milton Friedman responding to Phil Donahue’s castigation of greed. The only rational response to Friedman is “My God, he’s right.”

1) Hate.

If hate were the only reason, I’d stop being a leftist for this reason alone.

Almost twenty years ago, when I could not conceive of ever being anything but a leftist, I joined a left-wing online discussion forum.

Before that I’d had twenty years of face-to-face participation in leftist politics: marching, organizing, socializing.

In this online forum, suddenly my only contact with others was the words those others typed onto a screen. That limited and focused means of contact revealed something.

If you took all the words typed into the forum every day and arranged them according to what part of speech they were, you’d quickly notice that nouns expressing the emotions of anger, aggression, and disgust, and verbs speaking of destruction, punishing, and wreaking vengeance, outnumbered any other class of words.

One topic thread was entitled “What do you view as disgusting about modern America?” The thread was begun in 2002. Almost eight thousand posts later, the thread was still going strong in June, 2014.

Those posting messages in this left-wing forumpublicly announced that they did what they did every day, from voting to attending a rally to planning a life, because they wanted to destroy something, and because they hated someone, rather than because they wanted to build something, or because they loved someone. You went to an anti-war rally because you hated Bush, not because you loved peace. Thus, when Obama bombed, you didn’t hold any anti-war rally, because you didn’t hate Obama.

I experienced powerful cognitive dissonance when I recognized the hate. The rightest of my right-wing acquaintances — I had no right-wing friends — expressed nothing like this. My right-wing acquaintances talked about loving: God, their family, their community. I’m not saying that the right-wingers I knew were better people; I don’t know that they were. I’m speaking here, merely, about language.

In 1995 I developed a crippling illness. I couldn’t work, lost my life savings, and traveled through three states, from surgery to surgery.

A left-wing friend, Pete, sent me emails raging against Republicans like George Bush, whom he referred to as “Bushitler.” The Republicans were to blame because they opposed socialized medicine. In fact it’s not at all certain that socialized medicine would have helped; the condition I had is not common and there was no guaranteed treatment.

I visited online discussion forums for others with the same affliction. One of my fellow sufferers, who identified himself as a successful corporate executive in New Jersey, publicly announced that the symptoms were so hideous, and his helpless slide into poverty was so much not what his wife had bargained for when she married him, that he planned to take his own life. He stopped posting after that announcement, though I responded to his post and requested a reply. It is possible that he committed suicide, exactly as he said he would — car exhaust in the garage. I suddenly realized that my “eat the rich” lapel button was a sin premised on a lie.

In any case, at the time I was diagnosed, Bush wasn’t president; Clinton was. And, as I pointed out to Pete, his unceasing and vehement expressions of hatred against Republicans did nothing for me.

I had a friend, a nun, Mary Montgomery, one of the Sisters of Providence, who took me out to lunch every six months or so, and gave me twenty-dollar Target gift cards on Christmas. Her gestures to support someone, rather than expressions of hate against someone — even though these gestures were miniscule and did nothing to restore me to health — meant a great deal to me.

Recently, I was trying to explain this aspect of why I stopped being a leftist to a left-wing friend, Julie. She replied, “No, I’m not an unpleasant person. I try to be nice to everybody.”

“Julie,” I said, “You are an active member of the Occupy Movement. You could spend your days teaching children to read, or visiting the elderly in nursing homes, or organizing cleanup crews in a garbage-strewn slum. You don’t. You spend your time protestingand trying to destroy something — capitalism.”

“Yes, but I’m very nice about it,” she insisted. “I always protest with a smile.”

Pete is now a Facebook friend and his feed overflows with the anger that I’m sure he assesses as righteous. He protests against homophobic Christians, American imperialists, and Monsanto. I don’t know if Pete ever donates to an organization he believes in, or a person suffering from a disease, or if he ever says comforting things to afflicted intimates. I know he hates.

I do have right-wing friends now and they do get angry and they do express that anger. But when I encounter unhinged, stratospheric vituperation, when I encounter detailed revenge fantasies in scatological and sadistic language, I know I’ve stumbled upon a left-wing website.

Given that the left prides itself on being the liberator of women, homosexuals, and on being “sex positive,” one of the weirder and most obvious aspects of left-wing hate is how often, and how virulently, it is expressed in terms that are misogynist, homophobic, and in the distinctive anti-sex voice of a sexually frustrated high-school misfit. Haters are aware enough of how uncool it would be to use a slur like “fag,” so they sprinkle their discourse with terms indicating anal rape like “butt hurt.” Leftists taunt right-wingers as “tea baggers.” The implication is that the target of their slur is either a woman or a gay man being orally penetrated by a man, and is, therefore, inferior, and despicable.

Misogynist speech has a long tradition on the left. In 1964, Stokely Carmichael said that the only position for women in the Civil Rights Movement was “prone.” Carmichael’s misogyny is all the more outrageous given the very real role of women like Rosa Parks, Viola Liuzzo, and Fannie Lou Hamer.

In 2012 atheist bloggers Jennifer McCreight and Natalie Reed exposed the degree to which misogyny dominates the New Atheist movement. McCreight quoted a prominent atheist’s reply to a woman critic. “I will make you a rape victim if you don’t fuck off… I think we should give the guy who raped you a medal. I hope you fucking drown in rape semen, you ugly, mean-spirited cow… Is that kind of like the way that rapists dick went in your pussy? Or did he use your asshole… I’m going to rape you with my fist.”

A high-profile example of leftist invective was delivered by MSNBC’s Martin Bashir in late 2013. Bashir said, on air and in a rehearsed performance, not as part of a moment’s loss of control, something so vile about Sarah Palin that I won’t repeat it here. Extreme as it is, Bashir’s comment is fairly representative of a good percentage of what I read on left-wing websites.

I could say as much about a truly frightening phenomenon, left-wing anti-Semitism, but I’ll leave the topic to others better qualified. I can say that when I first encountered it, at a PLO fundraising party in Marin County, I felt as if I had time-traveled to pre-war Berlin.

I needed to leave the left, I realized, when I decided that I wanted to spend time with people building, cultivating, and establishing, something that they loved.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

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

Hoist By Their Own Petard

More ObamaCare mess.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld a federal regulations that implemented subsidies that are vital to President Barack Obama’s healthcare overhaul, in direct conflict with another ruling on the issue handed down earlier on Tuesday.

A three-judge panel unanimously said the law was ambiguous, and that it would defer to the IRS’s determination that subsidies could go to individuals who purchased health insurance on both federal and state-run exchanges.

The second court was obviously more liberal agenda driven since the Law does state the Feds are excluded from the exchanges. This was a political attempt, that partially failed, to get Republican Governors to cave-in and they didn’t. Now the Agenda has a new problem.

The ACA (ObamaCare) say the subsidies shall be available to persons who purchase health insurance in an exchange “established by the state.” But 34 states have chosen not to establish exchanges.

Nothing a few Agenda-driven judges can’t confuse! :)

A separate panel from a federal appeals court in Washington on Tuesday morning said the IRS could not offer premium tax credits to people who purchase insurance through the federal insurance marketplace that serves most of the 8 million consumers who have signed up for private coverage for 2014.

Analysts estimate that as many as 5 million people could be affected if subsidies disappear from the federal marketplace, which serves 36 states through the website HealthCare.gov.

The subsidies are available to people with annual incomes of up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $94,200 for a family of four.

The subsidies were the bribes to get people in the door of ObamaCare in the first place, as well as the cudgel against Republicans.

Did anyone mention cost? :)

Democrats in Congress passed a law that explicitly limited Obamacare subsidy eligibility to consumers who purchased plans on state-level exchanges. They did so in order to coerce and bribe states into setting up their own marketplaces under the law. (Another attempt at coercion, mandatory Medicaid expansion, has been struck down 7-2 by the Supreme Court). Given the controversial law’s unpopularity, a majority of states declined to establish exchanges, forcing the federal government to create the infamous federal version — with Healthcare.gov as its centerpiece. Subsequent New York Times reporting indicated that HHS never expected to have to set up any exchange at all, let alone for 36 states. That’s because they were laboring under the belief that the law’s sticks and carrots would compel every state to implement marketplaces on their own. Many did not, and the plain text of the law clearly states that anyone buying coverage through any system other than a state-based exchange would not be eligible to receive generous taxpayer subsidies, which relieve much of the heavy cost burden for many consumers (even with the subsidies, many enrollees say they’re struggling to pay).
Faced with this predicament, the IRS decided that Congress’ true intent was for all exchange consumers to have a shot at subsidies if they were financially eligible, so it simply decreed it to be so in the form of a regulation that effectively rewrote a major provision the law. Today, the Court ruled that the law says what it says, and that the IRS overstepped. This decision, at least for now, plunges Obamacare into chaos — and furious Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. When you ram through a lengthy, hastily slapped-together, unpopular law without reading it, unintended consequences sometimes arise. And this one’s a biggie. Then again, as Will notes in his piece, a strong case can be made that this passage of the law was very much crafted intentionally, even if today’s fallout was ‘never supposed to happen.’ Congress debated how to phrase the subsidy eligibility language, and ended up passing the Senate’s version — a move made necessary by the anti-Obamacare election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. A previous House version’s verbiage had been much more encompassing. But it didn’t pass. Obamacare did. If it stands, this ruling not only strips subsidy eligibility from many Americans (which could/will touch off a breathtaking adverse selection death spiral), it liberates tens of millions from the unpopular individual mandate tax. Why? (Guy Benson)

Time for King Fiat and His Executive Order Super Glue? :)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

So Israel should stop being so mean to the Palestinians… :)

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

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

Sowell of Immigration

In a recent confrontation between protesters against the illegal flood of unaccompanied children into the U.S. and counter-protests by some Hispanic groups, one man from the latter group said angrily, “We are as good as you are!”

One of the things that make the history of clashes over race or ethnicity such a history of tragedies around the world is that — regardless of whatever particular issue sets off these clashes — many people see the ultimate stakes as their worth as human beings.

On that, there is no room for compromise, only polarization. That is why playing “the race card” is an irresponsible and dangerous political game.

The real issue when it comes to immigration is not simply what particular immigration policy America should have, but whether America can have any immigration policy at all.

A country that does not control its own borders does not have any immigration policy. There may be laws on the books, but such laws are just meaningless words if people from other countries can cross the borders whenever they choose.

One reason why many Americans are reluctant to keep out illegal immigrants — or even to call them “illegal immigrants,” instead of the mealy-mouthed “undocumented” — is that most Hispanics they encounter seem to be decent, hard-working people.

This column has pointed out, more than once, that I have never seen Mexicans standing on a street corner begging, though I have seen both whites and blacks doing so.

But such impressions are no basis for deciding serious issues about immigration and citizenship. When we do not control our own borders, we have no way of knowing how many of those coming across those borders are criminals or even terrorists.

We have no way of knowing how many of those children are carrying what diseases that will spread to our children. And we already know, from studies of American children, that those who are raised without fathers in the home have a high probability of becoming huge, expensive problems for taxpayers in the years ahead, and a mortal danger to others.

A hundred years ago, when there was a huge influx of immigrants from Europe, there were extensive government studies of what those immigrants did in the United States. There were data on how many, from what countries, ended up in jail, diseased or on the dole. There were data on how well their children did in school.

As with most things, some immigrant groups did very well and others did not. Today, even to ask such questions is to be mean-spirited.

Such information as we have today shows that immigrants from some countries have far more education than immigrants from some other countries, and do not end up being supported by the taxpayers nearly as often as immigrants from other countries.

But such information is seldom mentioned in discussions of immigrants, as if they were abstract people in an abstract world.

Questions about immigration and citizenship are questions about irreversible decisions that can permanently change the composition of the American population and the very culture of the country — perhaps in the direction of the cultures of the countries from which illegal immigrants have fled.

During the era of epidemics that swept across Europe in centuries past, people fleeing from those epidemics often spread the diseases to the places to which they fled. Counterproductive and dangerous cultures can be spread to America the same way.

Willful ignorance is not the way to make immigration decisions or any other decisions. Yet the Obama administration is keeping secret even where they are dumping illegal immigrants by the thousands, in communities far from the border states.

Looking before we leap is not racism — except in the sense that anything the Obama administration doesn’t like is subject to being called racist.

Americans who gather to protest the high-handed way this administration has sneaked illegal immigrants into their communities can expect the race card to be played against them. The time is long overdue to stop being intimidated by such cheap — and dangerous — political tactics. (Thomas Sowell)

AGREED, Call them on it.

They’ve already set off the nuke, what do they have left if you survive that?

Is that it?? :)


Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

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

“Civil” Rights

Liberals never met a civil right they didn’t dislike. As with everything about liberal ideology, liberals’ great concern for civil rights is a scam, a lie, a fraud designed to sucker in the weak-minded and disguise their goosesteppy inclinations.

They care about civil rights like Michael Bay cares about Oscar night.

Sure, liberals pose as advocates of civil liberties, but only when they don’t have the power to squash them. In my new book, Conservative Insurgency, a speculative future history of the struggle to restore our system and culture, the left’s coordinated attack on our Constitutional rights is one of the biggest motivations for the pushback that results in conservatism’s final victory.

Yeah, the story has a happy ending.

But don’t listen to me. Listen to the liberals. Let’s take a look at our Bill of Rights and see which amendments liberals like. Here’s a hint: There aren’t many.

There’s the First Amendment, which lists rights such as free speech and freedom of religion. Liberals are against them.

Don’t think so? Ask a liberal whether he supports Harry Reid’s plan to repeal part of the First Amendment. He does.

Liberals hate the way the Citizens United decision recognizes that people still have the right to speak freely when they speak together. The feds, defending the law Citizens United overturned, told the Supreme Court that the law could allow the government to ban a book critical of a politician.

Yeah. Liberals think the First Amendment is bad because it protects people from being jailed for writing books. Unbelievable? Don’t believe me. Believe right-wing stalwart Jeffrey Toobin of the ultra-conservative New Yorker.

The Liberal First Amendement (by yours truly): Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Any religion,and mocking the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE speech, or of the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to worship the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES and protest it’s enemies, any assembly otherwise in opposition must therefore be “terrorism” or “racism”, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against Corporations and to seek “social justice” at all costs.

How about the whole religious freedom thing? Well, 20 years ago even Ted Kennedy thought it was okay to protect people’s right of religious conscience when he led the enactment of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that underlay the Hobby Lobby decision. Today, for liberals, the right to religious liberty pales against their “right” to boss you around.

So much for the First Amendment. How about the Second. Seriously? The idea of free Americans armed to protect themselves, their communities and their Constitution terrifies liberals. That freedom-loving Americans are able to defend themselves from the left’s most secret fascist fantasies fills them with fussiness.

On the Bill of Rights, so far liberals are zero for two.

What about the Third Amendment, the one about quartering soldiers in private homes? This is a toss-up. Liberals want to harass soldiers, who they see as hillbilly knuckledraggers useful only as photo op backdrops, but they also can’t resist intruding on private property. Call it a wash.

There’s the Fourth Amendment, but since the Obama administration probably read this column the minute I emailed it off, you can safely put this one down in the “Against” column.

Liberals are loving the Fifth Amendment more and more these days, as every Obama administration flunky seems to be taking it. We’ll call that one “For,” at least until it stops being useful to them.

Sixth Amendment due process rights? This whole “fair trial” thing is a huge hassle. They want the bureaucrats to handle that, not courts. For example, now the EPA apparently wants to garnish people’s wages without due process for bothering elk.

Liberals love the Seventh Amendment! It guarantees a Democrat-donor trial lawyer the right to have his crappy product liability lawsuit involving a plaintiff who is suing because his hammer was defective because it hurt when he hit himself in the head with it is heard by a jury composed of people who were unable to figure out how to get out of jury duty.

The Eighth Amendment against excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment? The liberals loved the idea of fining into oblivion companies that didn’t want to pay for abortifacients. As for cruel and unusual punishment, they’ll be for that once the trials for political heresy get underway.

The Ninth Amendment? Liberalism is literally built on denying and disparaging rights retained by the people.

How about the Tenth Amendment, the one that reserves unenumerated rights to the states or to the people? Unenumerated rights? Liberals don’t even like the enumerated ones.

And they sure as hell believe in Federal Supremacy is all things. 10th Amendment, fah…who needs it. It’s good to be The Lord and Master of all.

In sum, of ten amendments, liberals are against seven, in favor of one because it makes Democrat ambulance chasers rich, in favor of another as long as it keeps them out of jail, and torn about one because it’s too hard to choose between shafting our warriors or shafting property owners.

So, what do the liberals really think of civil rights? Not much. To liberals, the Constitution doesn’t have a Bill of Rights. It has a List of Suggestions.. (Kurt Schlichter)

That only apply to them, when they want them to (usually when their ideology is being threatened). But you are supposed to use it against THEM. They are your Lords and Masters. They are Homo Superior Liberalis. They are above you petty little commoners.

You who should be ruled with an iron fist of “social justice” or else you’ll “discriminate” against their exploited masses and will act with utter “racism”. :)

Hell, Michelle even wants your shopping cart to nag you…

 

 

 

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

Jumped The Shark

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 


Growing up, I was – as I assume you were – inundated with lists of “the benefits of citizenship.” The list was long and capped, naturally, by the fact the United States was the best, strongest, freest nation on the planet.

Being an American was a source of pride. But is it still? Do the benefits of citizenship still outweigh the alternative?

As progressives cheer the dissolution of our southern border and, by extension, our sovereignty, it’s worth looking at the benefits of non-citizenship illegal aliens now enjoy and comparing them to the responsibilities of citizenship.

Most people don’t like paying taxes. But it’s the price of citizenship, and if we don’t we face losing our property and jail time. We also do it because the government has legitimate functions that only it can do and that need to be paid for. It also does way more than it needs to or should, but that’s an argument for another time.

But the people flooding our border haven’t paid taxes and, to be honest, have no real prospects for paying taxes in the future, if they stay.

Most do not speak English, have no education and no real skills to contribute to the economy. No doubt some have potential in the future. But we don’t live in the future, and the total number who will fulfill that potential are almost as rare as unicorns.

Until those unicorns can draft a business plan, they all will be a drain on the economy, an economy that even after five “Recovery Summers” can’t employ enough Americans in full-time positions to return us to where we were before the last recession.

The jobs they take while they await their immigration hearings – and they will take jobs even though they aren’t legally allowed to – will be under-the-table jobs. No taxes will be paid. More importantly, those jobs won’t go to Americans who would have paid taxes on their wages. Medicare taxes will not be paid. Social Security taxes will not be paid. And the employers who hire them, illegally, for cash will save money too, not having to pay their share of taxes or for benefits.

In addition to the jobs they will fill, they will get sick. Everyone, citizen or not, can show up at an emergency room and get health care. The difference is a citizen will get a bill, but an illegal alien will not. A citizen is required to buy insurance; an illegal alien is not. A citizen who doesn’t buy insurance eventually will be forced to pay a fine for not following the law and may have to declare bankruptcy to pay for services received. Illegal aliens can…well, you get the idea.

Citizens who fall on hard times, such as the Obama economy, can avail themselves of the social safety net until they get back on their feet. But illegals can too. Sure, it’s against the law for illegal aliens to receive welfare, but the few documents that are required can be purchased easily on the black market. Identity theft is rampant in the illegal alien community, as it were.

And if you really want some money, house Illegal alien children for $1,054 per child,m paid for by YOU the Taxpayers! Such a Deal! :)

Moreover, many states offer driver’s licenses and in-state tuition to illegals. You, as a citizen, can’t attend a college in another state without paying full-freight, but someone in the country illegally can. Illegal aliens are even boarding domestic flights without photo IDs, but you can’t. Advantage illegals.

After all, you’re just a racist if you object!

As an American citizen you can be arrested for allowing your children to play in front of your house, as happened in 2012, or for allowing them to play in a park without you hovering over them, as happened this month. As an illegal alien, you can pay a human trafficker up to $10,000 to smuggle your child thousands of miles through several countries, have them enter the country illegally, and they’ll get free health care, food, housing and a plane ticket to be reunited with you.

Imagine placing an ad on Craig’s List seeking a stranger to drive your minor child from Los Angeles to St. Louis for cash. Forget not having anyone in St. Louis waiting for them; you’re just sending them to the city. How long do you suspect it would be before a SWAT team and child protective services kicked in your door? A half-hour at most?

But the open borders government agencies will pay you per child.

http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2014/07/17/leftist-sanctimony/

That’s what these illegal aliens who’ve sent for their kids to join them here – and many, if not most, of the unaccompanied minors are sent for by their parents, not sent by them – are doing. Their children aren’t being taking into protective custody by social services, the parents aren’t being arrested or even investigated; they’re being reunited with their illegal alien children. And it’s all being done on our dime.

We aren’t there yet, but we’re fast approaching a time when it’s more advantageous to be in the United States illegally than it is to be a law-abiding citizen. If we don’t gain control of our borders and reclaim our sovereignty, we will jump that shark in the next 10 years. The president’s much ballyhooed “comprehensive immigration reform” won’t make a dent in the real problem of punishing citizens but will incentivize law breaking.

But it will make millions of new loyal Welfare Democrats who will expect you to pay for their every whim.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2421645386001/inside-the-booming-food-stamp-program-in-florida/#sp=show-clips

fter all you don’t want to be a mean old RACIST now do you? :)

We are no longer talking about a situation that can be assuaged by a “Little Dutch Boy” approach. The dike has collapsed, and we’re all wet. (Derek Hunter)

Can you say “dike” without the Left calling you a homophobe? :)

After all…

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) slammed Republicans at a news conference Thursday, saying, “It’s stunning to me how the Republicans have tried to politicize this issue. We must act in the best interest … of the children … and that means we need the resources to get that job done.”

Be at peace that The Left’s Sanctimony is intact as you jump that shark!

The O-bus

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

The Can’t Do Spirit

Cultural Inertia: Remember how 45 years ago we were suddenly able to say: “If we can send a man to the moon, why can’t we (fill in the blank)”? If only we could say the same today.

If we can’t even send a man into Orbit, we can’t close our border! :)

It’s worth remembering Neil Armstrong’s July 21, 1969 “giant leap for mankind,” if only as a measure of what the country used to be able to accomplish, but increasingly can’t do today. When President Kennedy announced his goal of “sending a man to the moon and returning him safely to earth” in less than nine years, it was a laughably audacious promise.

But we did it. And Kennedy was a DEMOCRAT. Not one that the current crop of extreme leftist would elect though…

By May 1961, all the country had managed to achieve in space was to toss Alan Shepard up in a 15-minute suborbital flight powered by a tiny Redstone rocket.

Scientists and engineers still hadn’t decided how they’d land on the moon (they didn’t settle on the lunar lander concept until late 1962). The massive F-1 engines needed to lift the Saturn V rocket off the ground were still mostly theoretical. And only a handful of people were even involved in space flight at the time.

Yet the country brushed aside bureaucratic obstacles, quickly overcame political and technical setbacks and met Kennedy’s goal with time to spare.

Today, despite all the technological advances, a calcified NASA has spent nearly a decade just trying to build an updated version of the Apollo command module, with a manned mission at least six more years away.

Sure, Kennedy had the Cold War space race to motivate the country. But that wasn’t the only reason Apollo succeeded. Up until then, whatever the project, Americans would set their minds to it and just get it done.

But they “didn’t build that”. :) And think how imperialistic it was… :)

Not so today. It took just 16 years to build the Brooklyn Bridge — a true engineering marvel of the time — after the New York state legislature approved it in 1867.

Today, officials from Ohio and Kentucky have been dithering over a much-needed bridge across the Ohio River for a more than a decade, and at best it will take another decade before it’s finally built.

We can’t even complete a pipeline anymore. But we will bribe people with a $1,000 per illegal alien child bordered in an American home!!

In the mid-1930s, workers spent a mere 400 days building the Empire State Building. It took more than 3,600 days to wade through the red tape and politics and complete the replacement for the Twin Towers.

The country built the 47,000-mile Interstate Highway System in 35 years. But 34 years after Maryland decided to build a 19-mile Intercounty Connector, that stretch of highway is still under construction.

When President Obama was running for re-election in 2012, he loved to talk about how America used to be able to do “big things.” A favorite example of his was the Hoover Dam. Obama was mainly using it as a prop to push for more public spending.

But the problem isn’t a big enough federal budget.

The problem is that a massive army of NIMBY and “public interest” groups, environmentalists and regulators has grown up in recent decades — a force with the singular mission of saying “no” to anything and everything anyone tries to do.

From an engineering perspective, anyone could build a Hoover Dam today — or an oil pipeline for that matter — but who’d be dumb enough to propose such a thing, knowing the ferocious public attacks, exhaustive “environmental reviews” and endless lawsuits they’d face?

Environmentalists these days even block “clean energy” windmill farms and solar power plants because of the damage they’ll allegedly cause to local ecosystems.

Back in 1961, it would have been hard to believe humans were technically capable of reaching the moon.

Today, it’s impossible to believe that any project of Apollo’s scale could overcome the nation’s festering can’t-do spirit.

It can’t.

But we can blame that on Bush too.. :)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

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

The Vacation is The Vacation!

As pro-Russian separatists and the Ukrainian government traded charges about who was behind the surface-to-air missile that downed a Malaysia Airlines jet with 298 aboard Thursday, Ukraine’s separatist rebels on Friday said they have found “most” of the plane’s recording devices.

The Boeing 777 bound for Kuala Lumpur from Amsterdam was shot down Thursday afternoon at cruising altitude about 35 miles from the border, according to Anton Gerashenko, an adviser to Ukraine’s Interior Minister.

Malaysia Airlines originally said there were 280 passengers and a crew of 15 aboard the flight, though it later upped the number of passengers to 283 to account for three infants.

The flight manifest reportedly included the names of 23 Americans, though U.S. officials were unable to confirm Thursday whether any Americans were onboard the plane.

Meanwhile, the vacation for our King continues… :)

It “may” be a tragedy. Kinda like the Benghazi 4 might actually be dead…

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/07/17/with-ukraine-crisis-unfolding-obama-presses-forward-with-burger-joint-photo-op-infrastructure-speech-n1863240

The White House brushed off concerns Friday that, with the crisis in Crimea intensifying, now might not be the best time for President Obama — and his vice president — to go on vacation. 

The travel schedules of both the president and Vice President Biden have come under scrutiny, given the rapidly changing situation in Ukraine. Obama, already in Florida to talk about education, was planning to spend some family time this weekend in Key Largo, Fla., where he arrived late in the day. Biden, meanwhile, will be in the Virgin Islands. 

Despite some apparent discussion over cutting the president’s trip short, White House spokesman Josh Earnest indicated the president would be able to handle the crisis from out of the office. 

“The president over the course of a very busy week has maintained his schedule and his ability to monitor ongoing events in Ukraine. I would anticipate that he’ll do the same thing this weekend,” Earnest said. “And the fact of the matter is what the president is doing this weekend in Florida is essentially what the president will be doing if he stayed back at the White House. It’s just that the weather will be a little warmer.” 

He said Obama plans to spend time with his wife and daughters while in the Keys. “There are some recreational amenities on the property, including workout facilities, tennis courts, a couple of golf courses,” he noted.

The King is on vacation…take a message….

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

Leftist Sanctimony

While Obama is off golfing for 16 days, spending millions of dollars relaxing…

HOUSTON, Texas–An ad placed in the Penny Saver Newspaper in Murrieta, California is seeking “loving, compassionate parents to provide a loving home” for illegal immigrant minors, according to a local reader of the publication. 

Lisa Maloney Vinton, a Murrieta resident, provided Breitbart Texas with a purported copy of the advertisement, which was put up by the Crittenton Services and Foster Family Agency. It says, “Help heal the wounds … for children in foster care programs including survivors of human trafficking and unaccompanied refugee minors.” 

Parents who offer up their homes could have a child placed in their home in “as short as 45 days” and be paid up to $6,054 per month, according to the advertisement. 

Cindy Lemos, another Murrieta resident, told Breitbart Texas that she called the number on the advertisement. She said, “I called this afternoon and the gentlemen I spoke to told me that they are receiving the illegal immigrants but that none of them are under the age of 12. I asked him where all the younger children were… he told me that he was wondering the exact same thing.”]

The foster immigrant children ad was placed by the Crittenton Services and Foster Family Agency – FFA.

When Benswann.com contacted the FFA journalists learned:

“Those willing to a take in a child under the age of 16 can receive up to $854.00 tax free per month. For those taking in a child over 16, the total is $1,008.00 per month in reimbursement. If you have a 5 bedroom house and can take in as many as 6 children, you can receive reimbursement of up to $6,054.00 per month tax free.”

Reimbursement for the monthly payments is reportedly provided by multiple state and local grants for American children, but in the case of the “unaccompanied refugee minors,” the entire cost is paid by the federal government. Regardless of the government program or grant used to pay the expense, all funds stem from taxpayer dollars.

So if bribery isn’t your thing…How about naked arrogance….

Michelle Malkin: They’ve blown it again, big time. They just can’t help themselves.

Leftist Sanctimony will do that…. :)

During the Bush years, the open-borders movement won over bleeding hearts in the White House but alienated the American public with radical displays of La Raza (“The Race”) militancy, desecrated American flags and Che Guevara shirt-wearing, fist-thrusting marches across the country.

Left-wing public relations consultants taught the amnesty mob to tone it down, turn the flags right-side up and stop threatening Reconquista. But the phony red-white-and-blue dye job didn’t last. The movement’s true extremist, entitled roots can’t be concealed for long.

On Monday, leading illegal-alien journalist turned activist Jose Antonio Vargas engaged in a foolish stunt that will backfire on him and his allies in the media and Hollywood and on Capitol Hill. An openly defiant law-breaker who proudly calls himself “the most privileged undocumented immigrant in the country,” Vargas traveled to Texas with a film crew to commune with illegal aliens surging across the border.

But on his way out of the Rio Grande Valley, the former Washington Post reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner was detained at the McAllen, Texas, airport by Customs and Border Patrol. He was attempting to clear security and board a flight without legally required U.S. identification.

No surprise: Vargas initially made it past the buffoons at the TSA.

The media-savvy amnesty agitator telegraphed the stunt beforehand in a piece for Politico. He hyped sympathetic coverage from the liberal Huffington Post. He tweeted a photo of his Philippine passport and a pocket Constitution, which he audaciously presented to authorities in lieu of valid ID.

And then Vargas’ publicity minions captured and tweeted the exact moment when he was handcuffed, looking shocked and aggrieved that federal law enforcement officers would actually — gasp! — enforce the law.

An illegal-alien Icarus, Vargas had been riding high after movie theaters and CNN aired his biographical, pro-illegal immigration documentary. His amnesty activism is backed by the progressive Tides Center, a project of George Soros and former ACORN chief organizer Drummond Pike. To his elite friends in the no-borders industry, he’s a “hero.”

Journalists, celebrities and politicians immediately swallowed the propaganda bait, rallying to their privileged pal’s side. “#DontDeportJose,” they all cried in an orchestrated Twitter campaign.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people from around the world are waiting patiently for their backlogged visa and green card applications to be reviewed.

Vargas’ outraged reporter friends don’t have much sympathy for those would-be Americans. Or for the Americans who’ve dedicated their lives to protecting homeland security and upholding our laws. Vargas’ enablers jumped to condemn the CBP employees in McAllen for doing their jobs and demanded that he be freed from “unfair” and “out of hand” detention, as one hysterical Roll Call reporter put it.

Unfair and out of hand?

As I’ve noted previously, Vargas came here from the Philippines as a child, but knowingly broke multiple laws as an adult in order to stay in the country. After being supplied with a fake passport with a fake name, a fake green card and a bogus Social Security number, he committed perjury repeatedly on federal I-9 employment eligibility forms. In 2002, while pursuing his journalism career goals, an immigration lawyer told him he needed to accept the consequences of his law-breaking and return to his native Philippines. He ignored the counsel and instead used a friend’s address to obtain an Oregon driver’s license under false pretenses. It gave him an eight-year golden ticket to travel by car, board trains and airplanes, work at prestigious newspapers, and even gain access to the White House — where crack Secret Service agents allowed him to attend a state dinner using his bogus Social Security number.

The Vargas stunt will backfire because it is a smug and emblematic middle finger to everyone outside the D.C.-Manhattan bubble who believes in following the rules. As legal immigrant Asoka Samarasinghe wrote to me on Monday, “Michelle, this guy is a slap to the face of all us legal immigrants and citizens.”

As for “due process,” celebrity illegal alien Vargas will undoubtedly get more bites at the immigration court and federal appeals apple than law-abiding citizens will ever enjoy (see Zeituni Onyango).

But the sob-story violins play on. Democratic New York Mayor Bill de Blasio sanctimoniously tweeted Monday afternoon: “I stand in solidarity with journalist and advocate [Vargas]. He exemplifies what America is about.”

Only if “America” means protecting leftist elitists from the consequences of their reckless, arrogant actions.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

And your get the bill…Bend over… :)

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

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

The Delusion of the The King

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday the Obama administration’s foreign policies in a number of areas have enhanced the world’s “tranquility” – a word that raised eyebrows as reporters pointed to situations in Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Ukraine and the South China Sea.

More than one reporter during Monday’s press briefing referred to a front-page Wall Street Journal article highlighting some of those crises, and citing security strategists as saying “the breadth of global instability now unfolding hasn’t been seen since the late 1970s.”

“How does the White House react to the notion that the president is a bystander to all these crises?” asked Fox News’ Ed Henry, citing the widening gaps between the sides in the Iranian nuclear talks, the conflict in and around Gaza, and the Syrian civil war.

“I think that there have been a number of situations in which you’ve seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way, that has substantially furthered American interests and substantially improved the, uh, you know, the – the tranquility of the global community,” Earnest replied.

If I didn’t think they actually are that arrogant and out to lunch with reality I would laugh. But all I can do is cry.

ABC News’ Jon Karl quoted Attorney General Eric Holder’s assessment in an interview aired Sunday that the terrorist potential arising from Westerners returning home after fighting in Syria was “more frightening than anything I think I’ve seen as attorney general.”

Karl then pointed to “what’s looking like an all-out war” between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, Sunni jihadist successes in “taking over vast territory in Iraq and in Syria,” Russian aggression in Ukraine, and concerns about Chinese handling of territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

“It doesn’t seem like a time to be touting tranquility on the international scene,” he told Earnest. “Do you think the president’s foreign policy bears any responsibility for any of this, or is there anything he can do about any of this?”

Earnest said President Obama’s thinking about foreign policy was guided by one core principle – “the national security interests of the United States of America.”

Syria chamical weapons deal touted

He raised as examples of actions that advanced American interests the negotiated removal of the Assad regime’s “declared” chemical weapons (CW) stockpile, and mediation in recent days between “two competing presidential candidates in Afghanistan, who were prepared to sort of take that process off the rails.”

Secretary of State John Kerry’s efforts in brokering of an agreement calling for a full audit of votes in an Afghan election marred by allegations of rigging have drawn praise, although it will be weeks yet before the deal’s success or otherwise will be seen.

The Syria chemical deal has brought fewer plaudits from outside the administration, however. The Assad regime slow-walked the process, missing multiple deadlines set by the international community in a clearly-defined program of action.

Questions also remain about the completeness of its declaration – there are suspicions it may have kept some CW back – and the regime is also accused of using chlorine gas in the fighting this year.

Moreover, one key part of the CW agreement that has not been achieved is the destruction of 12 Syrian CW production facilities, a process that was meant to have begun last December and been completed by March 15. Almost four months after that deadline the 12 facilities, five of them located underground, remain standing.

“Syria continues to drag its feet in complying with its obligation to destroy chemical weapons production facilities,” U.S. ambassador to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Robert Mikulak, told a meeting of the body’s executive council last week.

“The international community has questions that must be adequately answered by Syria regarding the declaration of its entire chemical weapons program,” he said.

Mikulak added that the U.S. “remains deeply concerned by the reports of systematic use of chlorine gas and other chemicals in opposition areas by Syrian government forces.”

Apart from questions about the agreement’s implementation, some critics also believe the deal overall left President Bashar Assad’s regime stronger, because it transformed him in the space of several days from a pariah who had been facing promised U.S. airstrikes for using chemical agents to kill more than 1,400 people, to a partner whose cooperation was needed to achieve the touted CW handover. (CNS)

Ministry of Truth: it is responsible for any necessary falsification of historical events. In another sense, and in keeping with the concept of doublethink, the ministry is aptly named, in that it creates/manufactures “truth” in the Newspeak sense of the word. The book describes a willful fooling of posterity using doctored historical archives to show a government-approved version of events.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history to change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel, Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Minitrue plays a role as the news media by changing history, and changing the words in articles about events current and past, so that Big Brother and his government are always seen in a good light and can never do any wrong. The content is more propaganda than actual news.

Then there’s just the outright Delusion of The King, a hubris that say they are always right and nothing they do is ever wrong. How can they be wrong, they have only the purest, most saintly of intentions… They are the superior beings. Super Geniuses as it happens!

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

 

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

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

Foaming At the Mouth

By Eric Boehm | Watchdog.org

MINNEAPOLIS — They came for your plastic bags, and now they’re coming for your take-out trays.

On Tuesday (June 2014), the D.C. Council voted to ban the use of single-use disposable containers made from the material in restaurants and cafés.

Noe listen to the liberals retort at then end of this article (takepart.com): Don’t pity it too much, though. Because D.C.’s ban won’t take effect until Jan. 1, 2016, the industry still has two years to profit from material that pollutes the environment.

Subtle isn’t it? :)  It’s coming to a Liberal run town near you.

Minneapolis City Councilman Andrew Johnson says the largest city in Minnesota should join an ever-growing list of cities to ban foam containers, like the ones used by many restaurants for take-out food or hot tea and coffee.

The plastic foam containers will be prohibited on Earth Day, April 22, of next year. Subtle aren’t they? :)

In other words, he wants Minneapolis residents to eat cold take-out for the rest of forever.

TAKE AWAY YOUR TAKE-OUT: A proposed ban on certain types of foam dishes would leave residents of Minneapolis eating cold take-out.

Johnson did not return calls for comment, but he told KARE-11 that foam containers are bad for the environment and unhealthy for Minnesotans.

“There are better alternatives out there,” he told the TV station.

Opponents to the ban have expressed concern that eliminating plastic foam will lead to an increase in prices. Johnson’s hope is that once companies start buying environmentally sustainable containers, costs will decrease. (City pages)

Just Like Your Health Care under ObamaCare, remember that $2500 savings they promised? :)

But rather than educate the public about the problems with foam containers or encourage businesses to use a different packaging material, Johnson said the best solution is to impose his own preferences on city businesses and their customers.

Starting next spring, Portland will be among relatively few communities in New England with both a bag fee and a ban on the type of polystyrene foam that’s commonly used in coffee cups and take-out food containers, businesses will have until April 15, 2015, to switch their packaging.

The fee will be charged for both plastic and paper bags, with the stores keeping the money.Dry cleaners, restaurants and farmers markets will be exempt.

“I think we want to do this because Maine and Portland care about the environment,” said Councilor Jon Hinck, who voted for the measures along with Councilors Ed Suslovic, Jill Duson, David Marshall and Kevin Donoghue and Mayor Michael Brennan.

Imposing our will is “good for you”. :)

Andy Charles, who operates Haven’s Candies stores, called the bag fee a “double tax” because the 5 cents will be subject to the state’s sales tax .(Press Herald)

Subtle, very subtle… :)

New York City officials also recently voted to ban foam cups and to-go containers beginning in 2015. In Massachusetts, Brookline banned both plastic bags and foam containers beginning in November, while both Somerville and Amherst – home to the University of Massachusetts’ flagship campus – began prohibiting food retailers from using polystyrene earlier this year. (Press Herald)

There’s also an economic angle. It’s not profitable enough to recycle the foam containers (even though it is possible to recycle them, contrary to what environmental groups claim), so Minneapolis and most other cities don’t bother to do it.

According to Minnesota Public Radio, it would cost the city about $20,000 to purchase the necessary equipment to make the recycling process more worth-while.

There are more than 2.6 billion pounds of foam — technically known as “flexible polyurethane” —  consumed in the U.S. each year, according to Freedonia, a market research group.

But stopping restaurants in the city from using foam food trays hardly solves the problem. Most of the foam in the environment is the result of packing and shipping supplies, like the giant foam wrappings that come wrapped around new TVs or any other appliance, or used by construction firms.

More than 100 cities in the country already have bans on foam containers, but Minneapolis would be the first city in the Midwest to impose such a rule.  Almost all the others are in California.

Banning foam containers might be fine in Los Angeles or Santa Monica. What’s the worst that could happen to your food when the surrounding air is already a balmy 75 degrees at any time of the year?

But good luck keeping that plate of General Tsao’s chicken warm inside a paper container when the industrial-strength freezer of a Minnesota winter is running full blast (on Jan. 6 of this year, the high temperature in the Twin Cities was -12 degrees.  Yes, the “high” temperature.)

For his attempt to tell businesses what they use for take-out trays, Johnson brings home our “Nanny-state city of the week” award to Minneapolis. His prize is a plate of cold plate of poutine and lukewarm cup of Caribou coffee.

For the uninitiated a poutine is a Canadian staple of very unhealthy foods involving fries, a protein, gravy, and cheesy curds. This is NOT an Obama approved meal!!

We are from the Government and we are here to save you from yourself.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Color of Skin

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

The Race Card Again…

Just in case you forgot for a nano-second that any disagreement with King Obama and Herr Holder is “racist”…

Attorney General Eric Holder said Sunday he and President Obama have been targets of “a racial animus” by some of the administration’s political opponents.

“There’s a certain level of vehemence, it seems to me, that’s directed at me [and] directed at the president,” Holder told ABC. “You know, people talking about taking their country back. … There’s a certain racial component to this for some people. I don’t think this is the thing that is a main driver, but for some there’s a racial animus.”

Holder said the nation is in “a fundamentally better place than we were 50 years ago.”

I would disagree. And guess who made it as bad or worse… :)

“We’ve made lots of progress,” he said. “I sit here as the first African-American attorney general, serving the first African-American president of the United States. And that has to show that we have made a great deal of progress.

But your policies have made it worse. But we can’t criticize that without being “racist” now can we? :)

“But there’s still more we have to travel along this road so we get to the place that is consistent with our founding ideals,” he said.

Watch America: The Movie. Oh, that’s right, it’s a “right wing” extremist” “propaganda” film. :)

He also stood by his controversial comments made during Obama’s first year in office, in which he said the U.S. was a “nation of cowards” when it comes to race.

“I wouldn’t walk away from that speech,” Holder said. “I think we are still a nation that is too afraid to confront racial issues,” rarely engaging “one another across the color line [to] talk about racial issues.”

No, you just make it so if we confront YOU, then it’s “racist” so you’re the one with the problem.

The attorney general also pointed to Republican efforts to enact stricter voter ID laws in southern States as evidence that more needed to be done to protect minority rights. Republicans have maintained the efforts are designed to prevent voter fraud, while Democrats say instances of fraud are exceedingly rare, and far outpaced by the minority population that does not have identification that would be unable to vote.

Not true. But hey, all those million of Illegals…I mean New Welfare Democrats…have to be kissed up to.

Holder called the laws “political efforts” designed to make it “more difficult” for “groups that are not supportive of those in power” to “have access to the ballot.”

Democrats want to make the ballot irrelevant. I’d call that “power”, wouldn’t you?

“Who is disproportionately impacted by them? Young people, African Americans, Hispanics, older people, people who, for whatever reason, aren’t necessarily supportive of the Republican Party,” Holder said, adding that “this notion that there is widespread in-person voter fraud is simply belied by the facts.”

Yeah, that’s the ideological Alinsky hardline. :)

Holder said the Justice Department was planning legal challenges of new voting laws in Ohio and Wisconsin. It has previously filed suit in Texas and North Carolina.

“I’m attorney general of the United States. … I will not allow people to take away that which people gave their lives to give, and that is the ability for the American people to vote,” Holder said. (The Hill)

VOTER FOR THE DEMOCRAT, THE OTHER GUY’S a “RACIST” ASSHOLE and you don’t vote for them now do you, Citizen? :)

 

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

To Hoodwink

“Political language,” warned George Orwell, “is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Politicians understand that words matter and can be used to trick people. Which is why they can hardly be trusted to express themselves candidly in their own campaigns — or, heaven forbid, write ballot titles for important measures upon which citizens will vote.

Earlier this year, citizens in Phoenix, Arizona, gathered more than 50,000 voter signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to reform their public employee pension system. The initiative moves new city hires to a 401(k)-style retirement system. While it does not affect any retirement benefits already earned by current workers or retirees, the measure would also end what’s known as “pension spiking,” the practice whereby government workers manipulate overtime, vacation and sick leave in their final months and years of employment to dramatically increase their pension payments for as long as they live.

Spiking costs city taxpayers $12 million a year.

(and they just laid off a whole bunch of cops because of “the budget”)

That’s especially troublesome considering the pension system is already underfunded by $1.5 billion.

The annual price tag to the city for the pension mess has grown a whopping 40 percent since 2011. In dollar terms, Phoenix pension costs have gone from $35 million in 2003 to $266 million this year. Not surprisingly, the tab for pensions is burning a huge hole in the budget, threatening both higher taxes and service reductions. The city’s credit rating has already been downgraded

The one thing the initiative doesn’t touch? Pensions for policemen and fire fighters. These public safety workers are part of a statewide system, which is why the initiative specifically states that it does not “affect individuals who are members of, or are eligible to join, any other public retirement system in the State of Arizona such as the Public Safety Employees’ Retirement System.”

The Phoenix Pension Reform Act seems quite popular with the public, but not with public employee unions or a majority of the Phoenix City Council. Last week, the council officially set the ballot language voters will read when they go to the polls in November. Knowing the political popularity of police and fire, the council wrote a title claiming the measure would prevent the city from supporting public safety employees through the statewide system.

“The action by the Phoenix City Council last week to try to kill a pension reform initiative by adopting a wildly misleading ballot description was dirty,” wrote Arizona Republic columnist Robert Robb. He concluded by noting that the council “betrayed the voters and dishonored themselves.”

Que sera, sera.

This week, in a state far from Arizona, but also starting with the letter “A,” I visited with the leaders of Arkansas Term Limits, a grassroots group formed to oppose Issue 3, which was placed on this November’s ballot by state legislators.

What is Issue 3?

When Arkansans step into the voting booth, they’ll see the following language: “An Amendment Regulating Contributions to Candidates for State or Local Office, Barring Gifts from Lobbyists to Certain State Officials, Providing for Setting Salaries for Certain State Officials, and Setting Term Limits for Members of the General Assembly.”

It is what voters won’t be told that has term limits supporters up in arms. You see, Issue 3 doesn’t set term limits at all. Voters already did that by citizen initiative back in 1992 — and then reaffirmed those same limits in 2004, when state legislators tried a different scam to undo them.

Issue 3 re-sets term limits . . . doubling time allowed, or more!

Currently, state representatives are limited to three two-year terms or six years. Issue 3 would allow them more than twice that: eight terms or 16 years. State senators are now capped at two four-year terms or eight years. Issue 3 doubles that limit to four terms or 16 years.

If state legislators desire weaker term limits (and insist on being told loudly NO by the electorate), then let them put the measure on the ballot and provide voters the facts necessary to decide. But since legislators know darn good and well that voters do not support weakening the limits, their plan is simply to hoodwink the people.

The people they say they serve.

Furthermore, the anti-term limits amendment is being pushed as an ethics reform — a very unethical ethics reform. It’s not enough that these wannabe careerists attempt to trick voters about “setting” term limits, they also seek to sneak this most significant provision by voters by hiding it behind so-called ethics reforms that might appeal to voters.

Again and again, our representatives not only fail to represent us, they aggressively lie and cheat us. Thank goodness, we still have the right under the First Amendment to speak out and criticize their reprehensible behavior.

Of course, those pesky free speech rights may be jettisoned, too, if politicians have their way. As I wrote in this space weeks ago, Senate Joint Resolution 19 — introduced by U.S. Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) and co-sponsored by 45 other Democrat senators — would take a Sharpie and cross “freedom of speech” out of our Bill of Rights, replacing the First Amendment’s restriction that “Congress shall pass no law” with giving Congress complete, unrestrained power to control any and all fundraising and spending in congressional elections.

SJR 19 is repeatedly billed as overturning Citizens United and other U.S. Supreme Court decisions, thus ending “corporate personhood.” But it just simply doesn’t do that. Instead, it hands all power to Congress, which may or may not reverse those decisions in the course of regulating their own campaigns and the money their challengers and other individuals and groups may raise or spend against them.

After passage of SJR 19, if Congress enacted a statute banning citizens from spending any money that could conceivably be construed as affecting a congressional race, it would be perfectly constitutional. Your First Amendment right to speak out to your fellow citizens?

What First Amendment right?

Last Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to send this constitutional amendment to the full Senate. (townhall)

In the past, Phoenix city politics have sometimes been sneaky. Former Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimsza was fond of holding special elections to raise taxes, enabling supporters to control turnout. I called them “by invitation only” elections.

But until now, Phoenix city politics have never been dirty. The action by the Phoenix City Council last week to try to kill a pension reform initiative by adopting a wildly misleading ballot description was dirty.

The initiative, Proposition 401, would change Phoenix’s pension program for new hires to a 401(k) style plan.

City police and firefighters aren’t part of the city retirement system. They are part of a state-administered plan.

The initiative plainly states that it doesn’t affect the pension plan for cops and firefighters. The intent section declares it and the substantive sections are written to apply only to city-administered pension programs.

Yet the ballot language adopted by the council says that, if Prop. 401 is adopted, the city would be forbidden to make pension contributions to the state system for cops and firefighters.

The Old “yes” is No and No is “Yes”. :)

The legal argument that the initiative could be read to have this effect is severely tortured. It’s not even what the lawyers call a colorable argument. It relies on extreme pettifogging.

Moreover, there’s clearly a better legal argument on the other side, that passage of the initiative has no effect on those eligible to join the state retirement system for public safety workers.

Yet the ballot language flatly declares that cops and firefighters, as a matter of uncontested fact, would be out of luck. No argument. No question.

The real perversity is that if Proposition 401 passes, there’s no question that the city council and city staff would take the legal position that contributions to the state system for public safety workers could continue. In other words, that the ballot language was what it is: a ruse.

I’ve been around politics a long time and don’t expect politicians not to engage in politics. Yet there are times when even the crassest politicians are expected to act dispassionately and honorably. Crafting ballot language is one of those occasions. The voters are entitled to a neutral description of what they are being asked to decide, not language declaring as uncontested fact something very much subject to disputation.

Mayor Greg Stanton and the five council members who adopted this propagandistic ballot language – Kate Gallego, Michael Nowakowski, Laura Pastor, Daniel Valenzuela and Thelda Williams — have betrayed the voters and dishonored themselves. (phoenixpensionreform.com)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

 

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