Don’t mess with Big Sis!
Who was the only Republican to cave to every Lame Duck Meal the Democrats threw out there like a ravenous puppy?
That would be Alaska’s own RINO-Bitch, Sen. Linda Murkowski. The woman who was appointed to her job by her retiring father. Then when she lost the primary to an evil Tea Partier she got all snotty and arrogant and ran against him as a write-in “Independent”. It was HER seat!! Get your grubby “little people” fingers off MY SEAT!
Now’s she just pissed off. How dare you touch MY SEAT!
That’s what we all need in Congress. 😦
GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE: A strong storm system churning its way through the desert Southwest early Thursday will bring metro Atlanta a good chance for a white Christmas, with accumulating snow possible as far south as the Columbus and Macon areas, forecasters said.
Last time that happened: 1882. (When the Industrial revolution was young, Hmmm…:) )
The freezing conditions that have blasted Britain are being blamed on a series of weather patterns that are bringing Arctic temperatures to much of western Europe, California and even Australia.
One of the main factors is a change in the position of the jet stream – the fast-moving current of air that moves from west to east, high in the atmosphere.
Changes in the jet stream’s path can cause massive changes in weather conditions across the globe and may be why Australians are now shivering their way through summer and the current freezing conditions in California.
Go Global Warming! That’s our Pal! 🙂
Then there was this ditty:
Ho, ho, ho! Just in time for Christmas, the American Civil Liberties Union (aka The American Communist Liberals Union) has launched a new salvo against people of faith. Even as billions around the world celebrate the birth of Christ, joyless, abortion-obsessed secularists never take a holiday.
On Wednesday, the ACLU sent a letter to federal health officials urging the government to force Catholic hospitals in the U.S. to perform abortions in violation of their core moral commitment to protecting the lives of the unborn. They’re counting on sympathetic Obama rationing czar Donald Berwick — a recess appointee whose radical views on wealth and health redistribution were never vetted by Congress — to dictate which religious principles hospital operators can and cannot follow.
The ACLU reiterated its call for a federal probe — read: fishing expedition — of Catholic hospitals nationwide that refuse to provide “emergency” contraception and abortions to women. In practice, of course, every request for abortion is an “emergency” to the left.
“The dioceses cannot be permitted to dictate who lives and who dies in Catholic-owned hospitals,” the ACLU’s lawyers fumed in response.
But shall it be left to the ACLU and Obamacare bureaucrats to determine the Catholicity of a Catholic hospital?
And shall it be left to litigious secularists to sabotage the First Amendment rights of religious-based health care entities with impunity?
No. (Michelle Malkin)
Imagine the impudency of it all. Catholics deciding what to do in a Catholic Hospital and not the American Communist Liberals Union?
Imagine That! How rude! 🙂
Ann Coulter: It’s the Christmas season, so godless liberals are citing the Bible to demand the redistribution of income by government force. Didn’t Jesus say, “Blessed are the Health and Human Services bureaucrats, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven”?
Liberals are always indignantly accusing conservatives of claiming God is on our side. What we actually say is: We’re on God’s side, particularly when liberals are demanding God’s banishment from the public schools, abortion on demand, and taxpayer money being spent on Jesus submerged in a jar of urine and pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with pornographic photos.
But for liberals like Al Franken, it’s beyond dispute that Jesus would support extending federal unemployment insurance.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible, but it does nicely illustrate Shakespeare’s point that the “devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”
What the Bible says about giving to the poor is: “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” (2 Corinthians (9:7)
Being forced to pay taxes under penalty of prison is not voluntary and rarely done cheerfully. Nor do our taxes go to “the poor.” They mostly go to government employees who make more money than you do.
The reason liberals love the government redistributing money is that it allows them to skip the part of charity that involves peeling the starfish off their wallets and forking over their own money. This, as we know from study after study, they cannot bear to do. (Unless they are guaranteed press conferences where they can brag about their generosity.)
Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks’ study of charitable giving in America found that conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than liberals do, despite the fact that liberals have higher incomes than conservatives.
In his book “Who Really Cares?” Brooks compared the charitable donations of religious conservatives, secular liberals, secular conservatives and “religious” liberals.
His surprising conclusion was … Al Franken gave the most of all!
Ha ha! Just kidding. Religious conservatives, the largest group at about 20 percent of the population, gave the most to charity — $2,367 per year, compared with $1,347 for the country at large.
Even when it comes to purely secular charities, religious conservatives give more than other Americans, which is surprising because liberals specialize in “charities” that give them a direct benefit, such as the ballet or their children’s elite private schools.
Indeed, religious people, Brooks says, “are more charitable in every measurable nonreligious way.”
Brooks found that conservatives donate more in time, services and even blood than other Americans, noting that if liberals and moderates gave as much blood as conservatives do, the blood supply would increase by about 45 percent.
They ought to set up blood banks at tea parties.
On average, a person who attends religious services and does not believe in the redistribution of income will give away 100 times more — and 50 times more to secular charities — than a person who does not attend religious services and strongly believes in the redistribution of income.
Secular liberals, the second largest group coming in at 10 percent of the population, were the whitest and richest of the four groups. (Some of you may also know them as “insufferable blowhards.”) These “bleeding-heart tightwads,” as New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof calls them, were the second stingiest, just behind secular conservatives, who are mostly young, poor, cranky white guys.
Despite their wealth and advantages, secular liberals give to charity at a rate of 9 percent, less than all Americans and 19 percent less than religious conservatives. They were also “significantly less likely than the population average to return excess change mistakenly given to them by a cashier.” (Count Nancy Pelosi’s change carefully!)
Secular liberals are, however, 90 percent more likely to give sanctimonious Senate speeches demanding the forced redistribution of income. (That’s up 7 percent from last year!)
We’ll review specific liberals next week.
Needless to say, “religious liberals” made up the smallest group at just 6.4 percent of the population (for more on this, see my book, “Godless”).
Interestingly, religious liberals were also “most confused” of all the groups. Composed mostly of blacks and Unitarians, religious liberals made nearly as many charitable donations as religious conservatives, but presumably, the Unitarians brought down their numbers, making them second in charitable giving.
Brooks wrote that he was shocked by his conclusions because he believed liberals “genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did” — probably because liberals are always telling us that.
So he re-ran the numbers and gathered more data, but it kept coming out the same. “In the end,” he says, “I had no option but to change my views.”
Every other study on the subject has produced similar results. Indeed, a Google study of philanthropy found an even greater disparity, with conservatives giving 50 percent more than liberals. The Google study showed that liberals gave more to secular causes overall, but conservatives still gave more as a percentage of their incomes.
The Catalogue for Philanthropy analyzed a decade of state and federal tax returns and found that the red states were far more generous than the blue states, with the highest percentage of tightwads living in the liberal Northeast.
In his book “Intellectuals,” Paul Johnson quotes Pablo Picasso scoffing at the idea that he would give to the needy. “I’m afraid you’ve got it wrong,” Picasso explains, “we are socialists. We don’t pretend to be Christians.”
Merry Christmas to all, skinflint liberals and generous Christians alike!
And Finally a little Christmas Jeer from overactive Liberals.
BROOKLINE (FOX 25 / MyFoxBoston.com) – A Brookline school is now saying permission slips won’t be necessary for students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Edward Devotion School, which has not recited the Pledge of Allegiance in seven years, will say the Pledge over the school’s intercom once a week beginning next month.
Gerardo Martinez, the school’s principal, initially said the permission slips were sent to encourage parents to have a discussion with their kids about the Pledge.
The principal also says he sent this note out to parents just to let them know it was okay if they do not want their kids to participate.
Unfortunately for the principal, the thought of a permission slip to recite the Pledge set off a fire storm. Eventually the principal sent out a second note to parents explaining that it was not mandatory to sign the permission slips
It is state law for teachers to lead their classes in daily pledges at the start of school. Under Brookline school policy, the recitation may take place weekly, according to Martinez.
This is the original letter sent to parents earlier this week:
Dear Devotion Families,
Many of you are aware that Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 71, Section 69, requires a flag to be displayed in each school classroom. This law also requires classes to be lead in a group recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Public Schools of Brookline policy provides that this recitation may take place weekly.
Additionally, as part of that Massachusetts History/Social Science frameworks and the Brookline Learning Expectations (BLE) there is a learning objective that students be able to “Demonstrate understanding that there are important American symbols by identifying … the words of the Pledge of Allegiance.”
In order to meet the state legal mandate for public schools and to support our learning expectations, I will, once a week, as part of my morning announcements, recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Classroom teachers, as with any announcement, will bring the class to silence. Students and teachers may choose to stand and recite the pledge but are not legally required to do so.
Under our Constitution, neither teachers nor students can be mandated to participate in this exercise. This is each person’s personal choice. I urge you to have a conversation as a family to help your children understand why I will be reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and to support them in feeling comfortable and confident in the decision on whether or not to participate.
Whatever decision you and your child make will be fully respected. Please fill out the section below and return to your child’s homeroom teacher. I anticipate that we will begin recitation of the Pledge after the New Year. (My Fox Boston)
Bet there’d be no “permission slip” if a Muslim wanted to lay down a prayer mat and pray toward Mecca 4 times a day.
I wonder if they have a
Christmas Holiday display? 🙂
Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night!