Move On

Remember when the “debate” over Global Warming was over when the Liberals said they’d reached a “consensus” so you best just shut up and move on to more important things because they are right and you’re wrong and that’s just the end of it?

Well…the pattern repeats. Shocked? I’m not.

the president recommended that his party robustly defend Obamacare, while simultaneously averring that it’s time to “move on” and deal with other issues. A telling contradiction. We love Obamacare and will defend it passionately, but it’s imperative that we change the subject! The American people, he said, are more interested in more jobs, a growing economy, and improving wages than re-fighting the Obamacare battle. Perhaps he’s unaware that the latter is empirically impeding the former litany of goals he laid out. Perhaps not. The important message is that Obamacare is working, resistance is futile, and we ought not waste our energy on it anymore. Tell that to these widows, or to this poor woman:

 

After receiving her new health coverage in January through the New York State of Health Marketplace, Arden Heights resident Margaret Figueroa, 49, who suffers from two chronic illnesses, went to her pharmacy to fill her prescriptions. Although her insurance company, EmblemHealth, assured her she was covered, her insurance card was denied. While she had signed up for new health coverage — because her insurance carrier dropped her old plan — the company’s internal paperwork apparently wasn’t filed. She also learned that all her long-time doctors didn’t accept the new insurance plan. For Ms. Figueroa, who suffers from a rare neurological disease called Arnold Chiari Malformation and Syringomyelia, this has led to three months of excruciating pain, withdrawal symptoms and immobility. “It’s hard,” said Ms. Figueroa, through her tears Wednesday at a press conference at Rep. Michael Grimm’s (R-Staten Island/Brooklyn) New Dorp office. “I have been in pain. I’ve been vomiting. I lost 22 pounds. The pain is unbearable. My medication helps me function during the day,” added Ms. Figueroa, who has undergone four brain surgeries for her conditions, which require her to take numerous amounts of medication.

 
Silence, subject! The debate is over. And horror stories like yours have been “debunked” by Harry Reid and the media (“All of them are untrue”)– a “fact” that the president helpfully mentioned today, in an effort to minimize the financial and medical hardships his signature law is inflicting on millions of people.

Because after all, they are the superior beings. They are morally superior, intellectually superior and they have decided they are 100% correct and nothing can stop them. Certainly, not you neanderthal “deniers” who just want to cause suffering and pain. :)

President Obama’s (second) “Mission Accomplished” pep rally on behalf of his unpopular signature accomplishment was as shrill, demagogic and dishonest as one might expect. Especially insulting was his feigned confusion over why Republicans are so “angry” about people getting healthcare. Yeah, that’s it. People aren’t angry about millions of consumers losing the preferred coverage and doctors after being misled by Democrats’ “lie of the year.” People aren’t furious over steep premium increases and shocking out-of-pocket costs. They’re not upset that their hours are being reduced, or that the taxpayer-funded “cost curve” has been bent up, or that their new coverage options are severely limited. No, they’re mad that some individuals are gaining coverage, or whatever. This president routinely seems pathologically incapable of making an intellectually honest argument — let alone a generous one — even as he celebrates himself as a pragmatic non-ideologue. (Guy Benson)

And or course if you disagree, it’s obviously because he’s black and you’re a racist!

Move along, Move along, Nothing to see here.

The Great and Powerful OZ commands it!

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 

internet liberal jefferson

 

 

 

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

Straw Meet Camel

Buried deep on the website of the U.S. Census Bureau is a number every American citizen, and especially those entrusted with public office, should know. It is 86,429,000.

That is the number of Americans who in 2012 got up every morning and went to work — in the private sector — and did it week after week after week.

These are the people who built America, and these are the people who can sustain it as a free country. The liberal media have not made them famous like the polar bear, but they are truly a threatened species.

It is not a rancher with a few hundred head of cattle that is attacking their habitat, nor an energy company developing a fossil fuel. It is big government and its primary weapon — an ever-expanding welfare state.

First, let’s look at the basic taxonomy of the full-time, year-round American worker.

In 2012, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 103,087,000 people worked full-time, year-round in the United States. “A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked 35 or more hours per week (full time) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year (year round),” said the Census Bureau. “For school personnel, summer vacation is counted as weeks worked if they are scheduled to return to their job in the fall.”

Of the 103,087,000 full-time, year-round workers, 16,606,000 worked for the government. That included 12,597,000 who worked for state and local government and 4,009,000 who worked for the federal government.

The 86,429,000 Americans who worked full-time, year-round in the private sector, included 77,392,000 employed as wage and salary workers for private-sector enterprises and 9,037,000 who worked for themselves. (There were also approximately 52,000 who worked full-time, year-round without pay in a family enterprise.)

At first glance, 86,429,000 might seem like a healthy population of full-time private-sector workers. But then you need to look at what they are up against.

The Census Bureau also estimates the size of the benefit-receiving population.

This population, too, falls into two broad categories. The first includes those who receive benefits for public services they performed or in exchange for payroll taxes they dutifully paid their entire working lives. Among these, for example, are those receiving veteran’s benefits, those on unemployment and those getting Medicare and Social Security.

The second category includes those who get “means-tested” government benefits — or welfare. These include, for example, those who get Medicaid, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, public housing, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Women, Infants Children.

Let’s examine this second category first, which the Census Bureau reports as “anyone residing in a household in which one or more people received benefits from the program.”

In the last quarter of 2011, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 82,457,000 people lived in households where one or more people were on Medicaid. 49,073,000 lived in households were someone got food stamps. 23,228,000 lived in households where one or more got WIC. 20,223,000 lived in households where one or more got SSI. 13,433,000 lived in public or government-subsidized housing.

Of course, it stands to reason that some people lived in households that received more than one welfare benefit at a time. To account for this, the Census Bureau published a neat composite statistic: There were 108,592,000 people in the fourth quarter of 2011 who lived in a household that included people on “one or more means-tested program.”

Those 108,592,000 outnumbered the 86,429,000 full-time private-sector workers who inhabited the United States in 2012 by almost 1.3 to 1.

This brings us to the first category of benefit receivers. There were 49,901,000 people receiving Social Security in the fourth quarter of 2011, and 46,440,000 receiving Medicare. There were also 5,098,000 getting unemployment compensation.

And there were also, 3,178,000 veterans receiving benefits and 34,000 veterans getting educational assistance.

All told, including both the welfare recipients and the non-welfare beneficiaries, there were 151,014,000 who “received benefits from one or more programs” in the fourth quarter of 2011. Subtract the 3,212,000 veterans, who served their country in the most profound way possible, and that leaves 147,802,000 non-veteran benefit takers.

The 147,802,000 non-veteran benefit takers outnumbered the 86,429,000 full-time private sector workers 1.7 to 1.

How much more can the 86,429,000 endure?

As more baby boomers retire, and as Obamacare comes fully online — with its expanded Medicaid rolls and federally subsidized health insurance for anyone earning less than 400 percent of the poverty level — the number of takers will inevitably expand. And the number of full-time private-sector workers might also contract.

According to new IRS data, the 1.35 million taxpayers that represent the highest-earning one percent of the Americans who filed federal income tax returns in 2010 earned 18.9% of the total gross income and paid 37.4% of all federal income taxes paid in that year.  In contrast, the 128.3 million taxpayers in the bottom 95% of all U.S. taxpayers in 2010 earned 66.2% of gross income and that group paid 40.9% of all taxes paid. In other words, the top 1 percent (1.35 million) of American taxpayers paid almost as much federal income tax in 2010 ($354.8 billion) as the entire bottom 95% of American tax filers ($388.4 billion)

But they are the evil “greedy” rich after all…

Eventually, there will be too few carrying too many, and America will break. (CNS)

But since that’s what the Democrats want… :)

We are From the Government and we are here to help you.

Don’t vote for that other guy, he’s an asshole who hates everyone and will just hurt you. :)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

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

Snow Job

First, a Global Warming update: Detroit snow record: A spring storm broke Detroit’s 133-year-old record for snowfall totals: This winter, Detroit got 94.8 inches of snow, topping the previous record from 1880-1881 by more than an inch.

In Flint, 1.3 inches fell as of Tuesday morning, pushing the seasonal total to 83.9 inches. That exceeded the previous Flint seasonal record of 82.9 inches from the winter of 1974-1975.

I remember that  winter. I was there. And you were no Global Warming…

The Thought Police:

A school-wide questionnaire at Western Washington University (WWU) asked the community “How do we make sure that in future years ‘we are not as white as we are today?’”

No Racism here… :)

The question, released through the communications and marketing department’s daily newsletter Western Today, comes on the heels of admonishments given in multiple convocation addresses by WWU President Bruce Shepard for the university’s “failure” to be less white.

No Racism Here….

“In the decades ahead, should we be as white as we are today, we will be relentlessly driven toward mediocrity; or, become a sad shadow of our current self.”   

“Every year, from this stage and at this time, you have heard me say that, if in decades ahead, we are as white as we are today, we will have failed as university,” Shepard said in the 2012 speech.

No Racism here. After all, white people are evil, everyone knows that! :)

So on that bombshell…

Jonah Goldberg: Liberal fascism is alive and well, and seemingly everywhere one looks these days. Not since the dark days of Stalin’s purges have so many so-called progressives exercised so much violent aggression against their enemies. It is indeed a dark time to be considered an enemy of the left-liberal alliance, as so many recent victims can attest.

First, a bunch of Twitter users got mad at Stephen Colbert, leading to Comedy Central agreeing to end his show — forever. Regardless of the merit of the anti-Colbert complaint, it was chilling to see free speech trampled upon as a gaggle of vaguely organized people on Twitter successfully browbeat a massive media conglomerate into sort of apologizing for a joke.

As bleak as that episode was, it was just the warmup for the unprecedented onslaught of rage unleashed against Brenden Eich, the former CEO of Mozilla, who was hounded from his job merely for donating $1,000 to a political campaign organized around stripping same-sex couples of the right to have their unions recognized by the state. The gay mafia is real, my friends, which is why Eich is now dead in an unmarked grave somewhere outside Philly. Or at least no longer the CEO of a tech company, which is basically the next-worse thing.

Sure, Eich’s resignation was his own decision, prompted in part by the resignations of some members of Mozilla’s board — in other words, it was internal strife, not external protest, that led to his decision to leave the company — but the gays and their gay-sympathizers were frightfully unfair to Eich, by expressing disapproval of his totally legitimate decision to spend money denying them various rights. The entire affair reflected a terrifying new status quo, in which tech executives don’t have the complete freedom to say whatever they like. What’s next? Will it no longer be socially acceptable for men to make unwanted sexual advances toward women?



Still, the worst of the new intolerance was yet to come. Last week, Brandeis University announced that it would rescind an honorary degree it planned to award to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an internationally feted survivor of horrific abuse as a Somali-born former Muslim. Hirsi Ali is now a best-selling author and critic of religious extremism — a hero to the victims of Islamic Extremism worldwide, or at least a hero to various Americans and Europeans who imagine themselves the foot soldiers in a global war against Islamism. Brandeis’ decision to cave to pressure from the left-wing/Islamofascist militants and cancel Hirsi Ali’s honor has been castigated by champions of freedom around the world.

Hirsi Ali’s crime? Offending the Liberal Thought Police. And a bit of lying about her background. Like, sort of lying about most of it. And then also saying inflammatory things about Muslims. Inflammatory bordering on eliminationist. With a lot of stuff about how Islam must be “crushed” and “we are at war with Islam”; and so on. Plus the thing about how she sort of sympathized with Anders Breivik.

Still, to silence Hirsi Ali for her beliefs is a shocking violation of academic freedom. Louis Brandeis and John Podhoretz’s uncle would be appalled. Sure, Brandeis extended Hirsi Ali an invitation to speak after rescinding her completely meaningless honor, but not giving someone a prize is still a form of censorship.

All of these seemingly unconnected incidents can be understood with one simple word: fascism. Liberal fascism. “Fascism” as a term has been abused by leftists over the decades, but it is a definable and concrete thing. Essentially, fascism is when a bunch of people criticize something they disapprove of or are offended by, and ask that the thing or person that offends them not be rewarded in some fashion. (Mussolini got his start as a sort of Italian proto-”hashtag activist,” uniting his “followers” against Slavic people and socialists.) One of the most important features of liberal fascism, as it is practiced in the 21st century, is that while none of its victims ever die or go to jail, it is still always directly and exactly comparable to some sort of horrific historical (or literary) atrocity.

Like the Inquisition. Or the gulags. (“That term may be perverse, but it is not an exaggeration.”) Or honor killings. Or Orwell’s “Thought Police.” Or racist minstrelsy. Or McCarthyism. Whatever you want to call it, it is an appalling violation of the supposed tenet of liberal tolerance when liberals refuse to tolerate bigots and creeps. Obviously Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Brenden Eich, Alec Baldwin and Charles Murray are all still rich, free, influential and suffering no actual material or physical hardships for their beliefs, but people were rude about them on Twitter. Papa Joe himself would be proud.
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

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

They Care Too Much

If you’ve ever engaged in a debate with a progressive, you know first-hand the definition of futility. After a few minutes, they run out of whatever talking points they just read in Mother Jones or Salon, and out come the names. It used to take longer – there were even reported cases of debates reaching double-digits in minutes before the expletives and personal attacks began.

I find it’s almost instantaneous depending on the level of Progressive your attempting to communicate with.

Orwell would be proud of the near mindlessness of the behavior.

Cries of racism/sexism/homophobia used to be where Democrats ended up in a debate. Now, it’s where they start. What once was simply the last arrow in their quiver has turned into their favorite.

Now, the name-calling is the only arrow they use. It’s not by accident. After five and a half years of a Democratic president and liberal policies, the country is much worse off than before. Recessions come and go – it’s a fact of economics. They stick around only when government acts as if it can “fix” them. As we approach our fifth “Recovery Summer,” the economy is deeper into that ditch the president spoke of back in 2010. Democrats point to the stock market as proof of economic success but decry income inequality and systematically block Americans from investing a tiny portion of their Social Security in it to get their families a taste.

They care too much to set you free.

The failed progressive economic policies are but the tip of an iceberg of disaster, scandals and lies from which Democrats need people distracted if they are to have any hope of holding on to the Senate this fall. The media wants to play along and aid its fellow travelers, but reporters do have a job to do and time and column inches to fill, so a bone must be thrown.

Enter the “isms.”

In an act that should be classified as satire, Attorney General Eric Holder spoke this week to the National Action Network and claimed Republicans are subjecting him and the president to unprecedented mistreatment because they’re black. NAN is the shakedown wing of Al Sharpton’s empire. Sharpton is the preeminent race-baiter in the world today, with ruined lives, riots and a body count left in his wake. Once rightly a pariah for his hatred and corruption, the former FBI informant and MSNBC host’s annual conference is now such an important part of the progressive’s marketing strategy that it not only warranted a visit from the AG, but from the president himself.

Holder nailed himself to the victimhood cross in front of an audience assembled by a man who works in false charges of racism the way Michelangelo worked in marble. This wasn’t by accident.

The media ran with Holder’s lie without reporting on what precipitated it – his “abuse” at the hands of Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, the day before during a congressional hearing. Gohmert wants documents from the Justice Department so Congress can perform the oversight duty it used to do, and Holder is refusing. Considering Holder is currently in contempt of Congress for withholding other documents, there’s no reason to believe he’ll ever comply.

But the stories about Holder’s remarks to NAN didn’t bother delving into why he had his confrontation with Gohmert. They simply ignored that aspect of the exchange. Salon, in a particularly mindless piece of milk-bone journalism (which is saying something) claimed Holder went “off-script” with his victimhood claim. (I won’t link to it because why should I give them clicks they earn money from?) But Holder didn’t go off-script. Crying racism is the script – it is all they have left. That they make it and other cries of victimhood to people who truly have been victims of various “isms” in their lives illustrates just how despicable and desperate they are.

No philosophy has victimized, harmed, killed, imprisoned and ruined more lives than progressivism. It was born out of a sense of superiority – the thought that a few educated elites know better how other people should live their lives than those people themselves – and has used bullying, terror, murder, oppression and lies to advance it. Progressives bathed in Jim Crow and birth eugenics to breed “undesirable people” out of existence. Given there were more abortions of black babies in New York City than births in 2012, eugenics is alive and well, just simply rebranded.

But people aren’t taught the history or the present reality of the progressive philosophy. They know only what they hear in the media. Enter Hank Aaron.

Hank Aaron is a hero. He was one of the greatest baseball players ever, and still the home run king if you discount “juiced” round trippers. He went through an unimaginable Hell when he broke Babe Ruth’s record. Racists sent him death threats more disgusting than you can imagine, and he persevered. But he apparently didn’t learn from it.

This week Aaron compared Republican opposition to Obama’s agenda to the KKK.

What’s amazing to me is how Aaron doesn’t recognize that those Klansmen who were threatening his life were Democrats; the party of eugenics is the progressives. The message and methods have changed, but the objective hasn’t. Slavery still exists, it’s just now based on income rather than race. Government “largesse” is the new plantation and nearly half the people in the country live there, unaware they’re stuck in Plato’s Cave.

Racism is alive and well today, and it lives where it was born – on the left. What’s more racist than demanding a president, an attorney general, or anyone be treated differently, be deferred to, simply because of skin color? That’s what they’re arguing for, and that’s the essence of racism. I’d believe Barack Obama and Eric Holder are the victims of racism if “A-hole” was a race. But it’s not.

If progressives want to see racism, they need to find a reflective surface. While the media reports endlessly about an idiot Republican kissing a staffer, a Democrat representative in Illinois refers to a black conservative as “a half” black. She apologized “if she offended anyone,” not for what she said or for being a disgusting human being. A Democrat in Alabama said Republicans would support abortion if their daughters got pregnant by a black man, then attacked interracial adoptive families. He hasn’t apologized because he hasn’t had to. He “votes right,” so he can say disgusting things.

If you made this stuff up, you would me mocked as an absurdist. But if you truly believe it, if you believe in the superiority of the politician over the person, of the progressive agenda über alles, you get elected as a Democrat and/or a show on MSNBC. (Derek Hunter)

Are you know have you ever been…?

And these are the more “compassionate” and “sensitive”. :)

HAIL HYDRA!

Home Superior Liberalis uber alles!! :)

Vote For a Democrat, because the other guy’s a racist, misogynistic,intolerant, hater asshole! :)

 

 

 

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

Selfishness

I have often mused about selfishness, especially in politics.

So take it away Thomas Sowell.

The recent Supreme Court decision over-ruling some Federal Election Commission restrictions on political campaign contributions has provoked angry reactions on the left. That is what often happens whenever the High Court rules that the First Amendment means what it says — free speech for everybody.

When the Supreme Court declared in 2010 that both unions and corporations had a right to buy political ads, that was considered outrageous by the left. President Obama called the decision “devastating” and said it “will open the floodgates for special interests.”

 

Those unfamiliar with political rhetoric may not know that “special interests” mean people who support your opponents. One’s own organized supporters — such as labor unions supporting President Obama — are never called “special interests.”

All politicians are against “special interests,” by definition. They all want their own supporters to have the right to free speech, but not those individuals and groups so benighted as to support their opponents.

Even in an age of polarization and gridlock, the one area in which it is easy to get bipartisan support in Congress is in passing campaign finance laws, restricting how much money can be spent publicizing political candidates. What Congressional Democrats and Republicans have in common is that they are all incumbents, and they all want to keep their jobs.

Publicity is necessary to win elections, and incumbents get millions of dollars’ worth of free publicity from the media. Incumbents can all pontificate in Congress and be covered by C-SPAN. They can get interviewed on network television, have their pictures in the newspapers, and send out mail to their constituents back home — and none of this costs them a dime.

Congressional staffs, paid by the taxpayers, are supposed to help members of Congress with the burdens of their office, but a major part of their staff’s work is to help get them re-elected.

That’s not just during campaign years. Everything members of Congress do is done with an eye toward re-election.

Any outsider who wants to challenge an incumbent at the next Congressional election has to pay hard cash to buy ads and arrange other forms of publicity, in order just to get some comparable amount of name-recognition, so as to have any serious chance of winning an election against an incumbent.

Few people have the kind of money it takes for such a campaign, so they have to raise money — in the millions of dollars — to pay for what incumbents get free of charge.

Campaign finance laws that restrict who can contribute how much money, who can run political ads, etc., are all restrictions on political challengers who have to buy their own publicity.

If truth-in-packaging laws applied to Congress, a campaign finance law would have to be labeled an “Incumbents Protection Act.”

The very high rate of incumbent re-elections, even while polls show the public disgusted with Congress in general, shows how well incumbents are protected.

The media are accessories to this scam. So long as the information and opinions that reach the public are selected by mainstream media people, whom polls show to be overwhelmingly on the left, the left’s view of the world prevails.

Hence the great alarm in the media, and in equally one-sided academia, over the emergence of conservative talk radio programs and the Fox News Channel on television.

No longer can the three big broadcast television networks determine what the public will and will not see, nor two or three leading newspapers determine what is and is not news. Nobody wants to give up that kind of power.

When businesses that are demonized in the mainstream media, and in academia, can buy ads to present their side of the story, that is regarded in both the media and academia as distortion. At the very least, it can cost the left their self-awarded halo.

It is fascinating to see how some people — in both politics and the media — can depict their own narrow self-interest as a holy crusade for the greater good of society. The ability of the human mind to rationalize is one of the wonders of the world.

CYNIC: a person who believes that people are motivated purely by self-interest rather than acting for honorable or unselfish reasons.

Read that when I was 17. When I fully understood it, my “independent” streak in politics was born.

 

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

Cancellation

Canceling: In the early Internet days, AOL had a unique way of inflating its enrollment data: Just make it impossible to cancel the service. Looks like Obama is using this sorry tactic to keep his ObamaCare numbers up.

Writing in the Washington Times this week, Drew Johnson tells his tale of woe dealing with ObamaCare. No, it wasn’t the signing-up part that has received all the attention. Johnson wanted to cancel his policy shortly after enrolling, because he’d gained employer coverage. Then he found himself trapped in a bureaucratic nightmare.

The Liberals want to be that mother (like on “The Goldbergs”) that smothers you to death with there love. :)

First, his insurance company said he had to go to the ObamaCare exchange to cancel the plan. But HealthCare.gov wouldn’t let Johnson sign back in, and no one on the phone could help.

“All I can do is help you sign up,” a help line worker told Johnson. “That’s all anyone here can do.”

One way in, no one gets out! :)

After three days and countless hours, Johnson finally got on the website, where he was able to wend his way toward a cancellation page.

Johnson isn’t alone. A local Florida news station reported that “people who signed up for coverage are finding it impossible to cancel their plans.” It tells the story of Andrew Robinson. Even after spending six weeks and “50 to 60 hours on the phone, his policy is still not canceled.”

Fox News detailed the travails of a Missouri woman who, after fruitlessly trying to cancel through the normal ObamaCare channels, ended up driving to the Kansas City offices of Blue Cross for help.

All of them noted that calling the 800-number was useless. Even the “specialists” supposedly able to perform a cancellation were no help.

Back in the dial-up Internet days, AOL used precisely this strategy to inflate its revenues. Callers who tried to cancel got the runaround, and even when they thought they were out, AOL kept sending bills. Agents who thwarted cancellation efforts got more money.

I have had an AOL account for 30 years this month. I signed up the year BEFORE it became AOL. It was Quantum Link, a BBS for Commodore 64′s.

I still have it. I don’t pay any money for it.

I also use for my spam catcher. If some website wants an email address so they can send me spam, they get that one.

I think that’s only appropriate. :)

At least frustrated AOL consumers had recourse. After settling a class-action suit with New York in 2004 for $1.25 million and another with 48 states in 2007 for $3 million, AOL finally mended its ways.

Unlike AOL, ObamaCare can force people to buy its product. And aggrieved consumers who find themselves trapped have no choice but to grin and bear it.

And that, in a nutshell, is the difference between the private sector and a government-run program. (IBD)

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

You are too incompetent to do anything without Government Assistance! :)

Don’t Worry, Be Happy.

Vote for the Democrat,  because the other guy’s an Asshole! :)

We are “fair”, “compassionate” and “tolerant”. As long as you do what we say, when we say it, and because we said it. And you don’t step off the Thought Police reservation at any time. EVER!

Love ya! Kiss Kiss! Give Mama Government a Big Hug!! :)

 

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

Missing Irony

HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius will now get to enjoy one of the benefits of Obamacare touted by Democrats: She’ll have a lot more time to make dinner.

HAIL HYDRA! She’ll be back in some way, somewhere. Just less visible.

But now at least the next person who’s the head of HHS can continuously say, “But I wasn’t there so I didn’t have anything to do with it. Don’t blame me.” when they blow you off… :)

That’s because like a lot of other Obamacare victims, she has now lost her job.

Thank goodness her insurance is portable.

Unlike ours. :)

In losing her job as the head of Health and Human Services, she can take satisfaction that she now gets to see Obamacare in the same way the rest of us do, as a job destroyer.

If anybody in the media sees the irony in the fact that Sebelius lost her job because of the disastrous implementation of a disastrous law that have cost so many others their jobs, they’re not acting like it.

“Kathleen Sebelius,” writes the New York Times, “the health and human services secretary, is resigning, ending a stormy five-year tenure marred by the disastrous rollout of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Care Act.”

Hooray for the president!

Boo for traitors who can’t implement our traitorous laws!

At the beginning of the month—yes, the month of April– we were all treated to a round of triumphant celebration by the leftist wing of the left-wing party as Obamacare was declared to be not just a success, but a stunning triumph of the will over Republican obstructionism, lies– thank you Harry Reid– misogyny and misanthropy.

Four and a Half Years (of Struggle) Against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice, is what they will someday name the book if a Democrat writes one about the implementation of Obamacare.

Google it; you’ll see.

And again, they’ll miss the irony.

That liberals decided of their own accord that they would crown April Fools’ Day–forever after– as Obamacare Day, is again another irony that seems to be lost on people who believe that a variety selection of chilled cheeses is much more important than having a variety selection of competent doctors.

I mean let’s face it: There really aren’t any good wines that go with doctor anyway.

Ha, ha, ha, ha!

“Interviews with two dozen contractors, current and former government officials, insurance executives and consumer advocates, as well as an examination of confidential administration documents, point to a series of missteps — financial, technical and managerial — that led to the troubles” with the rollout of Obamacare conceded the New York Times in October.

Liberals will try to paint this as the failure of one person.

And they will be right. And they will be wrong.

Right premise; wrong person.

“Secretary of HHS will soon become known as the worst job in America,” says my friend, political consultant Tony Marsh. “It doesn’t matter how competent the director, no one can make this goofy law work.”

Pin the goofy law on our goofy president.

But then you’d be a racist!! :)

Whatever else people might say about Barack Obama, even liberals have to admit that when it comes to managerial prowess–even when having the benefit of his pen and telephone– the only executive action the president seems to get right is his tee time.

Don’t let the awesome size of the Obamacare debacle shrink the significance of the other debacles Obama has presided over: $1 trillion stimulus, failed; a Department of Energy loan program for green companies, failed too, just to name two in a growing database of Obama disasters.

Who could’ve predicted at a time when unprecedented money and resources would go into alternative energy production via fiat by the federal government, that the “green” industry would see an unprecedented number of bankruptcies, failures and collapses?

Conservatives could have, and did.

Because the question goes to the fundamental flaw that Democrats have when it comes to governance. If it were all about money and power and influence, Democrats would never have a problem; nor would communists.

But eventually human nature takes over; and human nature is the enemy of control freaks, a.k.a. progressives.

Human nature can’t control the progressive agenda, no matter how many jobs are lost. Democrats and the president mean to implement Obamacare even if they have to fire us all one by one.

That’s where the Thought Police come in. Control thought, control people.

In the old days, in order for healthcare to happen, you only needed to have a sick person.

Under the Democrats, you only need to have one very, very sick person right at the top, so he can do the firing of the rest of us. (John Ransom)

HAIL HYDRA!

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

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

Shut up!

Charles Krauthammer: Two months ago, a petition bearing more than 110,000 signatures was delivered to The Washington Post demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming. The petition arrived the day before publication of my column, which consisted of precisely that heresy.

The column ran as usual. But I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition.

Thought Police: It is their job to uncover and punish thoughtcrime. The Thought Police use surveillance and psychological monitoring to find and eliminate members of society who challenge the party’s authority and ideology.[6]

The Thought Police of Orwell and their pursuit of thoughtcrime were based on the methods used by the totalitarian states and ideologies of the 20th century.

The term “Thought Police”, by extension, has come to refer to real or perceived enforcement of ideological correctness.

Sound like the Left? :)

The proper word for that attitude is totalitarian. It declares certain controversies over and visits serious consequences — from social ostracism to vocational defenestration — upon those who refuse to be silenced.

Sometimes the word comes from on high, as when the president of the United States declares the science of global warming to be “settled.” Anyone who disagrees is then branded “anti-science” and, better still, a “denier” — a brilliantly chosen calumny meant to impute to the climate skeptic the opprobrium normally reserved for the hatemongers and crackpots who deny the Holocaust.

Then last week, another outbreak. The newest closing of the leftist mind is on gay marriage.

Just as the science of global warming is settled, so, it seems, are the moral and philosophical merits of gay marriage.

To oppose it is nothing but bigotry akin to racism. Opponents are to be similarly marginalized and shunned, destroyed personally and professionally.

Like the CEO of Mozilla who resigned under pressure just 10 days into his job when it was disclosed that six years earlier he had donated to California’s Proposition 8, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman.

But why stop with Brendan Eich, the victim of this high-tech lynching? Prop 8 passed by half a million votes. Six million Californians joined Eich in the crime of “privileging” traditional marriage. So did Barack Obama.

In that same year, he declared that his Christian beliefs made him oppose gay marriage.

Yet under the new dispensation, this is outright bigotry. By that logic, the man whom the left so ecstatically carried to the White House in 2008 was equally a bigot.

The whole thing is so stupid as to be unworthy of exegesis. There is no logic. What’s at play is sheer ideological prejudice — and the enforcement of the new totalitarian norm that declares, unilaterally, certain issues to be closed.

To this magic circle of forced conformity, the left would like to add certain other policies, resistance to which is deemed a “war on women.” It’s a colorful synonym for sexism. Leveling the charge is a crude way to cut off debate.

Thus, to oppose late-term abortion is to make war on women’s “reproductive health,” as is questioning Obamacare’s mandate of free contraception for all.

Some oppose the regulation because of its impingement on the free exercise of religion, others on the simpler (non-theological) grounds of a skewed hierarchy of values.

Under the new law, everything is covered, but a few choice things are given away free. To what does contraception owe its exalted status? Why should it rank above, say, antibiotics for a sick child, for which that same mother must co-pay?

Say that, however, and you are accused of denying women “access to contraception.”

Or try objecting to the new so-called Paycheck Fairness Act for women, which is little more than a full-employment act for trial lawyers. Sex discrimination is already illegal.

What these new laws do is relieve the plaintiffs of proving intentional discrimination. To bring suit, they need only to show that women make less in that workplace.

Like the White House, where women make 88 cents to the men’s dollar?

That’s called “disparate impact.” Does anyone really think Obama consciously discriminates against female employees, rather than the disparity being a reflection of experience, work history, etc.?

But just to raise such questions is to betray heretical tendencies.

The good news is that the “war on women” charge is mostly cynicism, fodder for campaign-year demagoguery. But the trend is growing.

Oppose the current consensus and you’re a denier, a bigot, a homophobe, a sexist, an enemy of the people.

Long a staple of academia, the totalitarian impulse is spreading. What to do? Defend the dissenters, even if — perhaps, especially if — you disagree with their policy. It is — it was? — the American way.

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

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

Obama: Winter Soldier

Hail Hydra bumper sticker-J

Great movie and truly a uniting message. I can’t imagine the American that doesn’t see this movie and then hear those like Rand Paul and not understand the clear and present danger we are a country and a world from elites in the name of security.-Glenn Back on Captain America: The Winter Soldier

In an interview with Asawin Suebsaeng of Mother Jones, the film’s directors, Anthony and Joe Russo, confirm that this was by design.

“[Marvel] said they wanted to make a political thriller,” says Joe Russo, who directed the film with his brother Anthony. “So we said if you want to make a political thriller, all the great political thrillers have very current issues in them that reflect the anxiety of the audience…That gives it an immediacy, it makes it relevant. So [Anthony] and I just looked at the issues that were causing anxiety for us, because we read a lot and are politically inclined. And a lot of that stuff had to do with civil liberties issues, drone strikes, the president’s kill list, preemptive technology.”

But at the heart of the explosion and melee -filled film are the political themes, including targeted killing. “The question is where do you stop?” Joe says. “If there are 100 people we can kill to make us safer, do we do it? What if we find out there’s 1,000? What if we find out there’s 10,000? What if it’s a million? At what point do you stop?” (MJ & Reason)


The corruptor is political and openly expresses the left-wing ethos on just about everything (ObamaCare, abortion, the environment) with a statement along the lines of, “I’m willing to kill 20 million people to save 7 billion.”

Near the end of his administration, Hollywood spent somewhere around a billion dollars bashing George W. Bush with a relentless series of awful anti-troop/anti-American films that flopped at a 100% rate.  Unfortunately for Obama, “Winter Soldier” is already a mammoth critical and box office hit.

Remember the George W. Bush Assassination Movie?

Only the extreme left does because they were the only ones who saw it.

The message against him is being blasted out far and wide. (BH)

Rogers, as Captain America, is a throwback to “the greatest generation,” a symbol of American idealism and a reminder of how much has changed in the landscape of warfare. He is a museum piece – literally, he visits an exhibit dedicated to his legacy, presumably at a Smithsonian museum. (US News)

Maybe that’s a new “Inconvenient Truth”. :)

But then there’s the real world:

Imagine a world where drones never have to touch the ground after takeoff. That’s what MIT PhD. candidate Joseph Moore did, and now he’s on the cusp of creating a drone that can “perch” on power lines just like birds to recharge its batteries.

Mr. Moore gave Business Insider a demonstration of the technology he’s perfecting by using a glider as proof of concept.


In short, if a drone is equipped with the a magnetometer it should be possible to make the aircraft capable of identifying magnetic fields given off by power lines, home in on the signal they emit, and then maneuver in such a way that would allow the drone to perch until fully charged.

Developing such a system for fixed wing aircraft is desirable because of their ability to carry heavier loads than those that use a quadrotor design, Business Insider reported.

During the demo it was given by Mr. Moore, Business Insider reported that the glider, even without a fully-developed perching mechanism, was able to come “within centimeters” of a mock power line. (WT)

Hmmm….

Ezekiel 25:17

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

Hail Hydra! :)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

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

Hydra-nation

If you haven’t seen Marvel: Agents of Shield or Captain America: The Winter Soldier this may not make a lot of sense to you.

But also ***SPOILER WARNING***

Robert Redford, of all people, plays Alexander Pierce, a high-ranking World Security Council official who has his own agenda. Pierce is the type of shrewd, sharp-suited string-puller who says things like, “To build a better world sometimes means tearing the old one down. And that makes enemies.”

He believes in Peace. Ruthlessly so.

And has an ideology that says that he’s doing the world a favor by killing 20 million people to save billions of people. But to do that he and his ideologues have been working secretly to make the situation so desperate that the people would give up their freedom for that security.

That’s peace. He can bring peace to the world if you just allow him to rule it with an iron fist and kill anyone who stands in his way or could stand in his way in the future as they’ve monitoring people to predict which ones would be a threat to them so they can be eliminated before they are a threat. You know, but how they live there lives, monitoring everything they do or say…

That’s a small price to pay for peace right?

It may be a movie, but does any of this sound familiar?

What’s the difference between Obama, The NSA, The IRS, and DOJ and HYDRA??

HYDRA is fictional.

A bit over-dramatic and a bit of stretch?

What difference does it make?? :)

That felt like that fit more into the struggle that Cap was going through in the film and it was a better villain for him to oppose. A sort of ideological villain, versus a science fiction creation” (IO9)

A character who has been fomenting unrest and stress in the world for decades so that at the apex of it he could wipe out his enemies and be triumphant to the point where he is unopposeable. But he does it in the name of Peace and Security.

If you throw the frog in boiling water he jumps out. If you put the frog in cold water and slowly turn up the heat on him he’ll eventually boil to death.

Sound like a Progressive Liberal Democrat Party we know?

Facts are unbelievably stubborn things.

Compare these changes for the last year of the Bush presidency 2008 versus the last full year of the Obama presidency 2013:

  • Full time workers: 120 million vs. 116 million

  • Workforce participation: 66% vs. 63.2%

  • Home ownership: 70% vs. 62%

  • Median income: $55,484 vs. $52,098

  • Poverty rate: 13% vs. 15%

  • People on food stamps: 31.6 million vs. 47.8 million

  • Debt-to-GDP: 64.8% vs. 101.6%

This isn’t about blame – it’s about doing what works. Freedom and opportunity – that is what made America a great nation.

But freedom is the antithesis of The NSA, The IRS, The DOJ, The EPA and the other government bureaucrats employed to squash your freedom, but in very subtle and Orwellian ways.

Not all at once.

Vote for me, the other guy’s an asshole, after all, so you don’t want him, they’ll just make it worse. After all, we did save you from them before…. :)

Hi, FROG, how’s that water temperature for you?? :)

Instead of pretending America’s been doing it wrong and needs “fundamental transformation,” let’s get back to what it did right to become an economic powerhouse with a world of opportunity for every American.

Why, then they wouldn’t have the power? Why would they do that?

After all, it all for the betterment of you. Freedom is such a drag. Let Mama Government take over and run every aspect of your life. That’s much less stressful and painful.

Give in. The struggle isn’t worth it.

It’s not Fair. It’s not Equal.

You were born to serve.

HAIL HYDRA!

HAIL OBAMA!

trust me hydra obamalimit

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

Medicaid Nation

The number of Americans who were enrolled in Medicaid at any time during fiscal 2013 exceeded the entire population of the United Kingdom, according to new data published by the federal government’s Medicaid and CHIP Payment Access Commission (MACPAC).

Were Medicaid a nation instead of a U.S. entitlement program it would be the 20th most populous country on earth.

“The estimated number of individuals ever covered by Medicaid remained steady at 72.7 million in FY 2013, compared to 72.2 million in FY 2012,” said MACPAC’s statistical report, released on April 1.

Medicaid, a federal-state partnership, is a means-tested entitlement program that provides health care to low income individuals.

With Liberals in control that “means test” means by any means necessary! :)

The Affordable Care Act, which requires all individuals to have health insurance, also expanded Medicaid, requiring states to extend Medicaid coverage to people earning up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not compel states do this, making the expansion optional for state governments.

This is will bankrupt the system, but don’t expect Liberals who have a vested and ideological interest to admit to it. After all, it’s just another government entitlement that foes broke and they have to raise taxes (and create more class warfare to do it) to fund it. No Problem. :)

It’s only money, you have plenty of it.

Vote for me, The other guy’s an asshole! :)

parasite

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

Medicaid, a federal-state partnership, is a means-tested entitlement program that provides health care to low income individuals.

The Affordable Care Act, which requires all individuals to have health insurance, also expanded Medicaid, requiring states to extend Medicaid coverage to people earning up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could not compel states do this, making the expansion optional for state governments.

- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/americans-medicaid-exceed-population-uk#sthash.7F9otVn1.dpuf

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

Sick Day

Sick day

Posted in politics | Leave a comment

Why You Should Care

Mozilla, the company that makes the web browser Firefox, committed the only unforgivable sin progressives have – it hired someone who didn’t toe the progressive line to be its CEO. Uniformity of thought is the new black, and a straying from that plantation lands you on the new blacklist. That’s where Brendan Eich finds himself now for daring to stray from the progressives’ plantation on gay marriage.

And if you think just because you’re not a Christian it doesn’t concern you…I’m not a formal Christian at all….

How did Eich stray? Did he take to the streets, shout from the mountaintop, or even take an active role in a campaign? No, he wrote a check, for all of $1,000, to support the campaign in favor of California’s Proposition 8 – the gay marriage ban which was supported overwhelmingly by voters. Not to have gays rounded up and killed or put in camps (those are progressive traits), or even to have homosexuality outlawed, but simply to not change the definition of marriage to fit the political flavor of the moment.

Eich’s donation in support of Prop 8 was confidential, by law. The only reason it is known, why any of the donations are known, is the Internal Revenue Service illegally leaked the donor list to a gay rights group who posted it online. Someone in government broke the law and gave what amounts to a “hit list” to progressive foot soldiers who have been targeting donors for their personal beliefs.

Ideology first, law 2nd. Sound familiar?

In this case it was gay groups, but these tactics are a favorite of progressives. Under communism people who didn’t embrace their agenda were purged, under fascism the nonconformists were sent to re-education/work camps, or killed. Progressives can’t simply murder or imprison people who flee their thought plantation, though they’d like to, so they try to ruin them in the meantime.

Fascists are always going to be around. They are the core of the progressive heart. But it’s a new and disturbing development when agents in our own government are aiding progressives in their thought  (Police) jihad.

Eich had no intention of changing Mozilla’s corporate policy toward gays, but that didn’t matter. Tolerance isn’t enough. As Erick Erickson put it, “You will be made to care.”

<<Insert bad Godfather accent here>>

Erick Erickson:

Let me make it clear for you — you will be required to care.Gay rights advocates on the steady march toward and past gay marriage will make you care. They will not give you room to sit on the fence.

Tim Keller has gotten a lot of heat for saying that “you can believe homosexuality is a sin and still believe that same-sex marriage should be legal.” He was not talking about himself. He was talking about the compromise many young evangelicals are making.

Some, though, are going the next step to.

The left will allow no fence sitting. You may not believe me. You may think me hyperbolic. But the history of the world shows this. Events ultimately come to a head. They boil to their essence. And at that point you must choose.

That is why so many Christians are fighting. Because we see in Europe and Canada what will happen here. Christianity is a religion of the city square. Christ compels us to “go forth and teach.” It is the Great Commission. We cannot go forth and teach when the left bars us from the town square.

Many people say we should have legal gay marriage, but not have religious gay marriage. The left will not honor the distinction. Look to Canada. Preachers can be brought up for hate crimes charges merely for discussing passages of the Bible that deal with same sex sexual relations. You may not care that it is a sin, but the world surely does.Look at Louie Giglio, who could not honor the President at his inauguration because of his orthodox Christian beliefs on this subject.

In short, you may choose not to care and in so doing sit on the sidelines or give aid and comfort to the open minded and tolerant who want gay marriage so everyone can have equal rights.

The time will come, more quickly than you can imagine, when you will be made to care. It is not, as mjdaniels posits, this:

If, as the anti-SSM crowd would have it, the levers of State are to be wielded to enforce the commands of Scripture, then pardon me, but what the H-E-double-hockey-sticks are we doing spending so much time, energy and effort fighting to overturn Obamacare?

We are not using the state to enforce the commands of Scripture. We are using the state to protect our ability to preach the scripture under the first amendment. If the state has the power to change the definition of an institution that it did not create, but that God himself created, the state can compel and coerce the church to honor that definition or sit on the sidelines.

A Christian on the sidelines is a Christian not going forth. You can be a sincere Christian and support the idea of gay marriage. But you would also be foolish to ignore what is going to happen to the church once the state decides something is a matter of equal protection. You can dismiss me now, but you are ignoring what’s already happening.

Keep in mind as well that many of those who you make look to for reassurance that I’m wrong are hostile to the church already and will not be on the side of the church as the equal protection arguments against it grow.

The state did not create marriage and it should not now exert the power to change the definition of that which it did not create.  Those of you who are Christians who support gay marriage will one day have Archbishop Chaput burning in your ears. He said that evil peddles tolerance until it is dominant then seeks to silence good. That’s why Christians fight on this issue. It is not to force themselves on others, but to protect themselves from others being forced on them.

Back to Derek Hunter: did a man most people have never heard of become the focus of a nationwide campaign to deny him his job for thinking differently? A dating website.

The website OkCupid posted a letter that appeared only when users accessed the site using Firefox as its browser that said, “Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid.”

It continues with a lie about Eich wanting to make gay relationships “illegal,” because why let the truth stand in the way of an agenda? And it concludes, “OkCupid is for creating love. Those who seek to deny love and instead enforce misery, shame, and frustration are our enemies, and we wish them nothing but failure.”

It reads pretty much the same in its original German.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.

Just insert Christian, Conservatives and anyone who dares cross the Progressive Agenda Mafia.

Now do you care? :)

The president doesn’t give  <a> care – if anyone on his staff bothered to tell him. He’s called all scandals related to the IRS targeting Americans for their beliefs (as long as they disagree with him) as “phony.” Democrats have fallen in line, obstructing ongoing investigations into any and all Obama administration scandals.

This disinterest from Democrats is ironic since such groups are allowed to keep their donors’ names secret because of actions by Democrats in the 1950s. Alabama, then a racist Democratic stronghold, wanted the member list of the NAACP for reasons one easily can imagine. The NAACP, fully aware Democrats and Jim Crow were one in the same, sought to protect its members from targeting and refused. The case went to the Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously groups could keep their members secret.

The case, NAACP vs. Alabama, was important because it protected people from being targeted because of their views and allowed them to work for their objectives anonymously if they wished. No longer – at least if you’re not a progressive.

The Eich case was summed up perfectly by Andrew Sullivan when he wrote, “Will he now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society.”

The plight of a wealthy CEO may not inspire sympathy, but what it represents should worry everyone, regardless of politics. This week it’s gay marriage. Next week it will be something else. But it always will be something. More and more, hearing “celebrate diversity” means listening to like-minded drones, albeit of different colors. Those who think outside their prescribed, accepted thoughts have no place in progressive America.

The vast majority of Americans, even those who vote for Democrats or call themselves progressives, are not in tune with the radical fascistic activist fringe that is steering their ship. Decent human beings have limits – and the idea of people being targeted and destroyed because they disagree with those in power is abhorrent. Unfortunately, none of those decent human beings seem to be working for OkCupid, this administration, or in Congress as Democrats right now.

A thoughtcrime is an occurrence or instance of controversial or socially unacceptable thoughts.

The Thought Police use surveillance and psychological monitoring to find and eliminate members of society who challenge the party’s authority and ideology.[6]

The Thought Police of Orwell and their pursuit of thoughtcrime were based on the methods used by the totalitarian states and ideologies of the 20th century.

The term “Thought Police”, by extension, has come to refer to real or perceived enforcement of ideological correctness.

NOW DO YOU CARE?

146598 600 Obamacare Questions cartoons

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

The Gay Progressive Mafia

The Thought Police Triumphant.

“Unsatisfied with victory they want to stamp out and punish people for previous views.” (except themselves of course, that usually someone else’s fault)

ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN…

Intolerance: The left hounded a CEO from his job over a 2008 donation in favor of a California measure opposing gay marriage. So much for free speech and job performance. This is a descent into mob tyranny and mediocrity.

The dirty work of the left was achieved after Brendan Eich, recently appointed CEO of Mozilla, a software company based in Silicon Valley, was forced out of the company he helped found, all to feed the maw of political correctness.

Eich’s “crime” had nothing to do with his job performance, let alone the inclusive work atmosphere he fostered at Mozilla. All it involved was free speech, through a $1,000 donation he made to express support of 2008′s Proposition 8 ballot measure.

That triggered grandstanding and resignations from staff at Mozilla, a 70,000-strong petition from another group, and the dating website OKCupid blocking access by Mozilla’s Firefox browser.

It was sickeningly out of proportion to what after all is a mainstream point of view held by millions of Americans — including President Obama, at least until last year — and has nothing to do with whether one likes or respects gay people.

No, it’s all about the lemminglike groupthink agenda of certain gay lobbies and the ideological intolerance inculcated into the young by academic elites.

Moves like this serve to create fear and silence, and with it a court of artifice and hypocrisy — not openness, persuasion and dialogue. Did the baying mobs who chased Eich out change any minds? Nope.

All they did was get word out that dialogue is out of the question and that political correctness trumps merit, a very bad sign for a merit-oriented community like Silicon Valley, where nonconformity, wild ideas and hostility to formalities until now have fueled its dynamism.

With Mozilla’s leadership now decapitated, the company, including its gay employees, will suffer.

And with political correctness ascendant, it’s inevitable that Mozilla’s gray, Soviet-style bureaucrats, mouthing the party line by heart and producing nothing of value, will become the stagnant norm there. (IBD)

But at least the Mafia got what THEY wanted, now everyone can be happy…. :)

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 

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

Doh!

Americans Say 75 Percent of Politicians Are Corrupted, 70 Percent Use Political Power to Hurt Enemies

Americans don’t paint a pretty picture of their public servants in the new national Reason-Rupe poll. Americans tell Reason-Rupe that 75 percent of all politicians are “corrupted” by campaign donations and lobbyists.  And they say 70 percent of politicians use their political power to help their friends and hurt their enemies.

No wonder just 17 percent approve of the job Congress is doing.  Or that President Obama’s approval rating is just 43 percent, with 51 percent disapproving.

And while the Supreme Court just struck down limits on campaign contributions to federal candidates, the new Reason-Rupe poll finds Americans are actually more concerned about how elected officials misuse their power and taxpayer money once they’re in office than they are worried about campaign contributions. 

Asked, which is a “more serious” problem — “special interest groups spending private money on campaigns to elect the politicians they favor” or “elected officials enacting policies and spending taxpayer money that benefit the special interests they favor” — 63 percent of Americans said officials enacting policies and spending taxpayer money for special interests was a more serious problem.

Similarly, Americans say they are “more bothered” by politicians abusing political power than they are by some of the personal issues most often associated with political downfalls.  Seventy percent of Americans say they would be “most bothered” by a politician who used his or her political power to bully someone, while 14 percent would be most bothered by a politician using drugs, and 11 percent would be most bothered by a politician who cheated on his/her spouse.

The Reason-Rupe national poll conducted live interviews with 1,003 Americans on mobile (503) and landline (500) phones from March 26-30, 2014.  The margin of error is plus or minus 3.6 percent.  Princeton Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide Reason-Rupe survey.

Fifty-three percent of Americans have an unfavorable view of the Affordable Care Act, while 36 percent have a favorable view of the law in this Reason-Rupe poll.

Forty-three percent of Americans say they will blame the federal health care law if their health care premiums increase or their health care plan changes in the next year. Twenty-six percent say they’ll blame health insurance companies, 17 percent would blame the economy and 5 percent would blame their employers.  (Reason.com)

Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday night that excessive partisanship flowing through the nation’s political system is causing the U.S. to march “backwards instead of forward” and pointed to fall elections as a sign of how the country might tackle problems.

But when the moderator asked her to address the nation’s future, Clinton cited the need to “get back to evidence-based decision-making.”

“There is just pure ideology, pure partisanship. We disguise a commercial interest behind a political facade and the result is that we’re kind of marching backwards instead of forward,”

One word for the Once & Future Queen: BENGHAZI!

Evidence based decision making anyone, Queenie?? :)

So you ought to know since you’re the poster child for it!

Gibbs: We’ll Probably End Up Just Dumping Obamacare’s Employer Mandate

As you read this, keep in mind that Robert Gibbs isn’t some marginal figure. He is as close to Barack Obama’s inner circle as anyone in America, and served as the administration’s official mouthpiece for years. So when he starts talking about significant changes to Obamacare, people should sit up and listen. These remarks could reasonably be considered White House-planted trial balloons:

“I don’t think the employer mandate will go into effect. It’s a small part of the law. I think it will be one of the first things to go,” he said to a notably surprised audience. The employer mandate has been delayed twice, he noted. The vast majority of employers with 100 or more employees offer health insurance, and there aren’t many employers who fall into the mandate window, he said. Killing the employer mandate would be one way to improve the law — and there are a handful of other “common sense” improvements needed as well, he said…And, most importantly, Gibbs said “health care has to add an additional layer of coverage cheaper than the plans already offered.”

 

 

A few points: (1) Yes, the employer mandate has already been delayed twice, tacit admissions that the law is bad for business. Will the administration keep punting it, or will they simply declare it dead? The mandate is built into the law. The White House’s postponements of this provision are legally dubious at best; they absolutely do not have the authority to excise entire sections of the law permanently. Will Congress act? I’d also imagine that many employers would dispute Gibbs’ characterization of this mandate as “small.” (2) How would the demise of the employer mandate impact the mechanics of the law? Its existence has been baked into CBO estimates on revenues and coverage. If a portion of the law designed to ensure coverage for millions, which obviously impacts revenues, goes away, what then? CBO already projects that 31 million Americans will remain uninsured under Obamacare.

(3) Absent a federal mandate to provide coverage, and facing rising costs, many businesses could be incentivized to just dump employees into Obamacare’s exchanges. A 2012 Deloitte survey indicated that one in ten American businesses were already planning to stop providing coverage — and that was with the mandate fully intact. Such a move would add countless Americans to the roster of those burned by Democrats’ “keep your plan” lie, and could heap major additional costs onto taxpayers (who fund the law’s subsidies). It would also rapidly expand the individual healthcare market, which is where the sharpest cost increases are taking place. And are Democrats prepared to cancel a mandate on corporations while keeping the individual mandate tax in place for families?


(4)
To that end, Gibbs floats the idea of eventually adding a cheaper coverage level into the exchange mix, below the “bronze” level — which has proven unaffordable for many people. This, like the administration’s expansive “hardship waivers,” is a concession that the “Affordable” Care Act is no such thing for many Americans. It would also re-establish an group of bare-bones plans that Obamacare defenders have dismissed as “sub-standard” or “junk” coverage. Healthcare expert Bob Laszewski has been advocating this change, which he argues must be implemented immediately, despite the risk of “anti-selection.” Significant premium increases are expected in 2015 and beyond. So even as top Democrats beat their chests over their grand “achievement” this week, vulnerable Democrats aren’t eager to join the celebration:

 

 

But while Obama administration officials popped champagne to celebrate the enrollment figure, Democrats on the ballot this year continue to tread cautiously. Vulnerable incumbents who voted for the Affordable Care Act but have distanced themselves have no plans to suddenly embrace it. They plan to continue emphasizing the ways they want to “fix it” and “make it work.” … Added a prominent Democratic pollster, “[The enrollment success] is helpful but it’s not going to fundamentally change the playing field. The less we’re talking about Obamacare, the better off we are.”

 

 

If you read that full Politico story and others like it, you’ll find expressions of relief among Democratic strategists. Finally we have some good news, so our team will be less skittish! There’s light at the end of the tunnel. It’s as if they’re deliberately ignoring, or are genuinely ignorant of, Obamacare’s looming PR headaches. If Democrats are determined to convince themselves that a new day is dawning, Republicans should let them. They’ll be less equipped to deal with round two. I’ll leave you with this:


UPDATE - We’ve written about how the administration is exaggerating its enrollment numbers on the exchanges and on Medicaid. Turns out that their “more than three million” stat on young people staying on their parents’ plans is also bogus. Details here.

(Guy Benson)

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

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

Welcome to The Nightmare.

They said they had to have 7 Million sign up for ObamaCare. They triumphantly announced they got their number, after many delays.

Was there any doubt that people who have used ACORN in the past and openly call Illegals “Americans” wouldn’t cheat so as to brag about how great they are and that they can never fail, only be hindered by the inferior.

I ‘m not shocked.

The Democrats when into Peacock Strutting mode.

Pelosi: “Well let me just say, those of us who fought for this knew what we believed in and really don’t think we needed any vindication,” she responded. “We just had to protect it from those ideological anti-government people who didn’t want to see it succeed — for ideological, or political or whatever those reasons are.”

“Taking the heat on something like that — well, that’s what we do,” she bragged. “That’s like, all in a day’s work.”

Of course the people who will say it succeeds no matter what for ideological and political reasons, like her, don’t count. :)

They will smear an infinite amount of lipstick on this pig and call it a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model. That’s nothing new.

“I think the fight for the election — elections are always about jobs. So I think that while we’re proud of the Affordable Care Act, we now pivot to job creation.”

You mean the lowest labor participation rate in 35 years? The millions of peiople who have given up even looking?

Of course not!

She mean Class warfare. Fear. Intimidation. Grandma eating dog food on the street!

The fact that the Democrats have caused it won’t even occur to them.

“Which is — you know, the bill creates — will create 4 million jobs,” she added. “This is a jobs bill — we never advertise that — it’s a deficit reducer, it’s a job creator. And again, it is affordable, quality care. So maybe it just clears the air a bit so we can have a fuller discussion of jobs. And that’s a place where Republicans have been totally bankrupt in terms of their suggestion.”

But it’s not ideologically delusional at all. :)

The Deficit goes towards +8 trillion in 5 years, that’s “deficit reducer”.

Massive unemployment and lowest labor participation in over a generation is “a job creator”.

A Health Care overhaul that crushes people under massive debt and poor service is “affordable”.

Why?

Because they say so. And anyone who naysays them is obviously an partisan hack who just wants to make them look bad and is not really interested in how great they are.

This is the psychotic disassociated reality of the modern Progressive Liberal.

Welcome to Their Nirvanah, funny how it looks like a Nightmare.

“There’s been a recent academic study, and I say academic because people here are, most of you are academic something-or-the-others, and there has been a longitudinal study that finds the longer you are in the Tea Party, the more racist you become,” he told the group.

Leonard Zeskind, a human rights activist who writes on the topics of racism, anti-Semitism and the white supremacist movement. He is a lifetime member of the NAACP and serves as the current president of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights. The epitome of the self-loathing white guilt Liberal “intellectual”.

“But these people think that black people are running the United States of America. These people, these Tea Partiers think that black people are oppressing them as white people. These Tea Partiers think that they are a dispossessed majority.”

He said members of the Tea Party describe themselves as “Obama’s slaves,” and are fighting to keep their white privilege.

“That’s the funny thing about white privilege. These folks want it, but they don’t think they have it anymore, since the white monopoly on the presidency was broke, it’s not their country,” Zeskind told the group. “They want their country back, to quote them.” (McIver Institute)

The level hilarious Orwellian filtered doublethink brain farts in that statement could keep a psychologist in a $1 million dollar mansion for the rest of his grand kids lives.

But it fits THEIR Narrative. So it has to the truth.

After all, they are Homo Superior Liberalis. They are simply smarter and better than anyone. So they are never wrong and you’re always just jealous of how vastly superior they are to you, so you just want to tear them down and hurt people by denying them the fruits of their superior enlightenment.

And they can’t be told differently.

And as long as they have the power to do, they are going to bring that “enlightenment” to you, even if you don”t want it you savages!

Scary isn’t it…

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

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

Perception

Democrats, led by the President, have resorted again and again to the rhetoric of class warfare — you know, “the party of the rich” and all that.

That’s why it’s ironic that Democratic Party is the actual party of the rich. Democrats represent the richest district in the country — and the richest Americans.

In shorthand, they represent the very rich and the very poor . . . those needing or wanting the benefits procured by a big, active, high-taxing government, and those who can pay those high taxes without even noticing (or find creative ways to prevent them from biting). They are also rich, powerful and connected enough to influence government policy in their favor, and often stand to benefit from government regulation that serves to stifle competition.

The GOP has become the party of the strivers, of the middle class, of small business, and of all those who have aspirations to prosperity. And sadly, they are the only ones who are serious about protecting what Paul Ryan has described as “the right to rise” — what used to be universally known and embraced as “the American Dream.” (Townhall)

(if they’d stop trying to get along and appease the bully that is)

But you’d never know it from The Ministry of Truth. :)

Yesterday, blogger Pundit Pete made his way into the the daily White House press briefing to ask Press Secretary Jay Carney about the broken promises of Obamacare and reminded him that the law has never been a popular one. Pete’s wife, who he calls Citizen Caryn, lost her previously held health insurance as a result of Obamacare and now their family is paying $3600 more for a new plan.

In order to avoid the security risks associated with the Obamacare exchanges, and find a plan in which she could still keep he doctor of many years, she now pays about double her previous premium.

 

Naturally, Carney stuck to his script by repeating talking points about “millions” of new people being covered as a result of Obamacare.

 

PETE: Why won’t he listen to the American people?
MR. CARNEY: You obviously haven’t seen the data because the majority of Americans do not in any poll want it repealed. The majority supports fixing it and improving it, not repealing it. I would ask you to check your data.
Secondly, the President made that pitch. Republicans in Congress fought it tooth and nail. It went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld it. It was the principal argument in a presidential election. The President won reelection.
And again, Republicans are free to make the repeal argument. My point was simply that when you go to individuals and you ask them, do you want quality, affordable health insurance, or do you want the insurance company to tell you that you’re not going to get coverage for that condition you have because the fine print says you can’t. In fact, your sister, we’re going to charge her double even though you have identical medical histories because she’s a woman –
PETE: Well, my wife is getting charged double now because she lost her insurance.
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I don’t know the circumstances with your wife. And what I can tell you is that the Affordable Care Act provides quality, affordable health insurance to millions of people. They are — million are –
PETE: But that’s not true. More people have lost their insurance because of the act right now than have been — didn’t have insurance and have signed up. That is a fact.
MR. CARNEY: Okay, well, you’re entitled to your facts, sir. (Townhall)

But he has no real facts, just ideological talking points that further the liberal delusion that they are superior and strong.

Link: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/03/10/Colorado-Reporter-Confronts-Flustered-Carney-Demands-Repeal-Of-ObamaCare

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

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

Crafting D.C. Style

Oh they hear you, they just don’t care what you think. :)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred, documents and interviews with current and former intelligence officials show.

The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.

That the talking points used by Mrs. Rice, who was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, were written by a CIA that ignored the assessment by its own station chief inside Libya, has emerged as one of the major bones of contention in the more than two years of political fireworks and congressional investigations into the Benghazi attack.

What has never been made public is whether Mr. Morell and others at the CIA explicitly shared the station chief’s assessment with the White House or State Department.

Two former intelligence officials have told The Washington Times that this question likely will be answered at a Wednesday hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence during which Mr. Morell is scheduled to give his public testimony.

Mr. Morell, who has since left the CIA, declined to comment on the matter Monday. He now works at Beacon Global Strategies, a Washington insider strategic communications firm.

One former intelligence official close to Mr. Morell told The Times on the condition of anonymity that “the whole question of communication with the station chief will be addressed in his testimony.”

“We’re confident that it will clarify the situation in the minds of many who are asking,” the former official said.

Another former intelligence official told The Times that Mr. Morell did tell the White House and the State Department that the CIA station chief in Libya had concluded that there was no protest but senior Obama administration and CIA officials in Washington ignored the assessment.

Why they ignored it remains a topic of heated debate within the wider intelligence community.

A third source told The Times on Monday that Mr. Morell and other CIA officials in Washington were weighing several pieces of “conflicting information” streaming in about the Benghazi attack as the talking points were being crafted.

“That’s why they ultimately came up with the analysis that they did,” the source said. “The piece that was coming out of Tripoli was important, but it was one piece amid several streams of information.”

One of the former intelligence officials said the Libya station chief’s assessment was being weighed against media reports from the ground in Benghazi that quoted witnesses as saying there had been a protest. Analysts at the CIA, the source said, also were weighing it against reporting by other intelligence divisions, including the National Security Agency.

“The chief of station in Tripoli who was 600 or 700 miles away from the attacks wouldn’t necessarily have the only view of what actually went on in Benghazi,” that former official said.

U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attack.

While the testimony is expected to focus on Benghazi, the hearing arrives at a time of growing tensions between Congress and the CIA over such matters as the Bush administration’s interrogation rules and mutual charges of spying and illegality between the Senate intelligence committee and the agency.

Lawmakers are likely to press Mr. Morell for a reaction to reports this week that a classified Senate intelligence report has concluded that harsh interrogation methods used in the years after Sept. 11 provided no key evidence in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and that the CIA misled Congress on the matter.

The CIA disputes that conclusion. The Senate panel is expected to vote Thursday on sending the Obama administration a 400-page executive summary of the “enhanced interrogation” report to start a monthslong declassification process.

One of the key issues likely to come up during the House hearing involves what was said during a series of secure teleconferences between CIA officials in Washington and Libya from the time of the attack on Sept. 11, 2012, to the completion of Mrs. Rice’s talking points for dissemination on the Sunday talk shows Sept. 16.

Multiple sources confirmed to The Times on Monday that the station chief’s email to Mr. Morell was written after one of the teleconferences during which senior CIA officials in Washington — Mr. Morell among them — made clear to the Tripoli station chief that they were examining alternative information that suggested there was a protest before the attack.

After the exchange, Mr. Morell signed off on the CIA talking points given to Mrs. Rice promoting what turned out to be the false narrative of a protest. The development ultimately triggered an angry reaction from Republicans, who have long claimed that the Obama administration, with an eye on the November elections, was downplaying the role of terrorists in order to protect the president’s record on counterterrorism.

Documents since released by the White House show that administration officials boasted in internal emails at the time about Mr. Morell’s personal role in editing and rewriting the talking points.

“Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy editing hand to them,” an Obama administration official wrote Mrs. Rice on the morning of Sept. 15.

What is not clear is whether the email was in any way referring to the conflicting intelligence streams about a protest in Benghazi.

Alternatively, the email notes that Mr. Morell was uncomfortable with an initial draft of the talking points batted back and forth between White House and CIA officials “because they seemed to encourage the reader to infer incorrectly that the CIA had warned about a specific attack” in Benghazi.

During interviews with The Times, several former senior intelligence officials have lamented the whole “talking points” issue, saying the CIA was caught in the middle of the White House, Congress and the reality on the ground in Benghazi while crafting the points.

The reason the CIA ended up taking the lead on the talking points was because, as news of the attack was breaking around the world, lawmakers on the House intelligence committee were seeking guidance from the agency on how to respond to media questions without revealing classified information.

Specifically, Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican and the committee chairman, and ranking Democrat C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland asked for the guidance.

One former senior intelligence official told The Times that as word circulated through the inner circles of the intelligence community that the CIA was working on the talking points, officials within the Obama administration steered the mission toward crafting something Mrs. Rice could say on national talk shows.

“In essence, the talking points got repurposed,” the former official said. “What it turned into — and I don’t think Michael ever knew this, it’s something to watch for in his testimony this week — was, ‘Let’s hand this thing to the U.N. ambassador and make it what she should say.’”

“That’s a big deal,” the former official said. “It’s one thing to prepare something for lawmakers so they don’t make a mistake or say something inaccurate. It’s quite another matter to have that feed the administration’s then-current, definitive account of what had actually happened in Benghazi.”

“There are a lot of twists and turns in this,” added another former intelligence official. “A lot of it hangs on the fact that the agency thought they were crafting these talking points for Dutch Ruppersberger and Mike Rogers, not the White House.” (WT)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

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

Biden Speaks

One again Joe has done it again. They let him out in public and he babbled Liberal secrets again.

The Law (IBD): In an invitation to voter fraud, Vice President Joe Biden declared illegal aliens in the U.S. actual “citizens.” There’s no doubt that’s an election-year crowd pleaser. But has there ever been a more lawless presidency?

Pandering never reached such heights as when the man sworn to uphold U.S. law as its second in command declared to the U.S.-Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Thursday that that those who have broken the law to live and take jobs here are “already American citizens.”

“These people are just waiting, waiting for a chance to contribute fully. And by that standard, 11 million undocumented aliens are already Americans in my view,” Biden said.

11 Million new Democrats to vote for them and to create a Socialist Dictatorship. That’s very American, Joe! :)

Well, no. They are in fact, NOT waiting — the U.S. welfare magnet and its immigrant networks are drawing millions of the Third World’s most indigent to the U.S., a safety valve for lawless governments such as Mexico’s to dump their least-educated on the gullible gringos to educate, feed and jail as a matter of state policy.

If that sounds strong, bear in mind that Mexican consulates from Brownsville to Los Angeles are being used to sell ObamaCare and all its subsidies to Mexican nationals with the collusion of ObamaCare organizers, despite the law’s explicit claim that illegals are ineligible.

And that brings us back to Biden, a man who, as second to the chief executive, is charged with upholding U.S. law.

In what American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson called a “chilling” undertone, Biden’s unilateral declaration that illegals are Americans amounts to an open invitation to voter fraud just as elections beckon.

Just as the law says illegals can’t get ObamaCare subsidies, and yet they do, so the declaration of citizenship for non-citizens renders U.S. law meaningless.

And that brings up what Biden’s real motive was in his nullification of U.S. law: a naked bid for the Latino vote in a tough election year for Democrats, and more to the point, his own presidential ambitions in 2016.

Biden’s unilateral declaration of citizenship was a call for Latino votes regardless of citizenship status.

In arguing his case, Biden showed no recognition of a difference between legal and illegal immigrants, conflating engineering graduate students who are almost always in the U.S. legally but are shut out of green cards by the Obama administration’s own quotas, and the benefit-seeking low-skilled workers who mostly are flowing upward from Latin America.

They are responsible for driving down the wages of low-skilled U.S. workers. Last June, the Congressional Budget Office reported that an amnesty as stipulated by the “Gang of Eight” bill passed by Biden’s own Senate would not only “dampen” demand for jobs but result in “slightly pushing down the average wage for labor force as a whole, other things being equal.”

That “slightly,” of course, is an average. In reality, poor African American workers will be hit hardest.

But no matter to Biden. He doesn’t even seem to know which country he leads. “The president’s basically put me in charge of this hemisphere,” he told the Chamber.

Seems the only thing truly foreign to him is rule of law. (IBD)

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

Freedom At Stake

Derek Hunter:

The world is on the verge of coming to an end. No, not because of Russia’s aggression or Jihadists getting a nuclear weapon, but because the Supreme Court could rule that owners of companies cannot be ordered to violate their deeply held religious beliefs. Yes, society has sunk this low.

The Supreme Court is not expected to rule until June in the case of Sebelius vs. Hobby Lobby, so you’ve got some time to stock up on canned goods and toilet paper before the reckoning. But, if the Constitution means anything, that reckoning will come to pass.

At stake is whether individuals lose their religious liberty simply because they start a business. The owners of the craft store chain Hobby Lobby have a deeply held religious belief that certain forms of contraception cause an abortion, something they, as Christians, vehemently oppose. As such, they object to paying for health insurance that provides those forms of contraception on the grounds of their religious freedom. You know, that “Congress shall make no law” part of the First Amendment.

The Obama administration has a different idea on this. It acts as if the First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law…unless the president acquires a magic pen and a phone that allows him to bypass Congress…”

The central question of the Hobby Lobby case is whether people lose their religious liberty once they open a business. Hobby Lobby is a privately owned company, not a publicly traded one. As such, it is an extension of its owners – not millions of stockholders with diverse views. It is owned by one family, and that family is unified in its beliefs.

But deeply held religious beliefs are an impediment to the progressive agenda; therefore they must be trampled. There is no God but government.

Sandra Fluke, the patron saint of mooching in the progressive church of victimization, took to the pages of the Washington Post to expose how little value and learning there is in a Georgetown law degree.

First, she’s listed as a “social justice attorney who testified before Congress in 2012.” But Fluke never testified before Congress. There was a hearing in the House to talk about the religious liberty aspect of the contraception mandate, and Democrats were afforded one witness on the topic. They submitted the name of an expert on religious liberty but attempted on the day of the hearing to swap out that expert, who was on topic, for Fluke. Republicans rejected the change, as is their right, because she was a student, not an expert.

The Democrats then boycotted the hearing, went to an empty meeting room in the basement, threw a blanket over a folding table and held a staged photo-op disguised as a hearing. The media played along and reported it as if it were a hearing, but it was not.

Did you see any Republicans ask Fluke any questions? There’s a reason for that. It wasn’t a hearing. That the media considers it one shows just how far in the tank most reporters are for Democrats.

Undeterred by fact, Fluke writes that if a religious exemption were granted for the contraception mandate and – GASP – people were expected to pay for their own birth control, “We are at risk of giving any person or group with a religious qualm the legal ability to refuse to comply with numerous critical employment laws, not just those related to health insurance. Depending on the exact ruling, any for-profit corporation could cut off its employees’ insurance coverage for blood transfusions, vaccinations or HIV treatment…”

Recognize that argument? It’s the “slippery slope” argument progressives routinely attack conservatives for making on gay marriage. If a man can marry another man, what’s the logic for denying three men from being able to marry? Or one man and three women?

Those questions are dismissed by progressives as unrealistic, mostly because they can’t answer them. But when they do it usually comes down to “No one is calling for that to happen.” Well, no one is saying companies should be able to deny coverage for medically necessary and proven procedures such as transfusions or HIV treatment – chosen specifically to try to scare the hell out of gay people. But progressives aren’t know for letting facts get in the way of pushing their agenda. Maybe Hobby Lobby should’ve just said, “If you like your contraception, you can keep your contraception. Period.”

The fact is some religions oppose some or all forms of birth control, not because they hate women but because they believe that is what God commands. That may not be what you believe. It’s not what I believe. But I’d no sooner let you order me to violate what I believe than try to force you to violate what you believe. Progressives don’t have that “leave people alone” gene.

In the progressive world you aren’t an “employee,” you’re a “worker.” Moreover you’re a slave owned by a company, unable to leave and find a new job if that company does things that go against what you want or believe yourself. Or worse, you’re a serf who doesn’t have the wherewithal to obtain your own contraception if your employer or government doesn’t provide it for you.

For much of their base, they’re probably right. But for self-respecting adults with at least two brain cells, this push by the left is another step in the attempted infantilization of America. Putting aside the fact that if you can’t afford the nominal cost of contraception you probably should find a better use for your time than sex … if your sex life is dependent on your employer, or, worse, government providing you with contraception … well, we’re all screwed.

Progressives’ claims of authority to impose their will hinges upon their desire to make religion something people do on Sundays, like shopping for shoes, not an all-encompassing way in which people live their lives. It’s a crutch, a prop, not real faith. After all, these are people who cheered and pretended to believe in Bill Clinton’s “faith resurgence” and church attendance after he was caught lying about Monica Lewinsky, so it’s been a prop for them for a long time.

For millions of others, on the other hand, religion is not a photo-op in times of low poll numbers, it’s a deeply help conviction that informs their every move. For progressives, that space should be filled only by government. Lack of belief in the individual and total trust in government is, if you will, their religion. And on this mandate, as with pretty much all of their intrusive, power-grabbing agenda, progressives are every bit as devout as any member of al Qaeda.

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