Doctor’s View

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

 

You shouldn’t judge the Affordable Care Act based on headlines or by listening to politicians or talking heads. I tried for a while, but only heard wildly conflicting stories that seemed to have little basis in reality.

Instead, you should ask someone who actually deals with the law on a daily basis — a doctor, for instance.

The Physicians Foundation did exactly that in its “2014 Survey of American Physicians,” which was released last month. The survey, which reached over 80% of doctors in the U.S. and elicited responses from some 20,000, is doctors’ collective report card on the Affordable Care Act’s first four years.

The grades aren’t good. Only 25% of doctors give it an “A” or a “B” grade. Nearly half ( 46%) give it a “D” or an “F”.

I can help explain why so many of us are fed up with the law: In many cases, it shifts our focus from patients to paperwork, from finding cures to filing documents.

The survey indicates that physicians now spend 20% of their time on non-clinical paperwork. I now spend many hours at a desk or a computer rather than at the bedside assisting patients. This isn’t why I became a doctor.

Unsurprisingly, this shift negatively influences patients’ access to health care — doctors simply don’t have the time to see the same number of patients.

The survey indicates that 44% of doctors “plan to take one or more steps that would reduce patient access to their services.” This includes “cutting back on patients seen, retiring, working part-time, closing their practice to new patients or seeking a non-clinical job.”

I would add another important effect based on my own observations: Spending less time with patients.

The ACA’s regulatory burden directly bears on these decisions. There are already at least 11,000 pages of government regulations related to the law. Some of it applies to insurers, some of it applies to doctors and some applies to the relationship between the two.

No matter who it applies to, it adds bureaucratic hassles to the health care process that may impact your doctors’ ability to attend to your medical needs.

It should come as no surprise, then, that 69% of physicians “believe their clinical autonomy is sometimes or often limited,” meaning they have a diminished ability to make medical decisions in consultation with patients.

And “limited” may be an understatement. The ACA’s implementation has also coincided with a dramatic decline in private practice — the small, personal doctors’ offices that have been in local communities for generations.

The number of private-practice doctors has dropped by nearly half in a mere six years, with the most dramatic drops occurring in the four years since the Affordable Care Act was signed into law.

According to the survey, 35% of physicians are now independent practice owners. In 2012, half were independent. In 2008 — two years before the ACA was passed — 62% were independent. In the last two years alone, the number of solo practitioners has dropped from 25% to 17%.

No wonder: Private and solo practitioners often lack the staff and the financial resources required to implement and keep up with the ACA’s dramatic changes to medicine.

The Physicians Foundation survey indicates that our country’s health care is still going in the wrong direction. Of course, it’s important to note that the Affordable Care Act is only one of many issues affecting doctors’ decisions and outlook.

But it is not a good sign that in the law’s first few years, physicians are seeing fewer patients, private practices are disappearing and nearly twice as many doctors believe the law is harming, not helping, American health care.

• Fodeman is an internal medicine doctor practicing in Tucson, Ariz. (IBD)

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

Oppression Index

Jon Gabriel, Richochet.com: We’ve all argued with liberals, especially online. The issue could be health care, tax rates or city zoning rules, but they’ll quickly turn their policy disagreement into personal attacks.

Conservative: “I think hiking the minimum wage will reduce jobs.”
Progressive: “You would say that, RICH RETHUGLICAN!”
Conservative: “Actually, I’m lower middle class, so…”
Progressive: “Are you denying your WHITE privilege?”
Conservative: “Well, I’m Asian, and…”
Progressive: “I’m glad the PATRIARCHY protects your precious job!”
Conservative: “Wrong again. I’m a woman.”
Progressive: “Probably sitting at home baking cookies for your husband!”
Conservative: “I’m a lesbian. By the way, who are you?”
Progressive: “Stop voting against your own self-interest by electing old white men like me!”

Mine usually end in being called a racist, a moron, idiot,or some other ad homimem is thrown at me with as much daintiness, precision or “compassion” and tolerance as an armed Nuclear Warhead.

The argument gets trickier when progressives argue with each other. Since they aren’t used to debating the substance of issues, they revert to form. The goal is always to find who is more of a victim:

Prog 1: “We need to raise the minimum wage to $15!”
Prog 2: “No way, oppressor! $25 an hour!”
Prog 1: “Oh, you think a black man like me should just keep my mouth shut?!”
Prog 2: “Shut up, homophobe! My lesbian sisters need ‘$25 to Stay Alive!’ Want a bumper sticker?”
Prog 1: “As a Bisexual of Color, I only use mass transit, planet raper!”
Prog 2: “Oh yeah, well my last name is Gomez and I was raised by a single mom!”
Prog 1: “My mom died of breast cancer when I was 12!”
Prog 2: “How dare you speak that way to a proud working-class Latina lesbian with transient fibromyalgia!”

The key isn’t to discover the best solution, but to prove one’s superior moral authority. A progressive can only be the winner if he proves he’s the biggest loser.

Or at the very least that they are morally and intellectually superior (in their own mind) to you, you low-life, knuckle dragging Neanderthal idiot. :)

I’ve decided to help my liberal friends save time with an easy quiz. By printing and filling out the form below, they can quickly determine who is more victimized and therefore the victor in any given argument:

OppressionIndex

Now they can be happy about their oppression and complete moral authority to oppress you and make you adhere to THEIR agenda or else!

After all, it’s for your own good. They are Homo Superior Liberalis, and you’re not! :)


155067 600 Ebola Czar cartoons


155063 600 Spreading Contagions cartoons

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

Pledge

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Progressive Liberalism, and to the Dictatorship for which it stands, one Nation under Government, divisible, with  liberty and social justice for the faithful only.”

Oh, am I going to get labelled a homophobe and a “hater” again for this one. :)
Oh well. They’d do it anyways. Reality doesn’t matter, the Narrative does.
But the Liberal’s favorite cudgel of social and legal enforcement was used again this week when the Federal Government overturned a voter approved State Constitutional Amendment on gay marriage.
The Court of Social Justice & Liberalism has struck again.
I wonder if this applies to all the Illegal Aliens the Feds say we aren’t allowed to catch also? :)
Am I against gay marriage? Nope.
Am I against liberals “supremacy” clause and their need to destroy you in court if you cross them, HELL YEAH!
But since the Leftist  Gay Narrative is that they are next great Civil Right struggle and they are the oppressed and their cause is righteous and “moral”, rational thought is not possible. So you’re a “hater” if you disagree with, period.
So will Wedding venues that refuse to hold a Gay Wedding be subjected to the Gay Mafia Hammer?
Businesses already have to watch out for the  Gay Thought Police prowling around to destroy them if they do or say the wrong thing.
That’s my objection.
But I’m evil automatically in Big Gay Brother’s eyes, so don’t bother listening to me. :)
A little history, that an irrational gay pride activist will not even comprehend in their haze of righteousness, so here goes.
Back in the early 1980’s when I was a freshmen in college I encountered my first gay people ever and you know what I thought– So what, I don’t care. They were good people and that matters more than their sexual proclivities. 
I truly didn’t care.
Actually, they were more accepting and better people than a lot of heterosexuals were back in the day to be honest.
My college roommates for a time consisted of a Gay Man, a Witch, and a Satanist, all under one roof. All friends. No political agenda AT ALL!
And well before it was “fashionable”.
Hell, it was considered I must be gay because I keep hanging around with gays.
So you see, I am not a “hater”. (I can here the leftist snark “Oh, he had a few gay friends…”)
But to the modern gay rights activist I must be a “hater” because I disagree with their need to FORCE their life style and your acceptance of it at the point of a Law Book and destroy good and decent people for the simple fact that they don’t want to kow-tow to them. Those filthy peasants!
After all, THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!
I think they were winning in general without being so heavy-handed and impatient. Their indoctrination techniques over the last generation or so were having the desired effect. But their secular hatred for the “Christian Right” and their own self-aggrandized Sanctimony gets the better of them.
They’d been working on it for decades, just like Obamacare took 90 years, many were patient.
But the squeaky activist gets the law greased.
So I can accept gay marriage because I always have, BUT the activist, no, sorry, you’re just another bunch of totalitarian social justice liberals who want what they want, when they want it, because they want it, and if you object you must therefore, by default be EVIL.
The oppressed become the oppressor, but because of righteous blindness can’t and won’t see it that way.
They are the triumphant aggrieved sackers of Christian Right “extremism”, after all.
Arizona’s governor, Jan Brewer, who has clashed with President Barack Obama over immigration and border security, said in a statement that federal courts have gone against the will of voters and eroded the state’s power. “Simply put, courts should not be in the business of making and changing laws based on their personal agendas,” Brewer said. (AP)
But personal agendas is the only thing The Left understands. They want it, you’re evil, you must be crushed! Period.
The federal court decision bars Arizona officials from enforcing a 1996 state law and a 2008 voter-approved constitutional amendment that outlawed gay marriage.
The Feds are The Supreme Law of The Land and you peasant will do as you are told or else!
So who’s next on their target list. Who do they want to crush next in their crusade to FORCE you do things their way or else??
Among the couples there were Bailey and Majors (outside the courthouse). Though marriage never seemed possible to them in their youth, they began to get hope in recent years as the nation started to debate the legality of same-sex unions.

Despite all the joy they felt Friday, Bailey said it was still hard to express her feelings about such a sweeping social turn-around that she witnessed in her lifetime.

There was no sweeping “social change”. There was a LEGAL hammer slammed into the State’s nuts and then they were cut off. That is not “social change” that is Legal ENFORCEMENT of one’s agenda regardless of any “social” feelings to the contrary.

It’s a LEGAL victory, not a “social” victory.

As The Doctor in “Doctor Who” last week said:

People with guns to their heads cannot mourn”

Big Gay Brother is watching you citizen, and you better not step out of line or else the Thought Police will come down on you…
Next up, Polyamory!!! :)
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

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

Red Ink

It may not be the sexiest topic or the one that gets your venom flowing, but what more important in the long run?  $17.865 Trillion (that a a $Billion since yesterday’s blog-check it). It’s irresponsible. Period. We overspent less this year Yippee!! :(

Red Ink: The White House is crowing that the deficit fell sharply this year. But in fact, there’s little to celebrate. The decline wasn’t a result of sound fiscal policy, and it won’t last.

This week, the Treasury Dept. reported that the total deficit for fiscal 2014, which ended Sept. 30, was $483 billion. Budget director Jacob Lew seized on the news to declare, “Not since World War II, more than 60 years ago, has there been faster and more sustained deficit reduction.”

Of course, time was that a nearly half trillion dollar deficit was the sign of abject failure, not success.

In mid-2008, then Senate Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad said, “If we gave Olympic medals for fiscal irresponsibility, President Bush would take the gold, the silver and the bronze.” That was after the administration said that deficits would hit $482 billion.

Given that Obama’s deficits topped $1 trillion for four years straight, anything less looks good by comparison.

But a closer look at the numbers reveals that this meager good deficit news is not particularly good.

First, the decline came almost entirely from rising corporate and personal income taxes. That’s just a sign that the economy has been growing — albeit painfully slowly. And as people return to work, they start paying taxes again. This growth rate in revenues won’t continue.

And while spending climbed by less than 2% in 2014, that’s misleading as well. A big chunk of the slowdown came from a $25.6 billion drop in unemployment insurance costs, in part because Congress didn’t extend long-term jobless benefits. That’s not likely to be repeated.

It’s true that there has been spending restraint in so-called discretionary programs, largely because Republicans control the House.

Entitlement programs are another matter. Medicaid spending climbed an eye-popping 13% last year as ObamaCare expanded eligibility. Medicare spending went up 2.5%, which seems low but is almost twice the rate of overall federal outlays. Social Security spending climbed 4.4%. Interest on the debt climbed 3.3%.

On top of that, ObamaCare added $13 billion in new subsidies to the ledger.

All of which is why the Congressional Budget Office projects that, starting in 2016, annual deficits will start to march upward, as entitlement growth starts to outstrip even historically high tax revenues.

By the decade’s end, the CBO projects, deficits will once again be in the trillion-dollar range, while debt held by the public will have climbed to 77.2% of GDP.

And this assumes that ObamaCare costs don’t climb faster than expected, and its taxes come in as planned.

That’s not likely, given that several ObamaCare taxes — most notably a tax on devices — are coming in below expectations, while costs are higher than planned.

A Senate Budget Committee analysis released this week finds that ObamaCare’s net costs are running $300 billion ahead of what the CBO had forecast back in 2010, when it claimed that the law would cut the deficit in its first 10 years. Instead, the committee report says, it will likely add $131 billion in red ink by 2019.

The CBO’s projections also assume that interest rates won’t spike, which would send already massive interest payments spiraling up, or that the economy won’t hit another brick wall.

The administration says that the latest deficit news marks “a return to fiscal normalcy.” If deficits as far as the eye can see and massive debt are what they consider normal, we’re in big trouble. (IBD)

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

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

Good News, Bad News

The federal government collected a record amount of taxes in fiscal year 2014, topping $3 trillion in revenue for the first time in its history, according to Treasury Department numbers released Wednesday that show the influx helped drop the deficit to its lowest level under President Obama.

The recovering economy was the key, sending personal and corporate incomes higher — and thus sending more money to Washington. Individual taxes rose 6 percent and corporate-income taxes, which are the best indicator of a business recovery, leapt 17 percent.

Just five years ago, the Treasury took in $2.1 trillion, but fiscal year 2014, which ended Sept. 30, saw the final take at $3.020 trillion. The government spent $3.504 trillion, leaving it $483 billion in the red. That’s down from $1.4 trillion in 2010, and is the lowest figure since 2008.

The good news is, that the government has never taken in more money ever. The bad news, it come from you! You’ve never given more.

The good news is the government has never taken in more money. The bad news is that th THEY STILL SPENT MORE THAN THEY TOOK IN.

The good news, according to Democrats, they spent more than  they took in LESS than they did 5 years ago. The bad news is that they have overspent EVERY SINGLE YEAR since 2008.

But it’s less, so you should be proud of them. :)

So the National Debt stands at $17.864 TRILLION dollar. That’s the good news, because, as the Democrats are proud to say, they overspent less than before.

The bad news is it’s nearly $8 Trillion more debt in 5+ years of Obama. He will spend more and accumulate more debt than all Presidents in the history of the country combined.

But that’s Bush’s fault, you know! :)

And hey, he’s got his drug addiction down 60% from 5 years ago. Of course he did it by taking more money in taxes than ever before and snorting roughly the say, but hey who’s counting that you “hater”! :)

“The president’s policies and a strengthening U.S. economy have resulted in a reduction of the U.S. budget deficit of approximately two-thirds — the fastest sustained deficit reduction since World War II,” Mr. Lew said.

Deficit reduction while the debt rises faster than ever.

Orwell would be proud of your dis-assembly of the language.

Over spending and debt is good, as long as you over spend less every year!

I really should try that with my credit cards… Nah! I’m not that stupid.

Just five years ago, in 2009, the trough of the recession, revenue was only $2.1 trillion. That means it’s leapt $900 billion in just five years.

Spending, meanwhile, has remained relatively flat at about $3.5 trillion.

So he’s overspending less and that’s a good thing… :)

Mr. Obama fought for higher personal income-tax rates in 2012, winning a postelection deal in the so-called “fiscal cliff” debate that saw income taxes hiked for the wealthiest, and payroll tax hikes for everyone. (WT)

President Obama made  a promise to not increase taxes for families making less than $250,000 a year.

Mind you, Obamacare IS a Tax, but it’s not a Tax, it’s a Penalty that is a Tax that isn’t a Tax. but then the Supreme Court said it was a Tax!

But the government has collected more taxes, so when it spends too much they can cheer that they are overspending less and you should be happy for them.

The $$$ drug addicts have cut back. No, they just got people to give them more drugs so they can maintain their habit and it LOOKS like they cut their consumption.

It’s good news for Orwell, bad news for the Country, as a whole.

Rejoice, we Overspend Less. Lets all throw a Party!

“I don’t think the government’s going to get any more out of the American economy. The only way Europe does is because they have the VAT taxes,” Mr. Edwards said, referring the Value Added Tax system that is prominent on the Continent. He predicted VAT would be the next big tax battle in the U.S.

Of course, the addicts still need more money. They can’t survive on a flat income source. THEY WANT MORE!

They NEED MORE! FEED ME!

FEED ME!  The BEAST IS HUNGRY!

And you get a starring role on the BIGGEST LOSER! :)

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

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

The Black Hole of Liberalism

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

So now the federal health bureaucrats in charge of controlling diseases and pandemics want more money to do their jobs. Hmph. Maybe if they hadn’t been so busy squandering their massive government subsidies on everything but their core mission, we taxpayers might actually feel a twinge of sympathy.

At $7 billion, the Centers for Disease Control 2014 budget is nearly 200 percent bigger now than it was in 2000. Those evil, stingy Republicans actually approved CDC funding increases in January larger than what President Obama requested.

What are we getting for this ever-increasing amount of money? Answer: A power-hungry busybody brigade of politicized blame-mongers.

Sounds like typical progressive liberalism to me.

Money, money, it’s always the money. Yet, while Ebola and enterovirus D68 wreak havoc on our health system, the CDC has been busying itself with an ever-widening array of non-disease control campaigns, like these recent crusades:

–Mandatory motorcycle helmet laws. CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden appoints a 15-member “Community Preventive Services Task Force” to promote pet Nanny State projects. An obscure Obamacare rule — Section 4003(b)(1) — stealthily increased the task force’s authority to study “any policies, programs, processes or activities designed to affect or otherwise affecting health at the population level.” Last year, the meddling panel extended the agency’s reach into transportation safety with a call to impose a federal universal motorcycle helmet law on the country. Is riding a Harley a disease? Why is this the CDC’s business?

–Video games and TV violence. At Obama’s behest, in the wake of high-profile school shootings, the CDC scored $10 million last year to study violent video games and media images, as well as to assess “existing strategies for preventing gun violence and identifying the most pressing research questions, with the greatest potential public health impact.” Whatever that means. Why is this the CDC’s business?

–Playground equipment. The CDC’s “Injury Centers” (Did you know there are 13 of them?) have crafted a “national action plan” and funded countless studies to prevent boo-boos and accidents on the nation’s playgrounds. Apparently, there aren’t enough teachers, parents, local school districts, and county and state regulators to police the slides and seesaws. Why is this the CDC’s business?

–“Social norming” in the schools. The CDC has funded studies and campaigns “promoting positive community norms” and “safe, stable, nurturing relationships (SSNRs)” in homes and schools. It’s the mother of all government values clarifications programs. So bad attitudes are now a disease. Again, I ask: Why is this the CDC’s business?

How about more agenda driven BS (from The Hill):

Senate Democrats are asking the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) how research is coming on gun violence.

Democratic Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) and Brian Schatz (Hawaii) sent a letter to CDC Director Tom Frieden on Friday asking for a progress report on the current state of research at the agency on the causes and prevention of gun violence.

“Gun violence kills or injures more than 10,000 children a year. It kills more than 30,000 people each year. It destroys families and damages communities. It is a public health crisis in every sense of the word, and it is critical that we treat it is as such,” the senators wrote.Last year, President Obama asked the CDC to research gun violence after the shooting in Newtown, Conn., where 20 first-graders were killed. Lawmakers asked the CDC if they have a budget and timeline for conducting studies on guns.

“Part of these efforts must include serious substantive research into the problem of gun violence in order to better craft additional strategies with which to combat it,” the letter stated. “Unfortunately, there have been no clear signs that the CDC is beginning to implement this agenda.”

Markey has also called for legislation that would provide the CDC with $10 million a year for six years in order to conduct more research on gun violence prevention and firearms safety. 

That has to be way more important than Ebola because it’s part of THE AGENDA!

After every public health disaster, CDC bureaucrats play the money card while expanding their regulatory and research reach into anti-gun screeds, anti-smoking propaganda, anti-bullying lessons, gender inequity studies and unlimited behavior modification programs that treat individual vices — personal lifestyle choices — as germs to be eradicated.

Just like Liberal educators are always wanting more money for their failures.

As I have said on many, many occasions, Liberals are the Greediest people on Earth.

Their failures are always someone elses fault and because they didn’t have enough money (thus enough power) to do it with (which is also someone else fault). So you have to feed the beast and give them more money and more power so that they can succeed.

But it’s a perpetual motion machine, enough is never enough for a Liberal. They never worker smarter. They don’t have to. They are always on the side of right and Light so denying them anything and everything they want is Darkness. Pure and simple.

Here’s a reminder of what the CDC does with money that’s supposed to go to real disease control. In 2000, the agency essentially lied to Congress about how it spent up to $7.5 million earmarked each year since 1993 for research on the deadly hantavirus. “Instead, apparently without asking Congress, the CDC spent much of the money on other programs that the agency thought needed the funds more,” The Washington Post found. The diversions were impossible to trace because of shoddy CDC bookkeeping practices. The CDC also misspent $22.7 million appropriated for chronic fatigue syndrome and was investigated in 2001 for squandering $13 million on hepatitis C research.

So when a real potential plague rears it’s ugly head?

Time to play the partisan card! (especially 3 weeks from an election)

Democrats have rushed out of the gate with an attack ad against Republicans claiming if only we had spent more money, we would be able to solve the Ebola situation.

It’s a defensive ad that reeks of desperation. At a time when more and more Americans, including millennials, are concluding government just doesn’t work, it probably won’t be effective. And Republicans can respond in kind.

For example, instead of studying Ebola, the National Institutes of Health were studying the propensity of lesbians to be fat.

Then there was the money for a study on wives who calm down quickly.

And the Centers for Disease Control spent its budget on gun violence studies on order of the President as part of his agenda to curtail the second amendment.

The CDC also spent its money to survey what bus riders thought of HIV videos.

Hey, and let’s not forget all the money the CDC spent to convince people to stop smoking and now we need tobacco to manufacture the drug to fight Ebola. Classic. (Red State)

But it’s not their fault! They are the Angels of Best Intentions and Compassion so it must be those evil Satans of Conservatism that have caused all this suffering and strife!

As I pointed out years ago, the CDC has its own private funding pipeline in the form of “Friends of CDC,” an Atlanta-based group of deep-pocketed corporations, now including ATT, Costco, General Motors, Google, IBM and Microsoft. To date, the entity has raised some $400 million to support the CDC’s work. (Michelle Malkin)

But there is not enough money in the universe to satisfy the addicted hunger of a Liberal.

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

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

A Wales of a Sickie

This one was fascinating, in the fact that someone actually made an actual guide from it. Government health care at it’s finest, from Wales Online.

Sickness guide for parents provokes fury by recommending NO days off school for youngsters with tonsillitis and glandular fever

The booklet was described as a ‘joke’ by angry parents after it was distributed in schools.

The leaflet advises parents that young pupils with conditions including tonsillitis and glandular fever do not need to take time off school

Parents have criticised a new health guide which advises children struck down with tonsillitis, conjunctivitis and even glandular fever should take no time off school.

The controversial booklet, which was handed out in schools across South Wales this week, sets guidelines for parents to follow should their child fall ill.

It recommends pupils take zero days off school should they contract a range of conditions including hand foot and mouth, conjunctivitis, glandular fever, head lice, threadworm, tonsillitis and slapped cheek.

It comes as local authorities across the region are put under increasing scrutiny by education watchdog Estyn to improve their attendance levels.

Estyn is the office of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales. It is a Crown body, established under the Education Act 1992. Estyn is independent of the National Assembly for Wales but receives its funding from the Welsh Government under Section 104 of the Government of Wales Act 1998.

Estyn inspects quality and standards in education and training providers in Wales. (from there website)

Here is the real story, the attendance levels aren’t what they want them to be so let’s shoehorn it by “advisors” funded by the Government.

Because the “experts” have determined that everything should be exactly like this and reality must conform to their data.

Another writer wrote, “Indeed it is so draconian in parts your offspring will need to be suffering bubonic plague before they have any chance of pulling an authentic sickie.

Mom & Pop Government don’t believe you’re sick or it should fit in-between these guidelines or else…

Seething parents took to social networking sites in their droves to criticise the guide, with some describing the recommendations as “nonsense”.

Dad-of-two Gareth Whittle, from Cardiff, said: “I thought it was a joke. I think as parents we are responsible enough to know when and for how long we should keep our children away from school.”

Another parent added: “My daughter had hand foot and mouth. She couldn’t eat for five days due to the ulcers in her mouth.

“If she talked she would dribble as it was too painful to swallow her saliva, so there was no way she could have gone to school. Who makes up this rubbish?”

The full sickness absence booklet distributed to parents  

The full list of illnesses in the leaflet for parents

 The booklet was published by the Central South Consortium, a joint partnership between Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan, Rhondda Cynon Taf, Bridgend and Merthyr county councils.

It urges parents to initially seek advice from NHS Direct or consult their GP before making a decision to remove their child from the classroom.

It also says children should spend five days off school for chicken pox, four days for measles, five days for whooping cough and five days for mumps.

Pauline Jarman, who is a governor at both Caegarw Primary and Mountain Ash Comprehensive School in Rhondda Cynon Taff, added: “When I had glandular fever I was too run down to function.

“I am inclined to trust the judgement of the parent or guardian. If they think the child’s illness is severe enough to keep them home – or are eager to avoid spreading the illness to other children – they will seek the appropriate advice from their GP.

“Some of the conditions where they are not highlighting a specific number of days will, in my opinion, vary in severity.”

Karen Roberts, Vice Chair of Governors Tonypandy Community College, said there was a “distinct lack of clarity” in the leaflet.

She said: “Sickness absence can be as much of a problem amongst school pupils as it can in the workplace.

“Children cannot be taught and learn if they are not in school, and of course it is right that as much advice and support as possible is given to parents who need it to encourage them to ensure their children miss as little school as possible.

“However, I can also see how this leaflet may to some be seen as the ‘nanny state’ – interfering with parents’ responsibilities and rights.

 “Different people react differently to illnesses. Some children suffering for instance from hand, foot and mouth may feel fine whereas others will be much more severely affected and certainly not feel up to attending school. It is contagious and will spread to classmates.

“The recommendation for some illnesses is that the sufferer be kept away from vulnerable children and pregnant women.

“The only way to ensure this is to keep them home. Vulnerable children and pregnant women do not generally walk around with signs on them to make them easily identifiable.

“I can only assume that the intended meaning is that there is no set recommended time, that children stay home until they are better.

“I hope it is the case that this is merely an issue with communication and poor design of this leaflet as if not then it raises serious questions as to the standard of advice coming from the consortium.”

Parents are told to inform their school of their child’s absence at 9.30am every day. By law, only the headteacher can authorise for a pupil to be off school.

The guide concludes: “If you child is frequently missing school due to illness, medical confirmation may be requested from your GP and/or a referral may be made to the Attendance and Wellbeing Service or Education Welfare Service.”

A spokesperson for Rhondda Cynon Taf Council, one of the local authorities in the Consortium, said: “The medical advice printed has been obtained directly from the Health Protection Agency in England in conjunction with the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.

“Consultation was carried out with Cwm Taf, Cardiff and the Vale and Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Boards and Public Health Wales who all approved the content of the advice table.”

Bureaucratic blow off anyone?

Government knows best. Government Hegemony. “best practices” aka do it our way or else.

Fascinating.

Head lice, meanwhile, is also no excuse to stay home according to the sickness absence guide.

While a scalp full of crawlies won’t make a youngster feel off colour, sending an untreated child to school who is the Typhoid Mary of the nits world will certainly make you the least popular parent at the school gates.

Ironically, the only illness that gets the softly softly treatment from the guide is flu. “Keep home until recovered” is the recommendation.

That is reasonable advice for “proper” flu but as every accomplished young sickie-puller knows, a bad cold can easily masquerade as proper flu. (Wales Online)

As a kid I tried, as all kids do, to get out of school by “being sick” but I had a disadvantage, my Dad was a Doctor and my mother was also well versed.

Go to far, and they’d start talking about hospitals… YIKES!

But what really caught my eyes about this was the specificness of it. 5 days for Chicken pox and extra, like you can cookie cutter kids.

“Well, the government says you should only be sick for 5 days…” strikes me as Government as parent or at least some kind of overlord. If you go past 5 days, then what?

Mama Government will be very cross with you…

P.s. I WONDER WHAT EBOLA WILL BE PRESCRIBED? :)

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

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

History Repeats

My seventh-grade son recently wrote a U.S. History paper extolling the virtues of President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. “It ended the Great Depression,” he wrote with great certainty. He’s only 12 and parroting what the history texts and his teachers told him.

That’s his excuse. What’s Ken Burns’?

Mr. Burns’ docudrama on the Roosevelts—for those who weren’t bored to tears—repeats nearly all the worn-out fairy tales of the FDR presidency, including what I call the most enduring myth of the 20th century, which is that FDR’s avalanche of alphabet-soup government programs ended the Great Depression. Shouldn’t there be a statute of limitations on such lies?

Not for Liberals. They spent 90 years working up to ObamaCare, after all…

Ask nearly anyone over the age of 80, and they will say that FDR cared about the working man and “gave the country hope,” a point that Mr. Burns emphasizes. Roosevelt exuded empathy, which isn’t a bad thing—remember Bill Clinton’s memorable line “I feel your pain”?—but caring doesn’t create jobs or lift gross domestic product.

Nor does spending government money revive growth, despite the theories put into practice by the then-dean of all economists, John Maynard Keynes. Any objective analysis of these facts can lead to no other conclusion. U.S. unemployment averaged a rate of 18 percent during Roosevelt’s first eight years in office. In the decade of the 1930s, U.S. industrial production and national income fell by about almost one-third. In 1940, after year eight years of the New Deal, unemployment was still averaged a god-awful 14 percent.

Former President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his wife Eleanor with their Scotch terrier Fala on the terrace of his house in Hyde Park, New York. (Photo: Newscom)

Think of it this way. The unemployment rate was more than twice as high eight years into the New Deal than it is today, and American workers now are angry as hornets. Imagine, if jobs were twice as scarce today, the pitchforked revolt that would be going on. This is success?

Almost everything FDR did to jump-start growth retarded it. The rise in the minimum wage kept unemployment intolerably high. (Are you listening, Nancy Pelosi?) Roosevelt’s work programs like the Works Progress Administration, National Recovery Administration and the Agricultural Adjustment Administration were so bureaucratic as to have minimal impact on jobs. Raising tax rates to nearly 80 percent on the rich stalled the economy. Social Security is and always was from the start a Madoff-style Ponzi scheme that will eventually sink into bankruptcy unless reformed.

The cruel irony of the New Deal is that the liberals’ honorable intentions to help the poor and the unemployed caused more human suffering than any other set of ideas in the past century.

The most alarming story of economic ignorance surrounding this New Deal era was the tax increases while the economy was faltering. According to economist Burt Folsom, FDR signed one of the most financially devastating taxes: “On April 27, 1942, he signed an executive order taxing all personal income above $25,000 [rich back then] at 100 percent. Congress balked at that idea and later lowered it to 90 percent at the top level.” The New Dealers completely ignored the lessons of the 1920s tax cuts, which just a decade before had unfurled an age of super-growth.

Then there was the spending and debt barrage. Federal spending catapulted from $4.65 billion in 1933 to nearly $13.7 billion in 1941. This tripling of the federal budget in just eight years came at a time of almost no inflation (just 13.1 percent cumulative during that period). Budget surpluses during the prosperous Coolidge years became ever-larger deficits under FDR’s fiscal reign. During his first term, more than half the federal budget on average came from borrowed money.

The cruel irony of the New Deal is that the liberals’ honorable intentions to help the poor and the unemployed caused more human suffering than any other set of ideas in the past century.

The road to Hell is paved with Liberal Good Intentions. Since they are The Enlightened , and they Care, it worked in their minds– in their reality. So, therefore, it will work again, and again, and again.

They are the good, compassionate, loving, caring, sensitive Angels of the World. Anyone who disagrees must therefore be a Devil and out to do everyone (but especially the poor) harm.

It just stands to reason, in their heads.

What is maddening is that thanks to this historical fabrication of FDR’s presidency, dutifully repeated by Mr. Burns, we have repeated the mistakes again and again. Had the history books been properly written, it’s quite possible we would never had to endure the catastrophic failure of Obamanomics and the “stimulus plans” that only stimulated debt. The entire rationale for the Obama economic plan in 2009 was to re-create new New Deal.

Doubly amazing is that at this very moment, the left is writing another fabricated history — of the years we have just lived through. The history books are already painting Obama policies as the just-in-time emergency policies that prevented a Second Great Depression. I wonder if 80 years from now, the American people will be as gullible as they are today in believing, as my 12-year-old does, that FDR was an economic savior.

Originally appeared in The Washington Times by Stephen Moore

Answer: YES. History is written by the winners, or at least, in this case the Liberal educators. So as long as they control the process, the falsehoods of the Liberal Narrative will become fact.

After all, if you often enough it becomes the truth. No one like this axiom better than a Liberal.

Ask nearly anyone over the age of 80, and they will say that FDR cared about the working man and “gave the country hope,” a point that Mr. Burns emphasizes. Roosevelt exuded empathy, which isn’t a bad thing—remember Bill Clinton’s memorable line “I feel your pain”?—but caring doesn’t create jobs or lift gross domestic product. (Chris Cook)

And then you have now the 24/7 Ministry of Truth to spew “the facts”.

So, yes, Liberals never learn from  REAL history (because they are SO MUCH smarter than the average bear) and we are doomed to repeat them.

Homework: http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=515

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

The Velvet Glove

Soft Tyranny: What is the purpose of government in America? To protect rights and freedoms? That’s how the nation started. But now government is seen as more of a cross between a nanny and an operations manager.

Not every American adheres to that notion. Enough governments are moving in that direction, however, to make us freedom-lovers more than a little nervous. Consider a trio of recent events moving us from a nation of liberty to a society that is over-governed and over-monitored.

Late last month, the Seattle City Council voted to make it a crime for residents to put too many food scraps into their regular garbage. The law says that regular trash bins can’t be filled with more than 10% of compostable waste, including food and paper products.

On first offense, citizens are punished with a $1 fine. Serial offenders could be fined $50. The whole thing gives new meaning to the dinner-table question: “Are you going to finish that?”

So do they have to eat the extra calories they would have thrown away (thus increase obesity, which the liberal will also get you for) or do you have save it for the poor or leftovers??

Well, don’t save them too long, then you’ll have to throw them out and Mama will be unhappy if it’s “too much”.

Seattle.gov:

In a recent study, Seattle households estimated that about 1/3 of all food scraps they throw out could’ve been avoided. This includes foods that went bad before being eaten and leftovers no one wanted to eat.

That rotten apple isn’t the only thing going into your food and yard waste cart, though. You’re also throwing away all the water, energy and other resources used to grow that apple and get it to your plate. That’s a lot of waste!

You horrible peach of ungrateful shit! How dare you! Mama Government is unhappy with you.

Monthly residential food and yard waste cart rates

Effective April 1, 2014.

Service Level (weekly) Curb or Alley
(per month)
Weight Limit Dimensions
13-gallon (mini-can) $5.15 20 pounds 11″W x 12″D x 27″H
32-gallon $7.75 60 pounds 21″W x 23″D x 40″H
96-gallon $9.90 180 pounds 29″W x 34″D x 46″H
extra yard waste (per bundle) $4.90 60 pounds 4′ x 2′ x 2′

Customers changing their food and yard waste cart size more than once in a twelve month period may incur a $23.80 fee charged to their solid waste account.

Apparently, you get to pay for the privilege of being condescended to by Mama Government. How sweet…

Reuters reports that the law is “one of the toughest mandatory composting efforts in the country” in a city considered “a leader in urban sustainability and recycling efforts.” Which means that the nonsense started there is likely to spread to other urban areas.

Actually, Seattle is the second American city to pass such a law. San Francisco — of course — was the first.

They are also banning plastic bags in California too. It’s a ‘environmentally friendly’ sanctimonious thing to do and it. But we have to start small. You have throw the frog into cold water first, soften him up, before you go for the full boil of Government.

Under SB270, plastic bags will be phased out of checkout counters at large grocery stores and supermarkets such as Wal-Mart and Target starting next summer, and convenience stores and pharmacies in 2016. The law does not apply to bags used for fruits, vegetables or meats, or to shopping bags used at other retailers. It allows grocers to charge a fee of at least 10 cents for using paper bags.

Selective Liberal outrage?

Shoppers leaving a Ralphs supermarket Tuesday in downtown San Diego were divided as they weighed the legislation’s environmental benefits against its costs. San Diego does not ban plastic bags.

“With the amount of waste that we produce, we can try to help out by slightly inconveniencing ourselves,” said Megan Schenfeld, 29, whose arms were full of groceries in plastic bags after leaving reusable bags at home.

Well, she needs to be handcuffed, arrested and fined for her bad behavior don’t you think? :)

Robert Troxell, a 69-year-old former newspaper editor, said the fees are more than an inconvenience for retirees living on fixed incomes like him. He shops daily because he has only a small refrigerator in his hotel for low-income seniors.

“It becomes a flat tax on senior citizens,” said Troxell, who lives off social security and other government assistance. “I have not disagreed with Jerry Brown on anything — until this.”(AP)

Environmental jingo-ism or people, which would the liberal choose? :)

Several hundred miles south of Puget Sound, drought-weary Californians who are keeping their lawns green or taking too long to wash their cars are being turned in to the authorities by their neighbors.

The Water Police and their little minions of sanctimony, how cute. Can we get some Scarlett Letters made next?

As we noted over the summer, “water officials in Los Angeles will soon offer hangers that residents can ‘slip anonymously around the doorknobs of neighbors whose sprinklers are watering the sidewalk.'” The Golden State has become the land of drought-shaming apps and water cops on the way to becoming the next Great American Dust Bowl.

The drought could have been avoided, as it is entirely man-made. No, we’re not blaming everyday Californians; we blame government policymakers.

We find guilty the “operations managers” at the state and federal levels who have refused to allow water to cost what it would in an open market unobstructed and unsubsidized by government, and who for environmental reasons have cut off water flows to “protect” a 3-inch fish and dumped the water into the ocean.

The Delta Smelt anyone? :)

http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/of-fish-and-foul/

http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/you-smelt-it-you-dealt-it/

And then there are the nannies in Washington — or more specifically, the nation’s First Nanny, who wants to dictate what every kid eats for lunch at school.

Michelle Obama is afraid that students across the country are consuming too many calories, too much fat and not enough of the right kinds of foods, so she’s been campaigning to be every student’s mom.

The Nation’s Mom! Think Mrs. C, not Mrs G(overnment). There’s no harm in that, after all, it’s for your own good!! :)

Instead of packing food that children will actually eat, she’s stuffing lunchboxes with kid-unfriendly green, leafy vegetables and tasteless wheat bread, making sure they don’t consume more than one packet of ketchup per meal.

It’s for your own good dear!

But the National School Lunch Program is both wasteful and, given Seattle’s and San Francisco’s laws, counterproductive.

But that’s what Liberal sanctimony does best.

As Warner Todd Huston observed last month on Breitbart.com, many of the 31 million children who are fed by the program “are throwing away the vegetables, fruits and snacks forced on them by the new federal nutrition standards.”

Better do it the right way or Mama Government will get you for THAT too… :)

Sounds like a practice that would run afoul of Seattle’s ordinance. Maybe the operations managers and government nannies need to work a little closer together so there won’t be any conflicts.

No, that’s not a good idea at all. It would be better for everyone if they all stopped trying to engineer society and let us live our lives without interference. (IBD)

But that’s impossible for a Liberal. They are so vastly superior in vision and purpose and they just want you to be like them and be “enlightened” or else they will have put the hammer to your nuts until you do as you are told.

You are a child, they are the adult- at least their minds- and you must be forcefully taught how to behave properly.

They are you “enlightened” Masters, and the sooner you do as you’re told Mama Government will not be cross with you anymore.

Love you, Kiss kiss…now shut up and do as you’re told!

 Are you my mummy? :)

154746 600 trick or treat cartoons

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

The November Surprise?

Another round of “if you like your plan” well… too f*cking bad suckers!

But don’t worry, the Liberal media won’t tell you about it because that’s not on The Agenda (and it’s still “the Affordable Care Act” to them because their Orwellian training says so when it’s bad news) or they’ll sugar coat it in Orwellian BS and class warfare as they do anything that’s bad new for them.

One of the causes they’ll never see, because it was central to their Agenda:

From MSNBC (earlier this year): Until recently, insurance companies screened individual buyers for potential health needs and penalized or excluded anyone who might actually need care. The Affordable Care Act bars that discrimination, and it uses tax credits to subsidize coverage for people with modest incomes.

And we know how this was destined to fail and has failed. What they are flapping their collectivist lips about is Adverse Selection (which I have harped on before).

Suppose an insurance firm offered health insurance to the general public. It is likely to have the highest take up rate amongst unhealthy people. People who don’t exercise, people who smoke. They are the group most likely to need health care, therefore, it makes sense for them to take out insurance. Healthy people don’t see the point, if the price of health insurance is determined by the average unhealthy person.

If insurance premiums are based on the needs of smokers, then the premiums will be high. Therefore, there is no incentive for healthy people to take out the insurance.

Solutions to Adverse Selection

To avoid adverse selection, firms need to try and identify different groups of people. This is why health insurance premiums are higher for smokers and obese people, etc.

And some people deemed of high or extreme risk are excluded altogether.

And this works in any insurance really, the higher risk people get higher premiums or excluded altogether in order to try and keep premiums as low as possible.

BUT

In Health Insurance if  you MANDATE that you can’t adversely select the higher risks (what the Left calls “discrimination”) then EVERYONE‘s premiums are going up to cover the influx of the unhealthy and the one’s who couldn’t afford it in the first place but are mandated to have it anyhow (or just like a freebie) are now on the taxpayers-you-and-me’s dime and we get to pay to pay for them as well!

That’s fair!, right. :)

And then you stick in the provision, in ObamaCare, that says if your plan doesn’t match up perfectly with what ObamaCare considers the perfect plan then your plan has to bit the big one and you get….

More than a dozen states plan to cancel health care policies not in compliance with ObamaCare in the coming weeks, affecting thousands of people just before the midterm elections.

“It looks like several hundred thousand people across the country will receive notices in the coming days and weeks,” said Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

The policies are being canceled because states that initially granted a reprieve at the request of President Obama are no longer willing to do so.

In coming weeks, 13 states and the District of Columbia plan to cancel such policies, which generally fall out of compliance with the Affordable Care Act because they don’t offer the level of coverage the law requires.

Virginia will be hardest hit, with 250,000 policies expected to be canceled.

And because federal law requires a 60-day notice of any plan changes, voters will be notified no later than November 1, right before the Nov. 4 midterms.

Many of those forced out of their current plans and into ObamaCare may not be able to keep their doctors. They also could face higher deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses, making ObamaCare an election issue on the eve of voting.

Obama had originally unequivocally promised that under his health care plan, everyone could keep their doctors and plans.

In 2009, he told the American Medical Association, “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period.No one will take it away. No matter what.”

The president later was forced to admit that any plan without the additional benefits required under ObamaCare faced cancellation.

But that unleashed a nasty political backlash, forcing him to back down and call for states and insurers to extend those policies for three more years.

Some said he didn’t have much choice. “There were some five or six million people who were at stake here and the federal exchange was in no condition to even process a few hundred thousand people much less millions,” said Joe Antos of the American Enterprise Institute.

Many states flatly refused to extend and now comes the new round of states that plan to cancel policies. (Jim Angle)

But don’t worry, IF the liberal media even mentions it, it will be the Insurance Companies fault, not the fault of ObamaCare and it’s ridiculous “requirements” because ObamaCare is the Light, and we “haters” are the Darkness, after all.

You don’t want the days of “discrimination” (racial overtone background music) to come back now do you? :)

After all, The Left is the Light, and everyone else is The Dark.

MSNBC: “Honest people can differ on the merits of those policies.

And there’s no one more honest and transparent than The Left, after all, they are The Angels of Mercy and Compassion… :)

So LIGHTen your wallet, here comes ObamaCare! The November Surprise?

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

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

Brazil Nuts

Dependency: A Brazilian economist has shown a near-exact correlation between last Sunday’s presidential election voting choices and each state’s welfare ratios. Sure enough, handouts are the lifeblood of the left.

Much of the attention in Brazil’s presidential election has been on the surprise rise of Aecio Neves, the center-right candidate who bolted to second place in the space of a week in the first round of Brazil’s election last Sunday, putting him in a face-off against leftist incumbent Dilma Rousseff at the end of the month.

Neves won 34% of the vote, Rousseff took 42% and green party candidate Marina Silva took about 20% — and on Thursday, Silva endorsed Neves, making it a contest of free-market ideas vs. big-government statism.

But what’s even more telling is an old story — shown in an infographic by popular Brazilian economist Ricardo Amorim.

In a Twitter post, Amorim showed a near-exact correlation among Brazil’s states’ welfare dependency and their votes for leftist Workers Party incumbent Rousseff.

Virtually every state that went for Rousseff has at least 25% of the population dependent on Brazil’s Bolsa Familia welfare program of cash for single mothers, given for keeping children vaccinated and in school.

States with less than 25% of the population on Bolsa Familia overwhelmingly went for Neves and his policies of growth.

The World Bank and others praise Bolsa Familia’s “poverty alleviation.” Problem is, “some experts warn that a wide majority cannot get out of this dependence relationship with the government,” as the U.K. Guardian put it.

And whether it’s best for a country that aspires to become a global economic powerhouse to have a quarter of the population — 50 million people — dependent on welfare and producing nothing is questionable.

The cash payouts amount to a half percentage of GDP and 2.5% of government spending. Money spent on welfare is money that can’t be put to use in creating jobs.

Amorim points out that Brazil’s 2% average GDP between 2011 and 2013 is the second lowest in all Latin America, topping only El Salvador, another country with a sizable welfare population — and millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Fact is, the left cannot survive without a vast class of dependents. And once in, dependents have difficulty getting out.

So Brazil’s election may come down to a question of whether it wants to be a an economic powerhouse — or a handout republic.

http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/in-dependence-2014/

 

The Dole: New data on federal public assistance programs show we’ve reached an ignominious milestone: More than 100 million Americans are getting some form of “means-tested” welfare assistance.

The Census Bureau found 51 million on food stamps at the end of 2012 and 83 million on Medicaid, with tens of millions of households getting both. Another 4 million were on unemployment insurance.

The percentage of American households on welfare has reached 35%. If we include other forms of government assistance such as Medicare and Social Security, almost half of all households are getting a check or other form of government assistance. The tipping point is getting closer and closer. (IBD)

And it’s not for a lack of trying on the Democrats part.

Dependence is good for the country, after all. Remember, Unemployment is Job Stimulus! :)

We are from the Government and we are here to help you…. :)

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

 

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

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

The Liberal Mosquito Swarm

On a Personal note…

AP: Arizona’s barrage of rain storms in recent months has created an unlikely pest infestation for the desert region: mosquitoes.

The storms — including one that began Wednesday — have established a breeding ground for mosquitoes that some longtime Phoenix residents say are as bad as they can ever remember.

Maricopa County environmental officials say they have received more than 10,000 mosquito-related complaints so far this year. County Environmental Services Department spokesman Johnny Dilone said that is nearly double the number of calls from the same period in 2013.

“We’re working a lot of hours and spraying in more places,” Dilone said. “We’ve been seeing a lot of mosquitoes, a majority of them are floodwater mosquitoes. Those are the ones that have been generating most of the calls.”

The uptick has left residents scratching their heads — as well as arms, legs and other body parts — at having to deal with unexpected insect bites. Jennifer Weller, a Scottsdale sales executive, said she feels like every day brings three to five mosquito bites more.

“I’m a native of Arizona, and I can’t remember getting eaten like this,” she said. “So I’m wearing my OFF! right now instead of my perfume.”

Other residents, like Leslie Meehan, are considering their own preventive measures. Meehan, of Maricopa, said nothing has worked to get them out of her yard and she is mulling a $149 mosquito trap.

“We’re a smorgasbord for these heat-seeking missiles with wings,” Meehan said. She compared it to a mauling — “I’ve got 32 bites on one arm.”

I have lived her for more than 27 years. I have had my house for more than 6. I have NEVER been swarmed by mosquitoes before now. It’s safe to say I have not been bitten by mosquitoes since moving to this house but in the last week I have been attacked mercilessly. I must have at least 20 mosquito bites on me alone.

And I know the cause. It wasn’t that we had the wettest monsoon on record. No,no, no.

I’m going to take a page from our dear friends on the Left and pronounce the cause as:

GLOBAL WARMING!!! :)

After all, if it snows too much…Global Warming

If it’s too hot…Global Warming

If it not hot or cold…It’s Global Warming!

If it rains too much or too little…Global Warming!

If they stub their toe on way to get their Cafe Latte’ from their $300 Latte machine it must be …

GLOBAL WARMING!!! :)

It’s the cure all for what ales a sanctimonious Leftist. After all, they are saving the planet (Like The Doctor from “Doctor Who”) and you’re not!

So what if the actual science doesn’t support their crack pot theories, that doesn’t matter because they are Special!

And you’re not.

They are “enlightened” and you are Darkness.

So they must be better than you. So they must be smarter than you. They should rule over you because Sanctimonious Might makes Right, except in the military where America is a bigger danger to the world than ISIS (according to the academically superior liberals at Harvard).

So the mosquitoes are a plaque upon the unworthy, racist, homophobic, misogynist, right wing “deniers” of the superior LEFT!!!

I would say a Biblical plague, but since the Left hates Christians can we call it a Caliphate?

No, because The Left doesn’t recognize jihadists to begin with.

I know!

Maybe their Obama NSA Drones made to look like mosquitoes! :)

Hmm… YEAH! That’s the ticket! :)

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

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

The Mafia

The Human Rights Commission in Lexington, Kentucky has a chilling message for Christian business owners who refuse service to LGBT organizations: leave your religion at home.

“It would be safe to do so, yes,” Executive Director Raymond Sexton told me. “Or in this case you can find yourself two years down the road and you’re still involved in a legal battle because you did not do so.”

Youse is going to do what we say, or else, forgetaboutit, you hear. We run the show and you what we say or else!

The idea that there must be, what dozens of other T-Shirt shops in the Lexington area alone and they could just vote with their feet and get them printed somewhere else would never even occur to them

Nope. They were “offended”. And you pay for your “offense” in blood!

Much like the lesbian couple that destroyed a wedding business in New York for the same reasons.

You’d almost say, and I would say, they go out of their way to find “offense” so they can “make an example” of this bigot and strike terror into the hearts of all the other “bigots” out there that would defy them!

That’s The American Way. If you’re the Mafia! :)

On Tuesday, a Lexington Human Rights Commission hearing examiner issued a recommended ruling that the owner of a T-shirt company violated a local ordinance against sexual-orientation discrimination. You can read the ruling by clicking here.

“It was a landmark decision,” Sexton said. “This is a very important ruling for us.”

The examiner concluded that Blaine Adamson of Hands On Originals broke the law in 2012 by declining to print shirts promoting the Lexington Pride Festival. The Gay and Lesbian Services Organization subsequently filed a complaint.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases, represented Adamson, a devout Christian.

“No one should be forced by the government or by another citizen to endorse or promote ideas with which they disagree,” said ADF attorney Jim Campbell. “Blaine declined to the request to print the shirts not because of any characteristic of the people who asked for them, but because of the message that the shirts would communicate.”

ADF also pointed out that Hands On Originals has a history of doing business with the LGBT community as well has hiring LGBT workers.

But Sexton told me the law is the law. And in Lexington it’s against the law to discriminate against the LGBT community – regardless of religious beliefs.

I wonder if they were Muslim… :)

“We’re not telling someone how to feel with respect to religion, but the law is pretty clear that if you operate a business to the public, you need to provide your services to people regardless of race, color, sex and in this case sexual orientation,” Sexton said.

The hearing examiner recommended the following punishment:

First, Hands On Originals cannot discriminate against individuals because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. In other words, the T-shirt company must service LGBT customers – no questions asked.

But if I go into a Vegan restaurant and order a steak, that’s not discrimination, according to The Left.

As usual, the “rules” only apply to what THEY want. And they want you do as THEY want, nothing else.

That’s The American Way. If you’re the Mafia or a Dictator.

The examiner also ordered Adamson to attend “diversity training” conducted by – wait for it – the Lexington Human Rights Commission.

Well, of course, they are the Santimonious, who else is better qualified to lobotomize you with Orwellian doublethink.

Take just a moment and let that sink in – a Christian business owner is being ordered to attend diversity training – because of his religious beliefs. That’s a pretty frightening concept and a mighty dangerous precedent.

Well, the owner is obvious a raging BIGOT and must be “re-educated”.  He must do as they say, or else.

That’s what “education” is for, to learn how to cow-tow to the Left’s superiority. :)

“That is certainly one of the dangers of an order like that – for the government to step in and order (what is essentially) a re-education of its citizens,” Campbell told me. “That’s a dangerous precedent for the government to engage in.”

But that’s perfectly in line with the Left’s sanctimony. You will bow before their superiority, or at least the government cudgel.

In essence, the Human Rights Commission is telling Christian business owners they have to change their religious beliefs. It’s the idea that the government knows best and Christians must reorient their beliefs.

Correct. You bigots!

Sexton, who said he is a Christian, said he’s just upholding the law.

Wimp!

“The law in Lexington is pretty clear,” he said. “You cannot discriminate against people on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Regardless of what your religious beliefs are – if you have a public business – then that’s how you have to operate.”

But curiously, it’s always just Christians…

It seems to me if a Christian business owner does not want to do business with an LGBT organization – that should be their right. And should an LGBT business choose not to do business with a church that should be their right, as well.

That’s logic and rationality. That has no place in the Leftist Narrative of their superiority in all things and your bigotry for disagreeing with their superiority.

They are “enlightened” and you are not.

There’s no denying there’s a conflict. Even Sexton admits to that.

“Our local law has exemptions for religious organizations,” he said. “However, religious organizations are narrowly defined. You actually have to be some sort of religious institution to get the exemption.”

Meanwhile, a growing number of hardworking Christian business owners are caught in the crosshairs of the culture war.

“There does tend to be a trend toward that,” attorney Campbell told me. “Business owners are being targeted for simply trying to operate their business consistent with their beliefs.” (Todd Starnes)

Because they are all Bigots. End of story. All of them. And all bigots must be rooted out and “re-educated” to be “enlightened” to the superiority of the Left.

You have but one choice. Do as they want.

Or Else, Guido the Leftist Lawyer with his pal Judge Hammer will come along and break your legs….

That, after all is the “enlightened” American Way!

pro-choicePolitical Cartoons by Henry Payne

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

Sowell Searching

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is both a danger in itself and a wake-up call for Americans – about President Obama, about the institutions of this country and, most important, about ourselves.

There was a time when an outbreak of a deadly disease overseas would bring virtually unanimous agreement that our top priority should be to keep it overseas. Yet Barack Obama has refused to bar entry to the United States by people from countries where the Ebola epidemic rages, as Britain has done.

The reason? Refusing to let people with Ebola enter the United States would conflict with the goal of fighting the disease. In other words, the safety of the American people takes second place to the goal of helping people overseas.

As if to emphasize his priorities, President Obama has ordered thousands of American troops to go into Ebola-stricken Liberia, disregarding the dangers to those troops and to other Americans when the troops return.

What does this say about Obama?

At a minimum, it suggests that he takes his conception of himself as a citizen of the world more seriously than he takes his role as president of the United States. At worst, he may consider Americans’ interests expendable in the grand scheme of things internationally. If so, this would explain a lot of his foreign policy disasters around the world, which seem inexplicable otherwise.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!

Those critics who have been citing Barack Obama’s foreign policy fiascoes and disasters as evidence that he is incompetent may be overlooking the possibility that he has different priorities than the protection of the American people and America’s interests as a nation.

He does. He’s a very smart guy. He’s just a narcissist who has grander and more ideological “big picture” things in mind than the puny concerns of just us peasant Americans. We are his vassals, not his masters. What he is after all, The Most Arrogant Guy in The World and he knows better than you. He has a vision, and he doesn’t care what the consequences are, he’s going to see it happen regardless of reality.

He just doesn’t care about you. It’s all about him and his “transformation” of America that he promised.

This is a monstrous possibility. But no one familiar with the history of the 20th century should consider monstrous possibilities as things to dismiss automatically. Nor should anyone who has followed Barack Obama’s behavior over his lifetime, and the values that behavior reveals.

A few critics who, early on, sensed something un-American, if not anti-American, in Barack Obama succumbed to the idea that he was not a native-born citizen. That claim blew up in their faces.

Nor was birthplace crucial anyway. People born overseas have put their lives on the line to defend America, and scientists who escaped from Europe in the 1930s played a major role in creating the nuclear bomb that made the United States a superpower. Conversely, the country’s most notorious traitor – Benedict Arnold – was born on American soil.

Whatever the reason, or combination of reasons, that led to President Obama’s foreign-policy disasters around the world – with the crowning disaster of all, a nuclear Iran, looming on the horizon – it cannot be a simple lack of knowledge or experience. Various former members of the Obama administration are telling the same story, of information and advice from knowledgeable and experienced officials being ignored by this vain and headstrong man.

After all, he only looks at 42% of the Intelligence reports. Then when something happens involving that lack of interest, he blames his minions for THEIR failures. He’s too busy with his own thing to care about that bullshit.

Back in the 18th century, Edmund Burke pointed out that, whatever the institutions of government, most of the outcomes of what it does “must depend upon the exercise of the powers which are left at large to the prudence and uprightness of ministers of state.”

What did the American voters know about the prudence and uprightness of this untried man they elected president, as a result of his glib rhetoric and his racial symbolism? It is not just bad luck when a reckless gamble turns out disastrously.

But then they re-elected him on the back of  VOTE FOR ME, THE OTHER GUY’s AN ASSHOLE! (and covering up Benghazi as quickly as possible).

What is the old saying…Fool Me One, Shame on You, Fool Me Twice shame on me?

Who’s the bigger fool, the Fool or the fool who follows it??

No one knows at this point how big the Ebola danger may turn out to be. But what we do know is that official reassurances about this and other dangers have become worthless.

The erosion of constitutional government over the years has become, under the Obama administration, a deluge of arbitrary edicts and defiant lawlessness protected by a grossly politicized Department of Justice.

It may be time to consider reorganizing the institutions of government, so that high officials who try to reassure the public about medical crises are not officials who serve “at the pleasure of the president.” Nor should the attorney general, whose duty is to enforce the laws, be part of an administration whose law-breakers the Justice Department can protect from prosecution.

True. But then that’s not fun for them. :)

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Narrowing The Field

Narrow Networks: ObamaCare promised to expand access to health care. But a couple of reports this week underscore the fact that just having an ObamaCare insurance card doesn’t guarantee access to care.

An inspector general audit of Medicaid found that newly enrolled patients who came into the program through ObamaCare won’t necessarily find a doctor willing to treat them.

For example, the IG reports that a person enrolled in a Medicaid plan in one state would have to drive more than 75 miles to see a urologist.

Enrollees in another state couldn’t make appointments with 45% of the primary care providers listed as participating in one area of the state. (The IG doesn’t identify the states.)

The IG found that while states have “access standards” for managed care plans that contract with them to provide Medicaid benefits, these standards can be vague, and only a handful of states bother to conduct tests to see if the plans are complying.

The federal government checks only whether a state has standards in place, not whether they’re any good.

Thanks to Medicaid’s low payment rates and cumbersome regulations, doctor shortages in Medicaid were already a chronic problem before ObamaCare pushed states to expand the program, which 27 have done so far. A 2012 study found that almost a third of doctors refused to take new Medicaid patients.

ObamaCare just adds to this problem, handing out millions of freshly minted Medicaid cards for a program that can’t handle those already in it.

Worse, ObamaCare is now expanding this deceptive Medicaid model to the private insurance market.

To keep premiums down in the face of ObamaCare’s costly market regulations and mandates, most insurers set up narrow — even extremely narrow — provider networks.

The result is the same as in Medicaid.

Enrollees are promised comprehensive benefits and subsidized premiums, only to find care difficult or impossible to get when they need it.

In California, Anthem Blue Cross has already been sued over its skimpy provider lists. And the Los Angeles Times reported this week that consumers in that state will, if anything, find it harder to see a doctor next year.

“The state’s largest health insurers are sticking with their often-criticized narrow networks of doctors, and in some cases they are cutting the number of physicians even more,” the Times found.

It’s no surprise, then, to learn that ER doctors report a surge in hospital visits from ObamaCare enrollees, often for routine care and often after looking in vain for a doctor to see them.

“We’ve given people an ATM card in a town with no ATMs,” is how Dr. Ryan Stanton of the American College of Emergency Physicians correctly described the situation to USA Today.

Negative word of mouth about such problems might be part of the reason why ObamaCare’s popularity is lower today than when it officially launched a year ago.

Passing out insurance cards is easy. Expanding actual access to health care is hard. (IBD)

 Talk is cheap. Especially political motivated agenda talk.

154534 600 Illegal Day Laborers   Reposted cartoons

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

Arguing with The Left: The Narrative

Continuing with the excellent Western Free Press…

If you have ever tried arguing with a liberal, leftist or progressive, at some point you have inevitably come away frustrated by your apparent inability to “win” an argument, despite proving conclusively the other side is objectively wrong.  The subject doesn’t matter, it could be the failure of Obama’s foreign policy, the IRS targeting scandal, tax policy, (lack of) Global Warming, or “helping” the poor.  There in fact is a literal parade of liberal/leftist social policies and issues that have been unequivocal, abject failures, yet no matter how many facts and figures you can marshal, your argument falls flat, and your opponent remains completely un-swayed.  Have you ever wondered why this is?

Best-selling thriller-author Robert Bidinotto offers an explanation:

One of the most valuable insights I discovered in recent years is how Narratives trump everything else — including what most of us would call concern for “practical results.”

For example, consider liberalism. Have decades upon decades of liberal policy failures deterred liberals from being liberals? Have the trillions of dollars blown on welfare-state programs since the “New Deal” and the “War on Poverty” made a damned bit of difference in curing poverty? And has that failure convinced “progressives” that there is something fundamentally wrong in their worldview and approach? Have the horrendous historical consequences of appeasement policies stopped today’s politicians from appeasing international thugs and terrorists? No?

Then why does anyone assume that liberals gauge the value of their worldview by the standard of its PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES?

Practical consequences are ALWAYS trumped by the advancement and protection of one’s core Narrative: the fairy tale that gives one’s life meaning, coherence, and moral justification.

When I linked last week to Simon Sinek’s seminal 18-minute talk, “Start With WHY,” it became obvious to me that he was saying exactly the same thing that I have been saying, in different language, with a different emphasis.

Sinek points out that customers are not attracted to a company primarily because of the merits of its products (i.e., the results of its policies); nor are voters attracted to politicians primarily because of the merits of their policy prescriptions and “eight point plans” (i.e., the goals of their policies). They are attracted because — as he puts it — “People don’t buy WHAT you do; they buy WHY you do it.”

People do things — e.g., vote for you, buy your products, donate to your cause — that prove, affirm, and reinforce what they ALREADY BELIEVE. They act to conform to and confirm their deep-rooted beliefs.

In other words: They act in conformance to their CORE NARRATIVE. Doing that makes them feel good about themselves. And they would far rather feel good about themselves than actually achieve any of their stated practical objectives. It’s not about the objectives at all. It’s about THEM.

Consider some other examples.

  • That’s why the leaders and officials in entire communities in Britain turned a blind eye to, or even rationalized, the mass rapes of thousands of young white girls: because they were wedded to a “multiculturalist” worldview, and — above all — didn’t want to think of themselves as “racists” or “anti-Muslim bigots.” THAT — affirmation of their Narrative-driven self-images — meant far more to them than the fates of thousands of young girls.
  • That’s why ObamaCare can meet absolutely NONE of its promised practical objectives (universal coverage; lower premiums; cost controls; “keep your doctor”; “keep your existing policy”; etc., etc.) — yet NO LIBERAL is calling for its abolition. It was never ABOUT those practical consequences, and still isn’t. It’s about protecting a Narrative about the role of government in our lives.

The Truth doesn’t matter, how many times have I said that about Liberals. ObamaCare was the Holy Grail of Government control, life and death, why would they possibly want to give that up!

  • That’s why temperature records can show that there has been NO, nada, zero, zip “global warming” over the past two decades; yet the diehard true believers in “manmade climate change” continue to blame everything — from Ebola outbreaks to sinkholes to allergies to campus rapes (REALLY!) — on “global warming” that IS NOT OCCURRING. In doing this, they are really professing how absolutely they are wedded to the Narrative (as old as the ancient “myth of the Golden Age,” and the Eden myth in Genesis) that Evil Man is destroying the pristine natural environment. That Narrative IS their notion of “reality”; thus, any inconvenient truths that clash with it are simply ignored or explained away.
  • And that’s why Obama golfs and fundraises while the world goes to hell, and while ominous threats against America mount. His moral/political Narrative is rooted in the belief that America was founded in the evil of slavery; that its capitalist system is immoral; that its Constitution only cements all of that evil in place; that America, therefore, has been a dark force internationally; and thus, that his primary job is to “fundamentally transform” this country and paralyze its ability to act (i.e., cause trouble) internationally.

The terrible CONSEQUENCES of pursuing this Narrative do not matter to him in the least. He measures his “success” by a completely different calculus: merely by the intensity of his commitment to “fundamentally transform” America. As long as he keeps undoing the Constitution and the free market system, he believes he’s on the “right path.” And that’s why, while his entire agenda collapses around him in practical terms, he remains smugly arrogant and condescending toward all critics.

And his followers still love him for it.

His diehard supporters and leftist followers are the same way: not in the least contrite, no matter what disasters they visit upon the nation. They take zero responsibility for those disasters. Their Narrative exonerates them, and twists facts to blame it all on their enemies.

Faux News anyone? :)

That is why they can watch, in passive, blithe bemusement, while Russia starts to gobble up territory in surrounding nations; while China continues its massive navy-building binge; while ISIS maintains a safe haven in Syria while proclaiming its intentions to launch horrific attacks on the American homeland; while Iran, a hotbed of militant Islam, builds its nuclear weapons; while nutcase North Korea continues to expand its nuclear arsenal; while millions of individuals — undoubtedly including foreign terrorists — pour across our borders into America without so much as a criminal record check, and are aided and abetted by the Regime in being scattered all over America, then subsidized.

It’s all about, ONLY about, reinforcing and implementing the Narrative. Nothing else — NOTHING, no matter how bad — matters.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!!! :)

I believe Mr. Bidinotto is on to something here.  I have often remarked how liberals/leftists/progressives are generally impervious to facts, all they seem able to do is regurgitate the accepted talking-points on the issue at hand, then blithely go forth and pull the handle for the guy with the (D) next to his name on election day.  It had never occurred to me to think about this in terms of how the left sees themselves, and their “relationship” with the narrative or “story” they want so desperately to be true.  So desperately in fact they will completely ignore or disregard reality itself if it gets in the way of their belief in the story.  The narrative truly does trump all.  And, it’s something we on the right lack.  It is why we have such a hard time winning at the polls, why despite the complete and continuing failure of their policies and issues, so many people continue to blindly support liberal-democrats.  It explains why so many like to repeat the calumnious propaganda about people on the right all being greedy, racist homophobic war-mongers who hate children and want old people to live in the street and eat cat food, all despite the complete lack of even the tiniest bit of first hand proof or evidence supporting these stereotypes.  It’s all part of the narrative.

And they have The Liberal Media, who is the spokesman for The Narrative to cover for them when need be. Benghazi, any one?

I know a liberal on Facebook (a friend of a friend) and you bring up Benghazi and the 4 dead people and the You Tube Video and all you’ll get is “Faux News” screeds and an unending spewing of personal ad hominems.

Reality doesn’t matter. The fact that I’m right does. And as I have often said, the Left believes they are always right about everything, every time, and if they aren’t then they will twist it and distort it until and at least you’re so confused by the bullshit that they aren’t “wrong” anymore.

Don’t dazzle them with intelligence, baffle them with bullshit. Bullshit hides reality.

VOTE FOR ME, THE OTHER GUY’S AN ASSHOLE! :)

I believe this phenomenon is also related to the most frequent criticism of the Republicans going into the mid-term election in November: they have no plan.  You can hear this repeated over and over again in the conservative punditry: the Republicans have no plan, they are giving us no reason to vote for them.  Of course this may not matter in terms of the outcome this election, the Democrats having failed so abysmally and being so unpopular, simply being “the other guy” may be a perfectly viable strategy, this time.  But what about the long game?  It’s not that we on the right don’t have a plan, it’s that we don’t have a narrative.

Even if the Republicans have a plan, it’s not the plan that fits the Narrative, so it might as well be no plan because that’s the way the Left would think of it.

I am not saying we should stop arguing with the left, pointing out their failures, or exposing the utterly fatal flaws in their policies and issues.  There will always be a place for debate, and it remains important, but I think at this point it’s clear this is not enough.  We need a counter-narrative, a story, about why we are right, and more importantly, why they are wrong.  And we need it now. (Greg Conterio)

The Republican’s have needed it for years.

And being “liked” or being friendly or accommodating to the Left won’t do it.

For if a Narrative denies the reality, then you have to have a Narrative that denies their reality, not accommodates it.

Making nice won’t work.

As I have repeatedly said,Compromise to a Leftist is weakness. There idea of compromise is “They win, you lose”.

Period.

End of story.

That’s the Narrative.

That’s their Reality.

That’s the Inconvenient Truth.

Deal with it.

154523 600 Immigration Policy    Reposted cartoons

151687 600 GOP Sues Obama cartoons

153833 600 Ebola Doctor cartoons

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

Why it is…

This guy Christopher Cook from Western Free Press nails it. It’s a great summation of what I have said over and over again in this blog for the last 5 years.

“Conservatives see liberals as misguided; liberals see conservatives as evil.”
—Original source unknown

Are you a conservative, a libertarian, or a Republican? Have you ever been verbally assaulted by someone on the political left with a ferocity you didn’t quite understand? Have you seen it happen to friends and colleagues, or watched in horror as the media establishment does it to a public figure?

Of course you have. At some point or other, nearly everyone on the political right has witnessed or been the victim of an attack designed not to elucidate facts, but rather to paint him or her as a villain.

My attention was recently drawn to a typical such calumny from a Facebook exchange:

Republicans hate anything that isn’t white, wealthy, and christian at least in appearance. They hate the poor, women, and minorities. They hate science and don’t believe that the global warming we clearly are experiencing is man made. They hate any government programs that help the poor and minorities, and the particularly despise immigrants, particularly the illegal kind. They love programs that line the pockets of oil companies, mining companies, and are willing to export jobs with wild abandon.

They hate public education, and they despise public schools and the public school teachers and public university professors. And since the do not respect the market place of ideas, they hate tenure (that gives teachers academic freedom) because it prevents them from firing teachers who are Democrats and who might infect some student with their liberal ideas. They want insurance companies to make a maximum of profit, and are perfectly willing for the health insurance companies to kill people by refusing service to anyone that might cost them a buck more than the median expense. They don’t care about clean food because it might cost the food corporation a little money, and they don’t care about clean water because cleaning up the waste will cost their precious corporate persons a little money.

This is not a recitation of facts; it is a series of smears. It is the construction of a giant cartoonish super-villain, made of straw and woven together with calumny. The giant straw villain is then publicly burned, in a narcissistic orgy of self-adulation. Of course, the torches of the “best” people burn the brightest.

Or one of my favourites: “you should stop watching Faux News” end of discussion.

Another way of looking at it is this: It is the modern-day version of a witch trial. The charges are utterly farcical and cartoonish. “I saw her dancing with demons in the pale moonlight.” “She looked at me and I sneezed, and the next day, I had a terrible cold.” “She turned me into a newt.” But they are stated with great conviction and repeated incessantly, and they establish the unassailable collective will of which the accused has run afoul. The witch is made into the auslander, and the good people of the community show how “good” they are by shouting their accusations the loudest.

Either way, whether the wicker man or the witch, the effigy goes up in flames and the community is purged—for the moment—of its evil. Moral annulment now achieved, the villagers walk away feeling good about themselves. Feeling superior.

Facts are also unimportant in this perverse passion play. Like the slavering, semi-psychotic Facebook rant above, most such assaults aren’t a series of accusations backed up by facts, they are a series of character assassinations, most of which are contradicted by the facts.

The most salient example today is the charge that people of the right (conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, tea partiers) oppose Obama out of pure racism—simply because he is black. Though this charge is easily refuted—by common sense, widespread evidence, and actual studies—it is repeated incessantly by the media, the left’s foot-soldiers . . . even the president himself.

Anything short of full Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants is therefore, racist. Anything less than full compliance with Global Warming fearmongering is “denial” and also Racist (according to the EPA Director).

Face it, disagree with a Leftist on basically anything, eventually you’ll be  a racist. Period. End of Discussion. :)

When actual studies are done (as opposed to just restating what the leftist imagines to be so as if it were actual fact), we learn that real racism is distributed fairly evenly among the population without regard to political affiliation.  In 2008, a survey was done that showed similar numbers of Republicans (5.7) and Democrats (6.8) would not vote for a black presidential candidate. Such a question gives us one of the clearest possible tests of raw racism. A loaded question like, “Do you feel blacks receive too much welfare?” might confuse attitudes about race with attitudes about government welfare programs. But this gives us apples to apples: All things being equal, would you refuse to vote for someone solely because of race?

In the 2008 survey, Democrats were slightly (1.1%) more likely to show racist thinking than Republicans, though this is well within the margin of error. A similar study on senatorial candidates was far more damning to Democrats. Bottom line: there is little evidence that Republicans oppose Obama or any candidate on the basis of race to any greater degree than Democrats.

But this should be obvious based on other facts and indicators as well. Take Mia Love. If you are on the political left, you may not have heard of her, but she is a rising star on the right. She quotes Bastiat, she believes in core principles such as subsidiarity—she is dynamic, successful, and hits all the right notes. She is a black woman, and I have not met or heard of a single conservative, Republican, or tea partier who wouldn’t be delighted to support her. (Deep down, many of the left know this, which is why they have been so vicious to her.) I have worked alongside or come in contact with hundreds of activists and partisans on the political right over the last 15 years, and I cannot think of a single one who would not exult at a Mia Love victory. If she were elected president, I myself would do the happy dance on top of the tallest mountain in my area every November!

The reason is obvious: we agree ideologically. Race is unimportant. Barack Obama is, it can be fairly argued, further to the political left than any previous president. And people on the right oppose him so virulently for that very reason—not because of his race, but because of the huge ideological gulf that lies between. Imagine that.

The other painfully incessant canard is the notion that people on the right “hate the poor.” In fact, the evidence shows the opposite. Conservatives are more charitable than liberals by fairly significant margins, even when you adjust for a variety of factors. Rich, middle-class, and poor conservatives are all more charitable than their liberal counterparts.  It’s not that conservatives are wealthier overall, either—liberal households are 6% wealthier on average. (I bet you never heard that little fact on MSNBC.) It is also not that conservatives are more religious: new data indicate that secular conservatives give more than secular liberals. These conservatives are voluntarily helping the poor with their own money, in greater numbers than their liberal counterparts in every cohort. Conservatism is a greater predictor of charity.

Leftists (they hardly deserve the term “liberal”), by contrast, are more “charitable” with other people’s money. Leftist A votes for Politician B to take money (by force) from Taxpayer C to give it to Recipient D. A and D give more support and power to B, who continues to take more and more from C, in a perverse and ever-increasing form of economic bondage. Then, A, B, and D get together and say that C hates the poor. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But we are getting dragged into the weeds here. We could go on and on refuting fact after fact, but the facts are unimportant. The leftist is creating a narrative. As a marketing guru will tell you, Facts tell, but stories sell. It’s a lesson the leftist has learned well.

Even more disturbing, in recent years, this method of “argumentation” has increasingly become the first tool pulled out of the toolbox. No longer does the leftist feel as compelled to make real arguments. All he needs to do now is shout “Racist!” or “War on Women!” and his job is done. He walks away feeling smugly satisfied of his own politically correct superiority, and the untrained observer is left addled at best, and possibly even swayed by the narrative.

So why they are so vicious?  Why do people who self-describe as “compassionate” direct such vitriolic hate and assaults at their ideological opponents? How they can justify painting you as such a monster?

Simple: To them, you are a monster. You must be.

Reason #1: Utopianism
You’re in their way

Strip everything away, and the fundamental trait of all leftists is this: The believe that through the state, they can build paradise on earth. They believe that with enough tinkering, coercion, and rule by “experts,” they can eliminate all hard choices and competing goods, perfect human nature, and bring all good things to all people.

To someone of the political right—defined by our belief in human freedom, private solutions, and individual sovereignty—this is just the modern re-telling of the age-old story: that some men should rule over other men. Ancient despotism, monarchy, fascism, totalitarianism, modern progressivism—they’re all just different flavors, and different degrees of application, of the same basic philosophy. But the person on the left does not see it that way. He wants perfection. He believes it is possible. And by gum, he’s going to get it.

This utopian thinking quickly leads to an unavoidable conclusion, echoed from the French Revolution to Lenin and Stalin to Mao to the Progressives of the modern era: “On ne fait pas d’omelet sans casser des oeufs.” (You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs.) To the utopian statist, “process costs” are entirely acceptable. They are building paradise, after all.

That’s why you see so much more toleration by the left’s rank and file of corruption and bad behavior by their leaders. What’s a little lying here, a little corruption there? They are building paradise. What’s a little cheating in the face of all they intend to accomplish?

That is also why you see such a prevalence of cult-of-personality adulation for strong leaders. Strong leaders resolve contradictions and sweep away the opposition. Strong leaders have the will to get the job done. Strong leaders get the trains running on time. Next stop, paradise.

But most importantly . . . these utopians—both the leaders and the rank and file—are so convinced of the nobility of their intentions that they believe that anyone who stands in their way must, by definition, have evil intentions. After all, who but a monster would stand in the way of paradise? And what consideration do monsters deserve? Why none at all, of course—they’re monsters.

That is why they do not simply disagree with you. That is why they calumniate you and attribute the worst motives to you. That is why they hate you.

Reason #2: Utopianism
The WORLD is in their way

The world refuses to conform to their utopian vision. The world isn’t the neat and tidy place they want it to be. They still hold onto the childlike belief that there can be goods with no tradeoffs, and this world of endless tradeoffs proves them wrong every day, mocking their childishness in the process. That makes them very angry.

Someone once said, “Conservatives believe what they see; liberals see what they believe.” Leftists hate you for the fact that you see the world as it is, rather than as it should be. You accept the facts of reality as they truly are, and you try to make the best of it. They believe that they can make reality conform to their vision of it. (That this effort always requires massive application of force against other human beings doesn’t bother them. It’s just another process cost.)

Your acceptance of reality as it is is pedestrian and troglodytic. Their vision of how reality should be makes them noble and romantic. They hate you for not living in the same fantasy land that they do. They hate you for recognizing that life is filled with tradeoffs. They don’t see the tradeoffs, so when you point them out, it’s as if you are the one that is making the tradeoff exist. La-La-La . . . I can’t hear you! Stop making bad things happen.

Your acceptance of reality makes them so angry, in fact, that they have convinced themselves that you must be suffering from some sort of psychological malady. Over the last century, dozens of self-reinforcing  junk-science books and studies have been published labeling “conservatism” (once called “classical liberalism”) as a mental disorder. Like the mental patient permanently lost in a psychotic world of his own creation . . . he’s normal, it’s the rest of you who are nuts.

Reason #3: Preening Narcissism
They are beautiful, so you must be ugly

The ideas of the political left produce failure at best and misery, oppression, and democide at worst. In spite of this, I had long clung to the belief that at least people on the political left “mean well.”

But do they? Or do they simply want to feel as though they mean well?

Author Robert Bidinotto asks (and answers) the same question:

Have decades upon decades of liberal policy failures deterred liberals from being liberals? Have the trillions of dollars blown on welfare-state programs since the “New Deal” and the “War on Poverty” made a damned bit of difference in curing poverty? And has that failure convinced “progressives” that there is something fundamentally wrong in their worldview and approach? Have the horrendous historical consequences of appeasement policies stopped today’s politicians from appeasing international thugs and terrorists? No?

Then why does anyone assume that liberals gauge the value of their worldview by the standard of its PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES?

Practical consequences are ALWAYS trumped by the advancement and protection of one’s core Narrative: the fairy tale that gives one’s life meaning, coherence, and moral justification. [ . . . ]

Doing that makes them feel good about themselves. And they would far rather feel good about themselves than actually achieve any of their stated practical objectives. It’s not about the objectives at all. It’s about THEM.

John Hawkins is just as unequivocal:

3) Liberals emphasize feeling superior, not superior results. Liberalism is all about appearances, not outcomes. What matters to liberals is how a program makes them FEEL about themselves, not whether it works or not. Thus a program like Headstart, which sounds good because it’s designed to help children read, makes liberals feel good about themselves, even though the program doesn’t work and wastes billions. A ban on DDT makes liberals feel good about themselves because they’re “protecting the environment” even though millions of people have died as a result. For liberals, it’s not what a program does in the real world; it’s about whether they feel better about themselves for supporting it.

If this is true, then for many, utopianism isn’t about what they think they can achieve, it’s about their own self-image.

So is it true?

The persistence of this vision in the face of centuries of evidence would seem to indicate that it may be. We know that maximizing human freedom is more moral and produces better results—the last two centuries have made that clear. And on the flip side, we know that maximizing government at the expense of the individual produces a parade of horribles. And yet, again and again, we are told that it simply wasn’t done correctly before, or by the right people.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?
Why you are, my dear—you are so compassionate and fair and noble in every way.

The leftist looks at herself in the mirror and sees that she is one of those “right people,” because that is how she wants to see herself.

And if she is so beautiful and noble and fair . . . then how ugly you must be for standing in her way.

 

The leftist—the utopian, the statist—sees himself as on noble quest. He is the embodiment of everything good, simply because that is how he sees himself. How he wants to see himself. In order to maintain this self-image, he must make you the embodiment of everything horrible. He must make you ugly.

To statists, you are just another process cost. Their willingness to accept process costs on the road to their utopia is limited only by national context. In the United States, an exceptional nation where we still have some rule of law, they will certainly calumniate you, and they may decide to harm your finances, career, or reputation. In less exceptional countries where there is less rule of law, the harm is often to people’s freedom or even their very lives, as more than 100 million poor souls discovered in the 20th century.

The typical leftist in America, ignorant of his own philosophical pedigree, will protest this characterization. Do not let their protestations sway you. The degree to which they will treat you—the monster standing in the way of their utopia—as a disposable process cost is limited only by the degree of power they have. For your own safety, do not let them get more.

You are in the way of the utopia they are trying to create. You are in the way of the power they need to do it.

You. Are. In. Their. Way.

utopia

“The conservative “thinks of political policies as intended to preserve order, justice, and freedom. The ideologue, on the contrary, thinks of politics as a revolutionary instrument for transforming society and even transforming human nature. In his march toward Utopia, the liberal ideologue is merciless.”― Russell Kirk

the Ministry of Truth It is an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete rising 300 metres into the air, containing over 3000 rooms above ground. On the outside wall are the three slogans of the Party: “WAR IS PEACE,” “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY,” “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” There is also a large part underground, probably containing huge incinerators where documents are destroyed after they are put down memory holes. (Hard Drives crashing anyone?)

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.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” – George Washington

154418 600 Obamas Piece Prize   Reposted cartoons

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

The Politically Correct Amnesty Plague

“The clearest path to change is to change [the voter turnout] number,” said Obama “Si se puede, si votamos! Yes, we can, if we vote!”

“And six years ago, I asked you to believe, and tonight, I ask you to keep believing, not just in my ability to bring about change, but in your ability to bring about change. Because in the end, DREAMer is more than just a title, it’s a pretty good description of what it means to be an American.”-Obama

Flood in here illegally, squat, and wait for Amnesty. That’s the “American” Way!

And you scoff at the idea that the Democrats want all these aliens to use as a voting block to do whatever they want, whenever they want, because they want. After all, checking whether they are legal to vote is “RACIST!”. :)

Now do you? :)

“This is a promise the president will keep,” Earnest said during an appearance on Telemundo’s “Enfoque con Jose Diaz-Balart.” “The president has tasked his team with looking at the law and determining what kind of executive authority he can use to try to address the problems of our broken immigration system. They’ve come up with some good solutions. They will be finalized before the end of the year and the president will announce them before the end of the year.”

Earnest noted that “the president has taken action before that has made a difference in try to addressing some of these problems,” pointing to his deferred action program that allows some who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children to remain without the threat of deportation.

“The president believed that they needed relief. And working with his Homeland Security secretary and other law enforcement officials, was able to bring them relief,” Earnest said. “The president made good on that promise and the president’s gonna make good on this promise too.” (The Hill)

It’s Good to be The King!

That’s Obama’s “America”.

But America is stuck on open-borders stupid.

The Diversity Visa (DV) program, to take just one glaring example of government insanity, is still going.

On October 1, the State Department opened the annual DV random lottery to applicants from around the world. Yes, it’s completely random like a Powerball drawing. Up to 55,000 lucky winners will snag permanent residency visas (green cards), which put them on the path to American citizenship ahead of millions of other foreigners patiently waiting to come to this country.

The green card lotto winners’ spouses and unmarried children under 21 all get golden tickets into the country, too, no matter where they were born.

Illegal aliens are eligible if a legal family member wins the jackpot. Applicants don’t even need a high school education. No outstanding abilities, training or job skills are necessary. A handful of countries are excluded if they no longer qualify as “underrepresented.” But if you come from a terror-sponsoring or terror-friendly nation — such as Iran, Syria, Sudan, North Korea and more than a dozen officially designated terror enablers on the State Department’s list — no worries. Thousands from these breeding grounds for jihad will walk through our front doors.

This is what happens when bipartisan panderers in Washington get their way. The visa lottery was championed by left-wing social engineer Sen. Ted Kennedy and signed into law by President George H. W. Bush in 1990 to admit more “underrepresented” immigrant minorities into the U.S. Although originally intended to give a leg up to Irish illegal aliens who had overstayed their visas, most of the winners now hail from non-Western terror hot spots and hostile territories.

ISIS anyone? anyone… :)

You know who else will get in? Untold numbers of “diversity” petitioners from Liberia, Sierra Leone and other West African countries where the Ebola virus is epidemic. If you think the feds will ensure that foreign visa-seekers with communicable diseases stay out, think again. The State Department now allows applicants with HIV to apply and enter. Those who suffer from tuberculosis, leprosy or other afflictions “of public health significance” can apply for waivers.

Because we don’t want to “discriminate” or be “racist” now do we… :)

Reports indicate that before his departure from Liberia to Texas last week, Ebola carrier Thomas Duncan lied at the airport about being in contact with someone exposed to the disease. So far, the White House refuses to impose any travel restrictions from West Africa. It’s also not clear whether the U.S. has re-screened West Africans who won last year’s DV game and are flying into the country now.

As I’ve reported for the past 12 years, enforcement and screening procedures are shoddy. The General Accounting Office deemed the DV program a national security risk in 2008, while State Department and Homeland Security officials blamed each other for reckless incompetence.

“Consular officers at six of the posts reviewed — Accra (Ghana), Addis Ababa (Ethiopia), Dhaka (Bangladesh), Kathmandu (Nepal), Lagos (Nigeria) and Warsaw (Poland) — reported that the availability of fake documents, or genuine documents with false information, such as birth certificates, marriage certificates, and passports, presented significant challenges when verifying DV applicants’ identities and the relationship between the principle DV applicants and their spouse and dependents,” the GAO reported.

The Diversity Visa lottery program is a public health hazard and a national security risk that leaves our safety to random chance. But pleas to curtail or end the program since the 9/11 attacks have fallen on deaf ears.

In the wake of the Ebola scare (not to mention renewed jihadi threats from abroad), worried Americans are heading to the drugstore to stock up on facemasks, hand sanitizer and gloves. New vaccines are in the works for emerging global contagions.

Unfortunately, there is no antidote for our government’s blind and deadly diversity worship. Political correctness is a plague on us all. (Michelle Malkin)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 

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

Psych Test

The Earth’s temperature has “plateaued” and there has been no global warming for at least the last 18 years, says Dr. John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at the University of Alabama/Huntsville. “That’s basically a fact. There’s not much to comment on,” Christy said when CNSNews.com asked him to remark on the lack of global warming for nearly two decades as of October 1st. –Barbara Hollingsworth, CBS News, 30 September 2014

New York magazine has figured out why conservatives don’t believe climate change is an imminent threat: we have a serious psychological problem.

As a result, environmental activists are working with shrinks to retool their message for the red states:

[S]ocial scientists have shown in laboratory settings that there are ways to discuss climate change that nudge conservatives toward recognizing the issue. Research is proceeding along a few different tracks. One of them involves moral foundations theory, a hot idea in political psychology that basically argues that people holding different political beliefs arrive at those beliefs because they have different moral values (even if there’s plenty of overlap). Liberals tend to be more moved by the idea of innocent people being harmed than conservatives, for example, while conservatives are more likely to react to notions of disgust (some of the conservative rhetoric over immigration reflects this difference).

I assume the “innocent people” in this study don’t include the unborn, though I agree that most conservatives are disgusted by abortion. The article provides zero examples of conservative disgust on the immigration debate. Most of the arguments I’ve seen focus on economics, security, and national sovereignty. But no worries — greenies have discovered other mental defects to exploit:

Another promising route that researchers are exploring involves the concept of “system justification.” Put simply, system justification arises from the deep-seated psychological need for humans to feel like the broad systems they are a part of are working correctly. It doesn’t feel good to know you attend a broken school or inhabit a deeply corrupt country — or that your planet’s entire ecology may be on the brink of collapse.

People tend to deal with major threats to their systems in one of two ways: taking a threat so seriously that they seek out ways to neutralize it, or “finding ways to justify away problems in order to maintain the sense of legitimacy and well-being of the system,” explained Irina Feygina, a social psychologist at New York University. This latter route is system justification.

Conservatives don’t have a monopoly on system justification, but there’s strong evidence they do it more than liberals. “There’s a lot of research that just goes out and asks people what their opinions and preferences are, and pretty consistently — I don’t actually know of any examples to the contrary — people who tend to report being further on the conservative end of the spectrum also report having greater confidence in the system and greater motivation to justify it,” said Feygina.

Researchers found positive responses to phrases such as “being pro-environmental allows us to protect and preserve the American way of life,” and “it is patriotic to conserve the country’s natural resources.” That’s nice as far as it goes, but doesn’t touch the heart of the left/right disconnect.

I know many, many people on the right, but don’t believe that I’ve met any who aren’t conservationists. We have always wanted to “conserve the country’s natural resources” and “protect and preserve the American way of life.” That these psychologists were unaware of this truth reveals they know little about conservative beliefs. Perhaps they’ve bought into the tired liberal caricature of greedy oil tycoons strip-mining national parks as rows of smokestacks belch soot hither and yon.

Unlike many leftists, we pick up after ourselves, try to save fuel, and enjoy the great outdoors. We vote for clean drinking water and don’t want smog-choked cities or garbage-filled lakes. That is a far cry from believing that man-made climate change has doomed our fragile planet to a nightmarish hellscape that will kill us all.

Partisan psychologists have a lot of work to do if they want to move conservatives from “it’s nice to save energy” to “we need a one-world government with 90 percent tax rates or the planet will melt.” (Ricochet)

P.S. Oct 1st marks 18 years without global warming.

“there is still a strong belief system that greenhouse gases control the climate, and so if that is your belief system, then it doesn’t really matter what the evidence shows.”-Dr. John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at the University of Alabama/Huntsville.

“Proof denies faith, and without faith I am Nothing”– Douglas Adams.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

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

Intelligence Failure

Well, now we know why. But is it a surprise. After all, it isn’t an AGENDA item so it must really bore him. Let his minions do the lowly stuff.

A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report reveals that President Barack Obama has attended only 42.1% of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) in the 2,079 days of his presidency through September 29, 2014.

The GAI report also included a breakdown of Obama’s PDB attendance record between terms; he attended 42.4% of his PDBs in his first term and 41.3% in his second.

The GAI’s alarming findings come on the heels of Obama’s 60 Minutes comments on Sunday, wherein the president laid the blame for the Islamic State’s (ISIS) rapid rise squarely at the feet of his Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

“I think our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria,” said Obama.

Because they were supposed to be doing the Job-That-President-didn’t-wanna-do  :) and they failed him, so it must be by default, their fault.

It surely can’t be his fault! Nothing is ever his fault! He’s too smart. He’s too wonderful. To clever to be at fault for anything, especially boring old crap he doesn’t give a shit about that other people where supposed to handle for him in the first place.

He’s King, not Commander-in-Chief, after all! :)

According to Daily Beast reporter Eli Lake, members of the Defense establishment were “flabbergasted” by Obama’s attempt to shift blame.

“Either the president doesn’t read the intelligence he’s getting or he’s bullshitting,” a former senior Pentagon official “who worked closely on the threat posed by Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq” told the Daily Beast.

Bullshit. If you can’t dazzle them with your Wile E Coyote Suuuuper Genius, you baffle them with bullshit, then get the Media to repeat it often enough people forget it was your bullshit.

On Monday, others in the intelligence community similarly blasted Obama and said he’s shown longstanding disinterest in receiving live, in-person PDBs that allow the Commander-in-Chief the chance for critical followup, feedback, questions, and the challenging of flawed intelligence assumptions.

“It’s pretty well-known that the president hasn’t taken in-person intelligence briefings with any regularity since the early days of 2009,” an Obama national security staffer told the Daily Mail on Monday. “He gets them in writing.”

The Obama security staffer said the president’s PDBs have contained detailed threat warnings about the Islamic State dating back to before the 2012 presidential election.

“Unless someone very senior has been shredding the president’s daily briefings and telling him that the dog ate them, highly accurate predictions about ISIL have been showing up in the Oval Office since before the 2012 election,” the Obama security staffer told the Daily Mail.

This is not the first time questions have been raised about Obama’s lack of engagement and interest in receiving in-person daily intelligence briefings. On September 10, 2012, the GAI released a similar report showing that Obama had attended less than half (43.8%) of his daily intelligence briefings up to that point. When Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen mentioned the GAI’s findings in his column, then-White House Press Secretary Jay Carney dubbed the findings “hilarious.” The very next day, U.S. Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and three American staff members were murdered in Benghazi. As Breitbart News reported at the time, the White House’s very own presidential calendar revealed Obama had not received his daily intel briefing in the five consecutive days leading up to the Benghazi attacks.

Ultimately, as ABC News reported, the White House did not directly dispute the GAI’s numbers but instead said Obama prefers to read his PDB on his iPad instead of receiving the all-important live, in-person briefings.

Now, with ISIS controlling over 35,000 square miles of territory in its widening caliphate in Iraq and Syria, and with Obama pointing fingers at his own Director of National Intelligence James Clapper for the rise of ISIS, the question remains whether a 42% attendance record on daily intelligence briefings is good enough for most Americans. (Breitbart)

But what do I know, I’m just a “hater”, after all. :)

Now ISIS…

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