Left Wanting

Democrat Fear Hyperbole Update: DNC Chief Wasserman-Schultz: Ryan Budget Plan “Throws Young People to The Wolves”…

Newly-elected DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.) said Sunday that the recen tDemocratic victory in a special election in a conservative upstate New York district was evidence that voters across the country disapproved of the Republican proposal for Medicare which, she argued, would end the program “as we know it.”

In an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Wasserman-Schultz said that the GOP plan, outlined in Wis. Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposed 2012 budget, would unfairly target young Americans. (this from a party that hasn’t passed or proposed a budget since April 2009! and now refuses to pass one!)

“[Republicans] would take the people who are younger than 55 years old today and tell them, ‘You know what? You’re on your own. Go and find private health insurance in the health care insurance market. We’re going to throw you to the wolves, and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you for pre-existing conditions,’ ” Wasserman-Schultz told CBS’ Harry Smith. ” ‘We’re going to give you X amount of dollars and you figure it out.’

Expect it to get much, much worse! Much, much worse.

By next year the Republican will be kicking old people down the stairs and burying them in mass graves!

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is a master at dodging the questions of network news types (and she’s pretty cute, too)!  In this video, she just simply ignores the question outright and immediately launches into a diatribe of demagoguery, exposing the Democrats’ lack of a budget and desire to keep the focus on the GOP’s plan, which they perceive to be vastly unpopular  (To them! and their apparatchiks in the media).  Watch and learn from a master . . .

Thomas Sowell: One of the painfully revealing episodes in Barack Obama’s book “Dreams From My Father” describes his early experience listening to a sermon by the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Among the things said in that sermon was that “white folks’ greed runs a world in need.” Obama was literally moved to tears by that sermon.

This sermon may have been like a revelation to Barack Obama but its explanation of economic and other differences was among the oldest– and most factually discredited– explanations of such difference among all sorts of peoples in all sorts of places. Yet it is an explanation that has long been politically seductive, in countries around the world.

What could be more emotionally satisfying than seeing others who have done better in the world as the villains responsible for your not having done as well? It is the ideal political explanation, from the standpoint of mass appeal, whether or not it makes any sense otherwise.

That has been the politically preferred explanation for economic differences between the Malay majority and the more prosperous Chinese minority in Malaysia, or between the Gentile majority and the Jewish minority in various countries in Europe between the two World Wars.

At various other times and places, it has been the preferred explanation for the economic differences between the Sinhalese and the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka, the Africans and the Lebanese in Sierra Leone, the Czechs and the Germans in Bohemia and numerous other groups in countries around the world.

The idea that the rich have gotten rich by making the poor poor has been an ideological theme that has played well in Third World countries, to explain why they lag so far behind the West.

None of this was original with Jeremiah Wright. All he added was his own colorful gutter style of expressing it, which so captivated the man who is now President of the United States.

There is obviously something there with very deep emotional appeal. Moreover, because nothing is easier to find than sins among human beings, there will never be a lack of evil deeds to make that explanation seem plausible.

Because the Western culture has been ascendant in the world in recent centuries, the image of rich white people and poor non-white people has made a deep impression, whether in theories of racial superiority– which were big among “progressives” in the early 20th century– or in theories of exploitation among “progressives” later on.

In a wider view of history, however, it becomes clear that, for centuries before the European ascendancy, Europe lagged far behind China in many achievements. Since neither of them changed much genetically between those times and the later rise of Europe, it is hard to reconcile this role reversal with racial theories.

More important, the Chinese were not to blame for Europe’s problems– which would not be solved until the Europeans themselves finally got their own act together, instead of blaming others. If they had listened to people like Jeremiah Wright, Europe might still be in the Dark Ages.

It is hard to reconcile “exploitation” theories with the facts. While there have been conquered peoples made poorer by their conquerors, especially by Spanish conquerors in the Western Hemisphere, in general most poor countries were poor for reasons that existed before the conquerors arrived. Some Third World countries are poorer today than they were when they were ruled by Western countries, generations ago.

False theories are not just an intellectual problem to be discussed around a seminar table in some ivy-covered building. When millions of people believe those theories, including people in high places, with the fate of nations in their hands, that is a serious and potentially disastrous fact of life.

Despite a carefully choreographed image of affability and cool, Barack Obama’s decisions and appointments as President betray an alienation from the values and the people of this country that are too disturbing to be answered by showing his birth certificate.

Too many of his appointees exhibit a similar alienation, including Attorney General Eric Holder, under whom the Dept. of Justice could more accurately be described as the Dept. of Payback.

Memorial Day 2011

Morning Breaks on Arlington – a poem by Orrin Hatch

Morning breaks on Arlington
Warmed by rays of golden sun
And all who pause in homage there
Feel a soft hush in the air

Those who love their liberty
Bow the head and bend the knee
And from their hearts they breathe a silent prayer
“Thank God for those who rest in honor there”

The lush green grass at Arlington
Shimmers in the morning sun
As pure white crosses seem to glow
Sentinels in perfect rows

Everyone who lives and breathes
Wonders at the sight of these
Who gave to us a gift beyond compare
“Thank God for those who rest in honor there.”

Home of the eternal flame
Of humble heroes without name
Whose graves are guarded day and night
Keeping memory burning bright

Those who gave so much for us
Bravely said, “In God We Trust”
Now they are safe in His eternal care
“Thank God for those who rest in honor there”

Our nation’s flag now takes the breeze
Waving over all of these
And heaven smiles upon each silent one
As morning softly breaks on Arlington.

Freedom is never free.

Freedom is a constant struggle. It is never a given.

Now more than it has been in generations.

And it needs you to join the fight to preserve it.

We may be tossed upon an ocean where we can see no land — nor, perhaps, the sun or stars. But there is a chart and a compass for us to study, to consult, and to obey. That chart is the Constitution. – Daniel Webster

“If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” – Samuel Adams

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. – Thomas Jefferson

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty.
– Thomas Jefferson

If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people, under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.– Thomas Jefferson

I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.-Thomas Jefferson

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Welcome Back, 1970’s

Media reports in recent weeks say that Senate Democrats are considering a 3% surtax on income over $1 million to raise federal revenues. This would come on top of the higher income tax rates that President Obama has already proposed through the cancellation of the Bush era tax-rate reductions.

If the Democrats’ millionaire surtax were to happen—and were added to other tax increases already enacted last year and other leading tax hike ideas on the table this year—this could leave the U.S. with a combined federal and state top tax rate on earnings of 62%. That’s more than double the highest federal marginal rate of 28% when President Reagan left office in 1989. Welcome back to the 1970s.

Here’s the math behind that depressing calculation. Today’s top federal income tax rate is 35%. Almost all Democrats in Washington want to repeal the Bush tax cuts on those who make more than $250,000 and phase out certain deductions, so the effective income tax rate would rise to about 41.5%. The 3% millionaire surtax raises that rate to 44.5%.

moore

But payroll taxes, which are income taxes on wages and salaries, must also be included in the equation. So we have to add about 2.5 percentage points for the payroll tax for Medicare (employee and employer share after business deductions), which was applied to all income without a ceiling in 1993 as part of the Clinton tax hike. I am including in this analysis the employer share of all payroll taxes because it is a direct tax on a worker’s salary and most economists agree that though employers are responsible for collecting this tax, it is ultimately borne by the employee. That brings the tax rate to 47%.

Then last year, as part of the down payment for ObamaCare, Congress snuck in an extra 0.9% Medicare surtax on “high-income earners,” meaning any individual earning more than $200,000 or couples earning more than $250,000. This brings the total tax rate to 47.9%.

But that’s not all. Several weeks ago, Mr. Obama raised the possibility of eliminating the income ceiling on the Social Security tax, now capped at $106,800 of earnings a year. (Never mind that the program was designed to operate as an insurance system, with each individual’s payment tied to the benefits paid out at retirement.) Subjecting all wage and salary income to Social Security taxes would add roughly 10.1 percentage points to the top tax rate. This takes the grand total tax rate on each additional dollar earned in America to about 58%.

Then we have to factor in state income taxes, which on average add after the deductions from the federal income tax roughly another four percentage points to the tax burden. So now on average we are at a tax rate of close to 62%.

Democrats have repeatedly stated they only intend to restore the tax rates that existed during the Clinton years. But after all these taxes on the “rich,” we’re headed back to the taxes that prevailed under Jimmy Carter, when the highest tax rate was 70%.

Taxes on investment income are also headed way up. Suspending the Bush tax cuts, which is favored by nearly every congressional Democrat, plus a 3.8% investment tax in the ObamaCare bill (which starts in 2014) brings the capital gains tax rate to 23.8% from 15%. The dividend tax would potentially climb to 45% from the current rate of 15%.

Now let’s consider how our tax system today compares with the system that was in place in the late 1980s—when the deficit was only about one-quarter as large as a share of GDP as it is now. After the landmark Tax Reform Act of 1986, which closed special-interest loopholes in exchange for top marginal rates of 28%, the highest combined federal-state marginal tax rate was about 33%. Now we may be headed to 62%. You don’t have to be Jack Kemp or Arthur Laffer to understand that a 29 percentage point rise in top marginal rates would make America a highly uncompetitive place.

What is particularly worrisome about this trend is the deterioration of the U.S. tax position relative to the rest of our economic rivals. In 1990, the highest individual income tax rate of our major economic trading partners was 51%, while the U.S. was much lower at 33%. It’s no wonder that during the 1980s and ’90s the U.S. created more than twice as many new jobs as Japan and Western Europe combined.

It’s true that the economy was able to absorb the Bush 41 and Clinton tax hikes and still grow at a very rapid pace. But what the soak-the-rich lobby ignores is how different the world is today versus the early 1990s. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, over the past two decades the average highest tax rate among the 20 major industrial nations has fallen to about 45%. Yet the highest U.S. tax rate would rise to more than 48% under the Obama/Democratic tax hikes. To make matters worse, if we include the average personal income tax rates of developing countries like India and China, the average tax rate around the world is closer to 30%, according to a new study by KPMG.

What all this means is that in the late 1980s, the U.S. was nearly the lowest taxed nation in the world, and a quarter century later we’re nearly the highest.

Despite all of this, the refrain from Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and most of the Democrats in Congress is our fiscal mess is a result of “tax cuts for the rich.” When? Where? Who? The Tax Foundation recently noted that in 2009 the U.S. collected a higher share of income and payroll taxes (45%) from the richest 10% of tax filers than any other nation, including such socialist welfare states as Sweden (27%), France (28%) and Germany (31%). And this was before the rate hikes that Democrats are now endorsing.

Perhaps there can still be a happy ending to this sad tale of U.S. decline. If there were ever a right time to trade in the junk heap of our federal tax code for a pro-growth Steve Forbes-style flat tax, now’s the time.

With economic malaise, you’d swear Jimmy Carter was President….

We can tax people to death and then spend it on the “poor” without end and everything will be great!  <wink wink>

And these business owners would be happy to hire you now… 😦

 

Persistance

I was woken up in the middle of the night think about something that Morgan Gendel (Star Trek: TNG’s “Inner Light”) said during his talk at Phoenix Comic Con today.

Persistance.

That’s what got him the job.

Sure he had to please the masses of people who worked for the show, but he pitched this now classic episode to the same people 5 times.

And it got me to thinking about the Republicans.

Those scared little boys who just want to be liked.

The one that will be eaten alive by a ravenous pack of Liberal “journalists”.

The idea that they will try and play to the middle so much that they will nominate a RINO (Republican in Name Only) again like Sen. McCain as their nominee again.

Then they will lose. The country will lose and history will lose. Time itself will lose. Humanity will lose.

The person who beats Obama will have to look into the teeth of the ravenous plague of piranhas and persist.

They will have to look the very face of Fear and Death in the face.

They will have to be willing to be atomized by the most ravenous levels of hatred, fear and bile.

Because, who every runs against the GOD of the Liberal Left will have endure all of these things and persist.

The Left and The Media are not our friends. They are a remorseless pack of wild raptors hunting in packs to rip apart any potential prey that gets in their way.

That is quite a daunting challenge.

But if it’s not well met and defeated, The Dark Side Wins.

You think they are insufferably arrogant now, just wait until even after all the shit they have piled on and still they win in November 2012 there will be no stopping them or their egos.

Orwell’s Nightmare will be an optimistic vision when these clowns are down with you.

So, if you’re a Conservative, A Libertarian, or just a Moderate who does not want to see The Darkness win you must be willing to start the very face of Fear and Death in the Face and WIN.

A RINO will be shredded not only by the Liberals and Their Liberal Media Machine, but by me, and people like me, your humble Tea Party Conservative.

You don’t have us in the bag.

Remember that.

You put up a RINO, a “safe” candidate that will have “middle of the road” appeal and you will lose!

Period. End of story. End of Country.

You want to be “safe” in your political games and elitism. You’ll lose.

But it is incumbent on us, the humble “average voter” to make sure that no RINO is put forth also.

We have our part to play and we have our own battle to win.

We must persist also.

We must get what WE WANT, not what Washington thinks we want. Or what some over-priced political consultants thinks will get those “20% in the middle”.

We must Survive the coming Armageddon that will reign down upon us by the hoardes of Hell from the Left and we must persist.

Or else, all hope is truly lost.

So get ready for battle.

It won’t be safe, it won’t be kind.

But it is a battle that must be fought and it must be won.

For your sake, for you kids sake for your grandkids and kids not yet borns’ sake.

Because even if we win, the Forces of Hell will just regroup and come again and again and again and we must fight them until THEY give up not when we declare victory.

Otherwise, it’s over, turn out the lights, and that shining beacon upon the hill that has been America will be forever extinguished.

Simple.

If you are going through hell, keep going. — Winston Churchill

As the Congressional Republicans have attempted to pass a budget that tackles our pending deficit and Medicare crises, Democrats have become quite adept at shooting down budgets while not bothering to propose any practical solutions of their own (today would be day 758, I believe?). It is understandable, though, that they just do not have the time to worry about a federal budget, since they are so darn busy coddling the general welfare. The latest legislation? Forget the budget; we need even more federal standards for sunscreen lotion labels! The Hill has the story:

“As families prepare for Memorial Day festivities, and plan outings this summer, most will be outdoors without adequate sun protection, even if they use sunscreen,” Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the sponsor, said this week. “This is because there are currently no rules that sunscreen makers must follow when making claims about the level of protection their products provide.”

The bill, S. 1064, would require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to finalize its 2007 proposal mandating that sunscreen labels disclose the extent to which the product protects against ultraviolet rays known as UVA rays. UVA rays can penetrate the skin more deeply than UVB rays, but currently, sunscreen labels are not required to tell consumers how they protect against UVA rays.

Aside from Reed, the bill is sponsored by several Democratic heavy-hitters, including Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.), Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rules and Administration Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-NY). First-term Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) is also a sponsor.

According to Reed, forcing the application of the FDA proposal would require labels to “disclose the level of UVA protection in a standard format that appears near the sun protection factor rating, and ensure that the SPF rating actually corresponds to a product’s protection against UVB rays.”

The bill would require the proposed FDA rule to take effect within 180 days after it became law.

“I look forward to a summer when Americans can finally feel protected from the sun’s harmful rays,” Reed said.

Well, what a relief that Senator Jack Reed is looking out for me, because otherwise, I would have had no way of knowing about the subtle differences in the sun blockage provided between SPF 75 and SPF 85 (hint: there are none), and never mind the numerous studies that suggest that sunscreen may actually accelerate cancer. Good grief! While this legislation was originally proposed in 2007, this is just a taste of what will happen if the looming menace of Obamacare stays on schedule: since I know that I will not have to feel the full costs of getting any skin cancer spots surgically removed, I have less of an incentive to limit my sun exposure. I know that “society” will pay for it, so I will not take conscious action to lessen my future demand for health care, and the system will become overburdened and expensive. Hence, it becomes the federal government’s job to make decisions about my welfare for me and further encumber the mind-blowing bureaucracy that rules our lives. But hey, even if I cannot afford to buy sunscreen because of federal spending, higher taxes, and a wracked economy, at least I will be able to understand the labels. (Erika Johnsen)

It’s your choice. You cannot do this because it will be easy, and neither can the Republicans.

It will not be.

The very mouth of Hell and Damnation will open upon any who dare to challenge the might and the righteousness of The Holy Left.

Thems just the facts,ma’am.

Deal with it.

And then Persist.

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Lost One!

Up Yours Eric! In your face Janet! F*ck you Barack!

Most recently, the Obama administration decided to challenge the 2007 Arizona immigration law and has asked the Supreme Court to overturn the provision. But what is a little known fact to most Americans is that it was <Supreme Court Justice and Former Solicitor General> Kagan who was the originator and driving force behind the Obama administration’s decision to ask the Court to overturn the Arizona immigration law. Kagan recently admitted as much in required disclosures to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Told you see was a political appointee, an apparatchik, a stooge.

The administration argued that Arizona’s law revoking the business licenses of businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants is unconstitutional. But this argument is completely baseless as the two lower courts already confirmed.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona’s law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Thursday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

The decision upholding the validity of the 2007 law comes as the state is appealing a ruling that blocked key components of a second, more controversial Arizona immigration enforcement law. Thursday’s decision applies only to business licenses and does not signal how the high court might rule if the other law comes before it.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a majority made up of Republican-appointed justices, said the Arizona’s employer sanctions law “falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states.”

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, all Democratic appointees, dissented. The fourth Democratic appointee, Justice Elena Kagan, did not participate in the case because she worked on it while serving as President Barack Obama’s solicitor general.

Breyer said the Arizona law upsets a balance in federal law between dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers and ensuring that people are not discriminated against because they may speak with an accent or look like they might be immigrants.

Employers “will hesitate to hire those they fear will turn out to lack the right to work in the United States,” he said.

When ICE does engage in worksite enforcement actions, it allows the illegal workers simply to walk down the street to the next employer to seek employment.  If the federal government is abdicating its responsibility to enforce our immigrations laws, how can the administration protest when individual states seek to protect their residents?

Business interests and civil liberties groups challenged the law, backed by the Obama administration.

The measure was signed into law in 2007 by Democrat Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona and now the administration’s Homeland Security secretary.

The employer sanctions law has been only infrequently used. It was intended to diminish Arizona’s role as the nation’s hub for immigrant smuggling by requiring employers to verify the eligibility of new workers through a federal database. Employers found to have violated the law can have their business licenses suspended or revoked.

Lower courts, including the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, previously upheld the law.

The case is Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, 09-115.

Even more so, the American people deserve to have Supreme Court decisions rendered by justices who adhere to the Constitution, not politics.

But that’s not how Liberals work. And it sure as hell isn’t how Barack & Co work.

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler


Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Supremacy

In the old days, you could say “Don’t Mess with Texas”.

Now they’ll just wimp out.

An astounding Department of Justice threat to cancel airline flights to and from Texas, in addition to underhanded lobbying by TSA representatives, has killed efforts in the state to pass HB 1937, a bill that would have made invasive pat downs by TSA agents a felony.

HB 1937, a bill that would have made it “A criminal act for security personnel to touch a person’s private areas without probable cause as a condition of travel or as a condition of entry into a public place,” was headed for an imminent Senate vote in Texas having already passed the House unanimously 138-0, before the federal government stepped in to nix the legislation.

In a letter sent to Texas lawmakers, including to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Speaker Joe Straus, the House Clerk, and the Senate Secretary, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy threatened to cripple the airline industry in the state if legislators did not back down.

“If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute,” Murphy wrote. “Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”

“We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote,” Murphy added.

The fact that Murphy can’t even get the name of the bill correct is almost as disconcerting as the rampant mafia-like attitude of the DOJ in using de facto economic terrorism to shoot down the legislation.

Following a fiery debate in the Texas House last night, Senate sponsor Dan Patrick (R-Houston) pulled the bill, remarking that TSA representatives had been “lobbying” the Texas Senate in an effort to mothball the legislation.

“I will pull HB 1937 down, but I will stand for Liberty in the state of Texas,” Patrick said.

Patrick added that TSA officials had warned him passing the bill “could close down all the airports in Texas,” which he regarded as a ‘heavy handed threat’ by the federal government.

The staff of Rep. David Simpson said the DOJ had “thrown down the gauntlet” in using such stark language to oppose the bill.

“Either Texas backs off and continues to let government employees fondle innocent women, children and men as a condition of travel,” the staff wrote, “or the TSA [Transportation Safety Administration] has the authority to cancel flights or series of flights.”

“… 97 percent of people who go though the nation’s airports do not go through these offensive searches. And yet, a United States Attorney warns that flights to Texas could be shut down because TSA would not be able to ensure the safety of passengers and crew if agents could not touch genitals. Someone must make a stand against the atrocities of our government agents …”

So Texas is safe for legalize sexual harrassment. Hurray!

But it also shows how authoritarian governments operate.

The fact that the Department of Justice and the TSA have resorted to threats of economic terrorism in addition to underhanded lobbying techniques again illustrates the fact that the federal government is increasingly behaving like a criminal enterprise with total disregard for the Constitution.

The TSA’s initial response to HB 1937 was to claim that it could not become law because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2), a law that the TSA claimed “prevents states from regulating the federal government.” (infowars)

Supremacy Clause?

Where have I heard that one before? 🙂

Texas has no authority to regulate federal agents and employees in the performance of their federal duties or to pass a statute that conflicts with federal law,” Murphy said in the letter, saying the federal government would seek a court order to prevent enforcement of the law if passed.

Until that occurred, “TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of the passengers and crew.”

Funny, I’ve heard those words before….SB1070 and Illegal immigration anyone… 😦

A boisterous group of protesters angry over the Texas Senate’s failure to vote on the airport groping bill tried to enter the public gallery this afternoon and were blocked by state troopers.

Shouting “treason” and “cowards” and carrying signs and placards, and led by radio talk show host Alex Jones, the group of perhaps as many as 100 people entered the State Capitol shortly after 3 p.m. and first went to the House chamber.

There, House members quickly informed the shouting group that it was the Senate that had failed to take action late Tuesday on House Bill 1937, which would have made it a crime for security checkpoint screeners to handle the private parts of anyone they screened. (so the House members through the Senate under the bus…)

The group then marched to the Senate side of the Capitol and tried to enter the third-floor public gallery. Troopers with arms folded blocked them from entry.

They stood outside for several minutes, chanting: “Co-wards, co-wards,” Trea-son, trea-son,” and shouted slogans accusing senators and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst of being “federal pimps” and “scallawag trash.”

They vowed to vote out of office Dewhurst and the senators who opposed passage of the bill.

After shouting chants for about 30 minutes, the group left and troopers reopened the gallery doors. The activists then went to other parts of the Capitol to continue their protest.

Dewhurst has said the bill did not have the votes to pass, a fact he learned after the debate began. Patrick pulled down the bill from consideration after the debate began, and a vote never took place. The bill had lost support after senators had learned that federal officials had warned that such ban would violate federal law and could bring court challenges and airport shutdowns.

“Someone who will not stand up to the federal government, you have to ask yourself, is that the kind of person we need in the U.S. Senate?” Patrick said this afternoon, saying the bill is dead. (statesman.com)

The culprit apparently, the Lt. Governor who is running for the US Senate. I guess he didn’t want to tick off his hoped-to-be-future dictators in arms. And this idiot is a Republican?

I’m sure the rights of the people in Texas were foremost on his mind. 😦

In other words, “Don’t mess with Texas…as long as it’s not a challenge to the supremacy of  Washington then we’ll cave like a rotten jalapeno”

The Bully pulpit wins again.

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”- George Orwell

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Keep ’em Down

Thomas Sowell: Those who regard government “entitlement” programs as sacrosanct, and regard those who want to cut them back as calloused or cruel, picture a world very different from the world of reality.

To listen to some of the defenders of entitlement programs, which are at the heart of the present financial crisis, you might think that anything the government fails to provide is something that people will be deprived of.

In other words, if you cut spending on school lunches, children will go hungry. If you fail to subsidize housing, people will be homeless. If you fail to subsidize prescription drugs, old people will have to eat dog food in order to be able to afford their meds.

This is the vision promoted by many politicians and much of the media. But, in the world of reality, it is not even true for most people who are living below the official poverty line.

Most Americans living below the official poverty line own a car or truck– and government entitlement programs seldom provide cars and trucks. Most people living below the official poverty line also have air conditioning, color television and a microwave oven–and these too are not usually handed out by government entitlement programs.

Cell phones and other electronic devices are by no means unheard of in low-income neighborhoods, where children would supposedly go hungry if there were no school lunch programs. In reality, low-income people are overweight even more often than other Americans.

As for housing and homelessness, housing prices are higher and homelessness a bigger problem in places where there has been massive government intervention, such as liberal bastions like New York City and San Francisco. As for the elderly, 80 percent are homeowners. whose monthly housing costs are less than $400, including property taxes, utilities, and maintenance.

The desperately poor elderly conjured up in political and media rhetoric are– in the world of reality– the wealthiest segment of the American population. The average wealth of older households is nearly three times the wealth of households headed by people in the 35 to 44-year-old bracket, and more than 15 times the wealth of households headed by someone under 35 years of age.

If the wealthiest segment of the population cannot pay their own medical bills, who can? The country as a whole is not any richer because the government pays our medical bills– with money that it takes from us.

What about the truly poor, in whatever age brackets? First of all, even in low-income and high-crime neighborhoods, people are not stealing bread to feed their children. The fraction of the people in such neighborhoods who commit most of the crimes are far more likely to steal luxury products that they can either use or sell to get money to support their parasitic lifestyle.

As for the rest of the poor, Professor Walter Williams of George Mason University long ago showed that you could give the poor enough money to lift them all above the official poverty line for a fraction of what it costs to support a massive welfare state bureaucracy.

We don’t need to send the country into bankruptcy, in the name of the poor, by spending trillions of dollars on people who are not poor, and who could take care of themselves. The poor have been used as human shields behind which the expanding welfare state can advance.

The goal is not to keep the poor from starving but to create dependency, because dependency translates into votes for politicians who play Santa Claus.

We have all heard the old saying about how giving a man a fish feeds him for a day, while teaching him to fish feeds him for a lifetime. Independence makes for a healthier society, but dependency is what gets votes for politicians.

For politicians, giving a man a fish every day of his life is the way to keep getting his vote. “Entitlement” is just a fancy word for dependency.

As for the scary stories politicians tell, in order to keep the entitlement programs going, as long as we keep buying it, they will keep selling it.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

But give hima fish every day, maybe he will vote for you to give him more fish!

And after all, that’s what really matters. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok


The Wait

The White House has named Jesse Lee to a new position within its communications department titled Director of Progressive Media & Online Response. According to The Huffington Post, Lee will essentially be responsible for building up Obama’s online presence as he prepares for his reelection bid, and squashing any negative stories:

The post is a new one for this White House. Rapid response has usually been outsourced to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), if not done on an ad-hoc basis by administration officials. And it signals that the White House will be adopting a more aggressive defense of the president and his policies as his re-election campaign gears up.

If you’re going to post something online about Obama that isn’t true, Lee is going to be the one to handle you. Considering that Lee’s first tweet about his new position included a picture of The Terminator, we suggest you watch what you say OR BE DESTROYED.

Okay that was a little dramatic, but you get the idea.

So Big Brother’s Thought Police is watching you…and me 🙂

************

Oh, and the The Rapture has been rescheduled for Oct 21st. So beware sinners! 🙂

Camping in his slow, liquorish drawl. “We’re not going to be advertising in anyway, anywhere. That’s all done. That’s all done. The world has been warned. My has it been warned. We did our little share.”

All those millions we raised from the sheep is going to me now. So I’m taking my millions and disappearing so that when it doesn’t happen on Oct 21st no one will be able to find me the next time.

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

************

While the clock is ticking toward the imminent August 2nd deadline for Congress to pass a budget, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate are holding out as long as possible and trading progress on a serious budget for political gains.

Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee, chaired by Sen. Kent Conrad, have stalled on producing a budget proposal in the hopes that the Gang of Six talks would prove successful. When it became clear the talks would not lead to a budget compromise, Conrad announced last week that he was putting off a proposal “indefinitely”.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, however, plans to bring to a vote, budgets proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, and President Obama – none of which represent Senate Democrats’ views, and are destined to fail.

But the Republican leadership, like Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, is actively working against Senate Republicans having a budget they can be held accountable for, according to one Republican staffer, and instructing Republicans to “stand down” on the issue behind the scenes.

McConnell’s strategy, according to the staffer, is to protect moderate Republicans like Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, from having to vote for a more conservative budget. If Reid’s doomed votes go forward as planned, Snowe and Collins can safely vote against them.

Moreover, McConnell’s  budget strategy could also include a larger plan that a “do-nothing” Senate will work in his favor to take back the chamber for Republicans in 2012.

“Republicans specialize in playing to lose in the Senate, not forcing tough votes and they would have been complicit in this deal instead of telling Reid it is time to take some tough votes on the budget,” the staffer told The Daily Caller.

In other words, Republicans don’t want to force the budget issue any more than the Democrats do.

One Republican – Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama – is being particularly vocal on the Senate’s failure to seriously engage in a budget debate. On Monday, Sessions spoke on the Senate floor and objected to the Reid’s scheduled budget votes, calling them “cynical political games,” and in doing so, rejected the request for unanimous consent.

“The planned series of votes are designed by the Majority Leader to fail,” said Sessions. “They are designed as a gimmick to distract attention from the unwillingness of Senate Democrats to produce an honest plan. They are designed to keep this Senate form doing its job and defending this Republic from a grave financial danger.”

He also spoke out against the Senate going on Memorial Day recess while no progress is being made on the budget.

His objections, however, do not mean that the budget proposals will not be voted on this week. Scheduling them ahead of time like Reid plans, means that the votes would require unanimous consent (UC). Sessions simply announced he would not approve UC, but because budget resolutions get special treatments under Senate rules, they can be called for a vote at any time.

Reid’s spokesperson, Jon Summers, responded to Session’s threats on Twitter, writing “In case anyone had any doubts, Sen. Sessions just made it clear: Repubs are petrified of voting on their own party’s plan to end Medicare.”

So as they play hot potato childish games with a small thermonuclear device that is the Debt anyone but me think it will go off in our faces before they get serious and grow up?

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Tough

Couldn’t have said it better.

Jedidiah Bila: I spend quite a bit of time calling out some on the left. I detest big-government policies that simultaneously snatch our liberty and rob us blind. I find class warfare to be profoundly un-American. I have no patience for leftists who demand civility while spewing hateful rhetoric, or those who insist that feminism, diversity, and compassion are enemies of conservatism. And I don’t like left-wing liars who utilize scare tactics to distort everything from Paul Ryan’s Medicare proposal to Jan Brewer’s effort to enforce an immigration law that the federal government should be enforcing already.

I’ve also had tough words for some in the GOP. I have rejected weak deals that do nothing in the way of seriously addressing this country’s deficit and debt. And I have repeatedly stood firm against business-as-usual Republicans who compromise even when it’s not in the best interest of the country.

I now see two trends developing on the right with respect to 2012 that I’d like to address.

First off, I’ve received many emails from Republicans who feel that GOP contenders shouldn’t boldly criticize each other and that conservatives shouldn’t strongly critique 2012 candidates. I beg to differ.

When it comes to a 2012 primary season, it is imperative that candidates hold each other accountable for their records, for any disparity between their actions and words, for promises made and not kept, and for any and all inconsistencies. I want grassroots conservative bloggers, columnists, television commentators, and talk radio hosts calling it like they see it, putting those records front and center, and having a zero-tolerance policy for phonies and do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do nonsense. That is the only way to try to ensure that the strongest, most capable, most genuinely conservative candidate rises to the top. I want candidates challenging the heck out of each other. And I want us challenging them, too.

Secondly, I’ve had about enough of folks on the right trying to discourage candidates from running by insisting right off the bat that they could never win. Candidates are labeled unelectable, unpresidential, too polarizing, not polished enough, too unconventional, or some other absurd description. And so I ask — what are you folks so afraid of? Why are you so terrified of Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, and others entering the race and showing voters what they’ve got? Whether or not they are able to adeptly articulate their message and/or possess a proven commitment to conservatism will be heard by voters. The American people will make their decision. And I have to question the motives of anyone who wants to silence a candidate before the battle has even begun.

Conservatives, 2012 isn’t a fight we can afford to lose. And it’s not just about defeating Barack Obama. It’s about supporting someone who can be trusted to get this country back on track. You and I both know that plenty of politicians with GOP labels stamped on their foreheads are in no way committed to principled conservatism, and can in no way be counted on to exhibit strong leadership when it comes to fiscal responsibility, entitlement reform, and reawakening the values that built this country. By challenging candidates — and by them challenging each other — American voters will begin to separate the men from the boys, the women from the girls.

And to those who love telling potential GOP candidates to sit down and shut up before they’ve even stepped up to the plate, I remind you that this is America. That’s not what we’re about. I, for one, am ready to hear from everyone gutsy enough to play.

AMEN!

The Left and the Leftist Media are going to hate you no matter what you do or what you say. Period.

You could farther left than Barack Obama (if that’s possible) and they’d still hate you. And so would anyone who would have voted for you.

So have some balls. Stir straight into the Hurricane of Hate.

Case in Point: McDonalds.

Under assault for year by the Food Police.

They attack them, they change their ways. They attack them for something else. They change. They attack them again and again and again.

It’s much like Israel to Hamas and The Palestinians, their very existence pisses them off!

Now that Osama bin Laden is dead, we can turn our attention to another remorseless enemy who for years has sown death and destruction among blameless innocents. I refer, of course, to Ronald McDonald.

The McDonald’s mascot may qualify as one of the more annoying characters on the planet. But to his credit, he doesn’t compound his unappealing personality by bossing you around. In that respect, he is far less objectionable than the people who make a fetish of finding him objectionable.

Last week, they took out ads in several newspapers blaming the clown for childhood obesity and demanding that McDonald’s “stop marketing junk food to kids.” The signers range from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an anti-meat group that the American Medical Association has accused of “perverting medical science,” to alternative-healing huckster Andrew Weil.

The general rule of critics is that McDonald’s can do nothing right. Some years ago, they insisted that the company get rid of the beef tallow in which it cooked French fries. It did so, in favor of a supposedly healthier oil containing trans fats. A few years later, the activists demanded that it abandon trans fats, which it soon did.

How much credit did it get for those changes? Not much. The class of people who detested McDonald’s went right on detesting it.

These ads are part of a larger campaign against everything McDonald’s represents. Were the company to retire Ronald McDonald, its enemies would step up their calls for an end to Happy Meals. Get rid of Happy Meals, and they would demand that McDonald’s thoroughly revamp its menu to incorporate their superior notions of nutrition.

Ultimately, the only way to please the critics is to become something unrecognizable. Or, better yet, disappear from the planet. New York Times food columnist Mark Bittman, who is to sanctimony what Saudi Arabia is to oil, believes “anything that discourages people from eating at McDonald’s could be seen as wonderful.”

Wonderful, that is, to enlightened souls who avoid it at all costs. But it’s clear that McDonald’s comes much closer to what paying consumers actually want than what its detractors prefer. It has 32,000 restaurants, serving 64 million people a day. Last year, it had revenues of $24 billion, more than the gross domestic product of some countries.

The food moralists imagine that McDonald’s marketing magic renders its targets helpless to resist. Ronald McDonald might as well be rounding up kids at gunpoint and forcing them to choke down

But children young enough to be seduced by Ronald McDonald or Happy Meals rarely visit restaurants without parents. These adults are free agents experienced at saying “no” to protect the interests of their sometimes ungrateful offspring.

Parents who dislike McDonald’s sales tactics have a wealth of dining alternatives. And anyone who wants a low-fat, low-calorie meal can easily find it underneath the Golden Arches: Health magazine ranks McDonald’s among the 10 healthiest fast-food restaurants.

It may be argued that many parents are too weak or ignorant to make sound decisions about the food their kids eat. If so, McDonald’s and its unstoppable brainwashing machine could vanish tomorrow without making the slightest difference in obesity or other diet-related ailments.

People don’t like cheap, tasty, high-calorie fare because McDonald’s offers it. McDonald’s offers it because people like it. In McDonald’s absence, patrons would seek it out at other fast-food places, sit-down establishments or grocery stores.

We live in an age of inexpensive, abundant food carefully designed to please the mass palate. Most of us, recalling the scarcity, dietary monotony and starvation that afflicted our ancestors for hundreds of millennia, count that as progress. But those determined to save human beings from their own alleged folly see it as catastrophic.

What is apparent is that the militant enemies of fast food would like it treated as a public health menace along the lines of tobacco. They want broad measures to restrict, discourage and punish the companies that sell it.

Ronald McDonald is merely a convenient symbol. Their true target is a capitalist economy that gives companies far too much latitude in appealing to customers and allows government far too little control over our food choices.

The idea of using government power to dictate what we eat will strike many Americans as a gross intrusion on personal freedom. But McDonald’s enemies? They’re lovin’ it. (Steve Chapman-Chicago Tribune)

Add in Liberal obsession with Oil Companies and you see where this is headed.

Liberals just want to control everything and everybody. They just consider themselves why smarter than you so you must be herded like cattle to do and to think what they want you to think.

So to have GOP Presidential Candidates cow-towing to the Media and the Left, trying to be “reasonable” and “accommodating” and “compromising” just drives me bat-crazy.

Stand Up. Be a Man (or woman) and Say what you believe and don’t Equivocate just to placate the Leftists. They won’t be.

Pure and Simple.

Now Just Do it!

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Welcome to Limbo

Well, no Rapture this time kiddies… 🙂

Reports of the end of the world appeared to have been exaggerated.

Eighty-nine-year-old tele-evangelist Harold Camping had prophesied that the “Rapture” would begin with powerful earthquakes at 6pm in each of the world’s regions, after which the good would be beamed up to heaven.

This morning, Kiwis confirmed there were no signs of the dead rising from the grave, nor of the living ascending into the clouds to meet Jesus Christ.

Twitter users were disappointed by the absence of Armaggedon.

Kind of sounds like “Hope & Change” doesn’t it. 🙂

But give the Democrats time, Armageddon will still come if you don’t allow them to rule over you completely and totally. From the very minute before conception till after your dead.

Throwing grandma off a cliff is child’s play compared to the fear campaign to come.

It’s not like Liberal Socialist/Marxist Democrats have an ideas that any wants to hear (except other Socialist Marxist Liberal Democrats).

And if you can’t win with ideas, go for fear. It’s worked for thousands of years.

David Speer, on Twitter, said: “Oh well no rapture. Just as well. New Zealand didn’t need that right now. Another delay to the filming of The Hobbit would’ve been terrible.” (London telegraph)

Now that’s truly an apocalypse….:)

“I had some skepticism but I was trying to push the skepticism away because I believe in God,” said Keith Bauer – who hopped in his minivan in Maryland and drove his family 3,000 miles to California for the Rapture.

Much like the fainting and the messanic behavior of 2008 for Barack Hussein Obama.

Now it will just be FEAR!

Many followers said the delay was a further test from God to persevere in their faith.

Sound like Obama Worshippers doesn’t it? 🙂
“The cold, hard reality is going to hit them that they did this, and it was false and they basically emptied out everything to follow a false teacher,” the Rev. Jacob Denys, of the Milpitas-based Calvary Bible Church. (Charlotte Observer)
Obama 2008:
The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.
Obama’s Nomination Victory Speech In St. Paul June 3, 2008.
Obama 2011 anyone? 🙂
But the blind faithful will carry on. The media will carry on.
You can’t break their faith.
Reality can’t break their faith.
But they can sure try and break yours!
To wage a campaign of  Doom if you dare to oppose Obama and the Democrats the seas will boil the air will turn to fire and grandma will be eating dog food as the Republicans gleefully throw her off the cliff laughing maniacally!!
Over the top? I doubt it.
I have faith in them. 🙂
On a different front, do you ever notice that when Liberals are wrong they always try to dismiss or diminish their mistakes so as to not take responsibility for them??
Well, our Dear Leader who started the war in Libya because NATO was founded by The US, funded largely by the US, and is a US led orginization (after all it stands for NORTH AMERICAN Treaty Orginization not “global”) now has to succumb to the War Powers Act and brasenly says that since we are doing so little he doesn’t need Congressional approval for it. So pshaw…
Now imagine a Republican saying that.
Hear that banshee howling of indignation and self-righteousness?
Hear the calls for impeachment?
In an effort to satisfy those arguing he needs to seek congressional authorization to continue US military activity in accordance with the War Powers Resolution, President Obama wrote a letter to congressional leaders this afternoon suggesting that the role is now so “limited” he does not need to seek congressional approval.“Since April 4,” the president wrote, “U.S. participation has consisted of: (1) non-kinetic support to the NATO-led operation, including intelligence, logistical support, and search and rescue assistance; (2) aircraft that have assisted in the suppression and destruction of air defenses in support of the no-fly zone; and (3) since April 23, precision strikes by unmanned aerial vehicles against a limited set of clearly defined targets in support of the NATO-led coalition’s efforts.” (ABC News)

Still hear that howling? Thought not.
But you can hear the howling of partisan hypocrisy. That’s screaming loud enough to cause The Rapture.
Now, consider what the 2012 re-election coronation of  Dear Leader is going to be like for the next 17 months.
Wishing the The Rapture HAD occurred yet? 🙂
A senior administration official told ABC News that the letter is intended to describe “a narrow US effort that is intermittent and principally an effort to support to support the ongoing NATO-led and UN-authorized civilian support mission and no fly zone.”“The US role is one of support,” the official said, “and the kinetic pieces of that are intermittent.”

Now flash to Iraq.
Rapture anyone?
Or at least of the Liberals and the Progressives.
I could pray for that.

The LA Times reported that Sen. Harry Reid has called the idea of a Democrat budget at this point ‘foolish,’ since they’ve decided they’d rather wait for any compromises to come out of the parleys already underway between the two parties.

“There’s no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion,” Reid said in an interview Thursday. “It would be  foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.”

Nothing like leading from behind, Sen. Reid. (Better to attack you, my dear…<<evil cackle>>)

As Sen. Jeff Sessions pointed out this week in a statement, “Nothing can change the fact that as long as Democrats retain the majority in the Senate—the majority they asked the American people to confer upon them—it is their responsibility, as required by statute, to publicly present their budget to the American people.”

Who needs one anyhow. Just let the Democrats do whatever they want, when they want, because they want. That’s how we all operate anyhow…. 🙂
Partisan sniping and fearmongering is so much better in their view.
Lead by Fear and Intimidation. Ideas are so passe’. Rule, not Lead!
You begin to wonder if the Democrats will ever pass another budget EVER.
I know I do. And I wonder why the Republicans don’t.
Oh, that would be because of a RINO virus. Silly me.
Please take the RINOs (Republicans in Name Only) please!
The president voiced support for a bipartisan resolution drafted by Senators John Kerry, D-Mass., John McCain, R-Ariz., Carl Levin, D-Mich., Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Lindsey Graham, R-SC, and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., stating that Congress “supports the U.S. mission in Libya and that both branches are united in their commitment to supporting the aspirations of the Libyan people for political reform and self-government…Congressional action in support of the mission would underline the U.S. commitment to this remarkable international effort.”Earlier this month, Kerry – who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – described his resolution as “in limbo.”

Isn’t limbo in between Heaven and Hell?
Sounds like what we have now under our Dear Leader.
And he will spend a BILLION dollars or more, with a massive media campaign blitz of fear and false hopes of the rapture (of peace and love) to come to convince ye of little faith that he is in fact the God of  “Hope” and the only moral “change” left in the Universe.
You must resist the Rapture to come in November 2012.
It won’t be Heaven on Earth.
The problem is the Republicans are too timid and the elites are too in love with themselves to care about you and me in any real sense.
So Welcome to Limbo.
Enjoy the eternity.

May the Schwartz Be With You!!

Can I have an Order of Fear & Freeloaders, Please…

A Michigan man who won $2 million in a state lottery game continues to collect food stamps 11 months after striking it rich.

And there’s nothing the state can do about it, at least for now.

Leroy Fick, 59, of Auburn won $2 million in the state lottery TV show “Make Me Rich!” last June. But the state’s Department of Human Services determined he was still eligible for food stamps, Fick’s attorney, John Wilson of Midland, said Tuesday.

Eligibility for food stamps is based on gross income and follows federal guidelines; lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don’t count as income. As long as Fick’s gross income stays below the eligibility requirement for food stamps, he can receive them, even if he has a million dollars in the bank.

Food stamps are paid for through tax dollars and are meant to help support low-income families.

“If you’re going to try to make me feel bad, you’re not going to do it,” Fick told WNEM-TV in Saginaw on Monday.

After all, he’s “entitled”. As I have said before and will say again, Liberals are the greediest, most self-centered because they feel the most entitled to other people’s money.

Oh, and if you disagree with Liberals on this Grandma is going to be thrown off a cliff (that’s coming later on in this blog).

Then there are the frauds. Like AARP.

“I think I’m scheduled to get my AARP card in a couple of years?” President Barack Obama asked today.

“Anytime you want one,” the organization told him. “Platinum.”

Obama at AARP.jpg

The stage was set at AARP, the powerful Washington-based lobby for senior Americans, for Obama to host another “town hall” forum on healthcare reform, where the president allowed that both he and his wife Michelle have “living wills” drafted but hope they don’t have to use them anytime soon.

“If you have insurance that you like, you will be able to keep that insurance,” Obama said of the healthcare reforms that he is pursuing on Capitol Hill. “Nobody is trying to change what works.” (Obama 2009)

They were a massive supporter of ObamaCare.

Now they get a waiver for their MediGap insurance. Their main rival, Medical Advantage gets savaged by ObamaCare.

Effectively, AARP is no longer a senior advocacy group, but just another “evil” “greedy” insurance company. But since they are in bed with Obama and the Liberals, that’s ok.

Their moral outrage is selective.

The Daily Caller has learned that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rate review rules, which it finalized on Thursday, exempt “Medigap” policy providers, like the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), from oversight when such providers increase payment rates for their supplemental insurance plans.

Insurance providers who aren’t exempt from Obamacare’s rate review rules are required to publicly release and explain some health care payment rate increases.

The AARP is the nation’s biggest seller of Medigap policies, or supplemental healthcare plans that add onto what Medicare won’t cover for seniors. The senior citizens interest group advocated for Obamacare to include an attack on Medigap policies’ biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage.

Though the White House and HHS dismiss allegations of political favoritism when it comes to who’s getting exceptions from the new health care regulations – such as in the recent uproar over the disproportionate number of Obamacare waivers that went to companies in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s district — Obamacare critics say the mere appearance of the administration helping friends is disturbing.

The appearance of favoritism exists with the new AARP exemptions, too. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sens. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, and Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, wrote to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius last October asking her not to do what HHS just finalized today – that is exempt Medigap policies from rate increase oversight.underwriter

“While Medicare Advantage premiums are declining, we are hearing disturbing stories from beneficiaries across the country about excessive premium increases for Medigap supplemental insurance policies,” Reid, Baucus and Kerry wrote to Sebelius on Oct. 6.

“For example, some beneficiaries enrolled in the United of Omaha Life Insurance Company will see their Medigap premiums increase by approximately 40 percent between 2010 and 2011,” the letter read. “An increase of this magnitude raises serious concerns about premium-setting practices and rate review procedures in place for Medigap policies.”

Instead of listening to three top Senate Democrats, the Obama administration decided to go ahead anyway with the Medigap exceptions from rate increase reviews.

The AARP was a driving force behind getting Obamacare through Congress, contributing a large sum to the $121 million advertising campaign pushing it, and spending millions more lobbying for it on Capitol Hill.

The senior citizen advocacy organization stands to make huge profits from Medicare Advantage cuts and from the exemptions it will benefit from when it comes to the Medigap plans sold under what AARP CEO A. Barry Rand calls the AARP’s “for-profit side.”

The AARP’s support of Obamacare during the debate over the legislation raised lots of eyebrows nationwide, as President Obama called for $313 billion in cuts to Medicare to push the plan through. Seniors weren’t happy about it, and many ripped AARP representatives at town hall meetings nationwide.

Now, though, it’s clear that the AARP is set to make millions, if not billions, of extra dollars in Medigap plan sales moving forward because they’ve effectively knocked out their biggest competitor, Medicare Advantage, through Obamacare. (DC)

AARP aided and abetted Democrats’ efforts to inflict a disastrous bill on an unwilling public.  They now stand to profit from the resulting law — while simultaneously receiving convenient exemptions from provisions that may hurt their bottom line.  Ed Morrissey pens the appropriate response to this outrageous report:  “If the AARP and the labor unions that backed ObamaCare need waivers from its consequences, then we all do.”  Amen.  I’ll leave you with this delightful AARP/Obama walk down memory lane.  This clip still makes my blood boil:
Update from AARP: “To be clear, AARP is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with a membership. While there are insurance products that carry the AARP name, they are underwritten by insurers such as Delta Dental, UnitedHealth Group, and Aetna and others—not AARP.  We work to ensure those products meet our standards and provide value to our members.

And, NATO is the US so the US didn’t attack Libya…right….. 😦
Oh and if you disagree with them, Grandma is going off a cliff…
Democrats continue to try to scare seniors with a new anti-GOP Medicare ad that shows “Grandma” getting thrown off a cliff and then asks, “Is America beautiful without Medicare?”

Welcome to the land of the freeloaders and the home of the depraved. No image captures America’s regressive ethos better than that of 30-year-old Stanley Thornton Jr., self-proclaimed “Adult Baby.” Profiled on a recent National Geographic reality television show, Thornton claims to suffer from a bizarre infantilism that leads him to wear diapers, lounge around in an oversized crib and seek constant coddling.

The nappies may be extreme, but let’s face it: Thornton Jr. — let’s just call him Junior — is a symptom of our Nanny State run amok, not an anomaly.

Junior came to Washington’s attention this week when Oklahoma GOP Sen. Tom Coburn challenged the Social Security Administration to probe into how the baby bottle-guzzling 350-pound man qualified for federal disability benefits. A former security guard, Junior is handy enough to have crafted his own wooden high chair and playpen.

Junior can drive a car and has sense enough not to go out in public in his XXL footie pajamas. Yet, welfare administrators treat him as an incurable dependent. Also collecting taxpayer-subsidized paychecks: Thornton’s adult roommate, a former nurse, who has indulged Thornton’s baby role-playing for the past decade.

Junior, naturally, threw a tantrum when his government teat-sucking was called into question. He wiped his nose and un-balled his fists long enough to type out an e-mail to The Washington Times: “You wanna test how damn serious I am about leaving this world, screw with my check that pays for this apartment and food. Try it. See how serious I am. I don’t care,” Junior threatened. “I have no problem killing myself. Take away the last thing keeping me here, and see what happens. Next time you see me on the news, it will be me in a body bag.”

Not from nowhere has this stubborn, self-destructive sense of entitlement sprung. As I reported last month, a record-breaking 12 million Americans have been added to the federal food stamp rolls over the past two years, and the bloated $6 billion AmeriCorps social justice army has been converted into a publicist corps for the welfare machine.

Just this week, a Michigan man boasted that he’s still collecting food stamps after winning a $2 million government-sponsored lottery prize. “If you’re going to … try to make me feel bad, you aren’t going to do it,” he told a local TV reporter. Embedded in his rebuke is the eternal refrain of the self-esteem-puffed teenager: “You can’t judge me!”

Diana West, author of “The Death of the Grown-Up,” traced the modern abdication of adulthood to the Baby Boomer generation. “The common compass of the past — the urge to grow up and into long pants; to be old enough to dance at the ball (amazingly enough, to the music adults danced to); to assume one’s rights and responsibilities — completely disappeared” after World War II. A culture of behavioral restraint gave way to “anything goes” and morphed into the current generation’s “whatever” attitude.

Look around: Junior’s infantilism is of a piece with the refusal of celebrity mothers Dina Lohan and Tish Cyrus to act like parents — and instead serve as best friends and tattoo parlor pals for their wayward daughters Lindsay and Miley. They’re the kind of women who shop at Forever 21, buy beer for their daughters’ prom parties and give them Botox certificates for high school graduation.

Junior’s penchant for pajamas is of a piece with perpetually stunted Hugh Hefner’s fetish for velvet robes 24/7 and self-indulgent decadence. Junior’s giant playpen is a cringe-inducing symbol of the Farmville-tethered, “funemployed” class of self-gratifiers who continue to live for today and spend like there’s no tomorrow.

Adult Baby Syndrome isn’t an isolated pathology. It’s the new American Way. Or, I should say, the new American Wahhhhh. (Michelle Malkin)

On issue after issue, Republicans are putting forward serious, sober and often politically risky solutions (if sometimes a bit weak kneed) to the nation’s most pressing problems, while Democrats play class-warfare games and stoke the public’s fear.

Oh, and today was supposed to be the end of the world… 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Thrown Under the Bus

Are feeling like you have tire treads  running up your body??

You’re not alone.

You must have Obama Bus Syndrome.

Where you are naively or purposely thrown under the bus to serve his ego and his mission to destroy all freedom everywhere.

After all, he is a Nobel Peace Prize Winner! 🙂

The latest victim, Israel. The long time ally of the United States.

Oh, and Christians and Jews, but who cares about them, they are just right wing religious nuts anyhow. 🙂

Obama, in a policy speech on Thursday on the “Arab spring” uprisings across the Middle East, laid down his clearest markers yet on the compromises Israel and the Palestinians must make for resolving their decades-old conflict.

His position essentially embraces the Palestinian view that the state they seek in the West Bank and Gaza should largely be drawn along the lines that existed before the 1967 war in which Israel captured those territories and East Jerusalem.

On the eve of Netanyahu’s visit, it was seen as a message that Obama expects Israel to eventually make big concessions.

“The viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of Israel’s existence,” Netanyahu said in a statement before flying to the United States for his talks with Obama.

Mind you some of the holiest sights in all of Christiandom and Judism would be turned over to Palestinians. Nothing too major since religion is hardly a concern of this administration except for that whole Muslim thing that he keeps reaffirming by doing Pro-Muslim things like this.

So what if Hamas, which is the government of the Palestinians, has in their charter, “KILL ALL THE JEWS” they can be reasonable and Israel has to stop being mean to them if they want peace. 😦

So what if a central tenant of these groups is the non-existence of Israel. Let’s be fair! They are the oppressed.

And Hezbollah, which is in Lebanon, and South America (I might add).

No biggie.

Syria, Iran. No biggie. if you’re just nice to them and you’re “fair” everything will come out kumbuya!

You have to do the 60’s hippie peacenik routine and everything will be a Summer of ’69 Lovefest.

Which I don’t know if he’s naive or deliberate. But the headline in the leftist LA Times might give us a Clue:

Obama: U.S. has chance to pursue the ‘world as it should be’

After decades of ‘accepting the world as it is’ in the Middle East, President Obama in his Middle East speech says the U.S. has a chance to ‘speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people.’

<<BARF BAG ON STANDBY>>

This is liberalism at it’s core, the way the world should be, according to them, not the way it is. So deal from a position of unreality and try and force it into reality because it makes you feel “good” and…<<drum roll>>…It’s FAIR! 🙂

God Help Us All!

He wants to expand Oil production because his re-election depends on it, BUT NOT HERE. he wants to expand in Brazil where a Major Democratic $$ Donor has ownership in…<<drum roll>> and OIL company!

He wants businesses to create jobs, but he wants to choke them do death with regulations , Obamacare, and bad mouthing them.

He wants the government to take over health care because it will save money, only it doesn’t. But it doesn’t give them control over life and death and that can’t be all bad. 🙂

He go all pro-“democracy” in Egypt calling for that rulers head. Now the Muslim Brotherhood (read: radical islam) are leading to taking over there.

Oh, and then there’s the “war” he started in Libya that both he, the media, and the Democrats are trying desperately to ignore. And you’re 60 days (War Powers Act) are up Mr.  Nobel Peace Prize.

Then there’s 9% unemployment for basically the last 2 years. Has anything positive been done on that at all? I say thee neigh.

He is pandering to the hispanic vote to get them to vote for him promising them the sky and the moon and whatever he has to knowing full well it will never pass in Congress.

So border security is just PR, pat down and legal sexually molestations.

He doesn’t care. He’ll just throw legal immigrants and legal Americans under the Bus.

It’s, after all, ALL ABOUT HIM. All about his greatness. His superior vision.

His superiority, period.

And it’s your turn.

“You can’t do $2 trillion just in cuts,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in an interview in his Capitol office. “There has to be a mix of spending cuts, including defense. There has to be a more fair apportionment of tax policy in this country.”

Read more taxes! Targeted to evil rich people mind you, but it never works out that way.

Especially with the proposals for a VAT TAX or a Vehicle Mileage Tax.

Because when a Liberal talks about “fairness” grab your wallet you’re under attack and about to be hit by that bus!

“That certainly would be a big, big number,” Reid said Thursday. “But you know these are numbers that are not impossible — if you do savings with the Pentagon, in addition to domestic discretionary [accounts] and rearrange the tax stuff. That’s all doable.

Aka, slash the military, crush businesses, raise taxes massively on “the rich”.

Throw them all under the bus. They are evil anyhow.

But it will create jobs and grow the economy! 🙂

Oh, and then there’s the new Food Devil on the block, McDonald’s. They are the Devil Incarnate. Evil Corporate devils preying on your innocent children for their evil profits! Bwah hahahahahahahahaha! <<organ sting>> <<Thunder and Lightning!!>> <<maniacal laughter>>

The national debate on corporate responsibility played out in a microcosm at McDonald’s annual meeting Thursday, when votes on shareholder proposals became a referendum on the pursuit of profit versus the question of what constitutes the public good.

Critics hammered McDonald’s executives not only for offering unhealthful menu items but also for marketing fast food to kids with its Ronald McDonald character and Happy Meal toys — all while boasting eight straight years of sales growth despite a deep economic recession.

McDonald’s response was powerful too, tapping into the fundamental notion of American freedom.

“This is all really about choice,” McDonald’s Corp. CEO Jim Skinner said at the meeting, held at company headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill. He said that while shareholders have the right to communicate concerns, the company should also have the right to advertise its menu offerings. “It’s about protecting people’s rights in this democratic society that we live in.”

As for Ronald McDonald?

“Ronald McDonald is an ambassador to McDonald’s, and he is an ambassador for good,” Skinner said. “Ronald McDonald isn’t going anywhere.”

Critics’ main beef with McDonald’s is its marketing to America’s children, thus side-stepping the thorny retort “If you don’t like McDonald’s, don’t eat there.”
Children are susceptible to the advertising that McDonald’s spends hundreds of millions of dollars on each year, said Juliana Shulman, national compaign organizer for Corporate Accountability International.

“For adults that’s one thing, but children aren’t just little adults. Their brains are just forming,” Shulman said. “McDonald’s marketing is really designed to get around parents and get to kids directly. For nearly 50 years, McDonald’s has been working to hook kids on unhealthy foods…. Parents are exercising parental responsibility. That alone won’t stop the problem.” (LA Times)

So if you’re feeling tired it’s probably because you have a bus parked on you by Obama and his Leftist apparatchiks.

And let’s not evil talk about how evil you are if your not in a union and your <<shudder>> a white person!!  EVIL!!!:)

Pure Evil! You must be destroyed.

Or at least repeatedly run over by my bus!

Oh, and do vote for me in 2012 because I have a (D) after my name and I represent all that is sweetness and light and good in the world. 🙂

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever. (Psalms 23)

You just have to find a place to park that bus on top of you! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

P.s.A D.C. Circuit decision this week in Oberwetter v. Hilliard <a href="” target=”_blank”><http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/748BE2DE8AF2A2A485257893004E07FC/$file/10-5078-1308285.pdf&gt;, concluding that (1) the Jefferson Memorial is a “nonpublic forum” in which reasonable, viewpoint-neutral restrictions are permissible, and that (2) the government could therefore bar from people from engaging, inside the Memorial, in picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms of conduct which involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers.

Isn’t freedom just fun under the Obama Bus…

P.P.s.

There is a report that the TSA faked its safety data on its X-ray airport scanners in order to deceive the public about the safety of such devices.

As evidenced by recent events in Washington, we now live in an age where the federal government simply fakes whatever documents, news or evidence it wants people to believe, then releases that information as if it were fact. This is the modus operandi of the Department of Homeland Security, which must fabricate false terror alerts to keep itself in business — and now the TSA <http://www.naturalnews.com/the_TSA.html> division has taken the fabrication of false evidence <http://www.naturalnews.com/evidence.html> to a whole new level with its naked body scanners.

The evidence of the TSA’s fakery is now obvious thanks to the revelations of a letter signed by five professors from the University of California, San Francisco and Arizona <http://www.naturalnews.com/Arizona.html> State University. You can view the full text of the letter at: http://www.propublica.org/documents… <http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/april-2011-letter-to-john-holdren>

The letter reveals:

• To this day, there has been no credible scientific testing of the TSA’s naked body <http://www.naturalnews.com/body.html> scanners. The claimed “safety” of the technology <http://www.naturalnews.com/technology.html> by the TSA is based on rigged tests <http://www.naturalnews.com/tests.html>.

• The testing that did take place was done on a custom combination of spare parts rigged by the manufacturer of the machines (Rapidscan) and didn’t even use the actual machines installed in airports. In other words, the testing was rigged.

• The names of the researchers who conducted the radiation <http://www.naturalnews.com/radiation.html> tests at Rapidscan have been kept secret! This means the researchers are not available for scientific questioning of any kind, and there has been no opportunity to even ask whether they are qualified to conduct such tests. (Are they even scientists <http://www.naturalnews.com/scientists.html>?) (KFYI)

So are you feeling securing under that bus?… 🙂

Is Sanity Overrated?

“The most snort-worthy aspect of the White House spin on its health care waiver program is the idea that the administration is ‘promoting transparency,’” <Michelle> Malkin said in an email. “As usual, Team Obama is stonewalling on full disclosure of the waiver process. Americans deserve a thorough accounting of everyone who applied, everyone who was denied, and why.” 

Obama, stonewalling, nah…that never happens! :I

Understanding Liberals by Thomas Sowell

The liberal vision of government is easily understood and makes perfect sense if one acknowledges their misunderstanding and implied assumptions about the sources of income. Their vision helps explain the language they use and policies they support, such as income redistribution and calls for the rich to give something back.

Suppose the true source of income was a gigantic pile of money meant to be shared equally amongst Americans. The reason some people have more money than others is because they got to the pile first and greedily took an unfair share. That being the case, justice requires that the rich give something back, and if they won’t do so voluntarily, Congress should confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners.

A competing liberal implied assumption about the sources of income is that income is distributed, as in distribution of income. There might be a dealer of dollars. The reason why some people have more dollars than others is because the dollar dealer is a racist, a sexist, a multinationalist or a conservative. The only right thing to do, for those to whom the dollar dealer unfairly dealt too many dollars, is to give back their ill-gotten gains. If they refuse to do so, then it’s the job of Congress to use their agents at the IRS to confiscate their ill-gotten gains and return them to their rightful owners. In a word, there must be a re-dealing of the dollars or what some people call income redistribution.

The sane among us recognize that in a free society, income is neither taken nor distributed; for the most part, it is earned. Income is earned by pleasing one’s fellow man. The greater one’s ability to please his fellow man, the greater is his claim on what his fellow man produces. Those claims are represented by the number of dollars received from his fellow man.

Say I mow your lawn. For doing so, you pay me $20. I go to my grocer and demand, “Give me 2 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer that my fellow man produced.” In effect, the grocer asks, “Williams, you’re asking your fellow man to serve you. Did you serve him?” I reply, “Yes.” The grocer says, “Prove it.”

That’s when I pull out the $20 I earned from serving my fellow man. We can think of that $20 as “certificates of performance.” They stand as proof that I served my fellow man. It would be no different if I were an orthopedic doctor, with a large clientele, earning $500,000 per year by serving my fellow man. By the way, having mowed my fellow man’s lawn or set his fractured fibula, what else do I owe him or anyone else? What’s the case for being forced to give anything back? If one wishes to be charitable, that’s an entirely different matter.
Contrast the morality of having to serve one’s fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces with congressional handouts. In effect, Congress says, “You don’t have to serve your fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces. We’ll take what he produces and give it to you. Just vote for me.”

Who should give back? Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart, Bill Gates founded Microsoft, Steve Jobs founded Apple Computer. Which one of these billionaires acquired their wealth by coercing us to purchase their product? Which has taken the property of anyone?

Each of these examples, and thousands more, is a person who served his fellow men by producing products and services that made life easier. What else do they owe? They’ve already given.

If anyone is obliged to give something back, they are the thieves and recipients of legalized theft, namely people who’ve used Congress, including America’s corporate welfare queens, to live at the expense of others. When a nation vilifies the productive and makes mascots of the unproductive, it doesn’t bode well for its future.

Obama wants to further economic development in the Middle East. Not here, in the Middle East, where he started a war in Libya. Uh, yeah….

So he wants more oil production, but only in Brazil where a Democrat Money God has investments.

Now he wants economic development in the Middle East where he started a war and they hate us to begin with.

Has Sanity gone out of fashion in Washington D.C.??

President Barack Obama is set to announce a government-directed plan for economic development in the Middle East that emphasizes the role of Western multinational organizations, but that also sidelines the role of companies, ignores the new democracy in Iraq and downplays regional cultural, tribal and religious practices.

“We’re going out of a decade of great tension and division, and now, having wound-down the Iraq war and having taken out Osama bin Laden, we’re turning the page to a positive future for the United State in the region,” said a senior administration official during a 25-minute press briefing on Wednesday that did not include any mention of Islam, the tribal cultures of the region, democracy in Iraq, or the word “company.”

The plan, which Obama will include in his Thursday speech on Middle East policy at the Department of State, calls for at least $2 billion in debt-relief and loan guarantees to be delivered to Egypt, Tunisia and other countries via non-profits, funding agencies and universities.

Obama’s economic agenda for the region will have four pillars, said the officials. Non-profits, think-tanks and universities will help provide better “economic management,” international aid will boost countries’ financial stability, international agencies can help foster “a strong private sector,” and trade-negotiators can help establish regional trading zones, said the officials. “We will galvanize support from the international community… [and] the multinational organizations will have a huge role to play here,” said one White House official.

Given his track record, if he gets what he wants this will surely defeat Al-Qaeda, Iran and Middle Eastern Terrorism. He’ll do to them what he did to us for “economic development”.

They will never have a chance, they’ll be too broke and too poor to attack us.

Good plan, Mr. President. 🙂

PACKING THE SUPREME COURT

Here’s another reason to get rid of our Dear Leader. He will pack the Supreme Court with his cronies.

He already has at least 1, Elena “she’s not qualified” Kagan. Want More?

Newly released documents reveal Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was more involved with President Obama’s health-care law than she disclosed previously. The documents likely will lead to a revival of questions about whether the Kagan should recuse herself from future cases.

Specifically, the documents show that Kagan was involved with crafting the legal defense of the Affordable Care Act in her role as solicitor general, before her appointment to the bench. The Media Research Center and Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that was filed in February 2011.

In an email dated Jan. 8, 2010, then-Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal sent an email to Senior Counsel Brian Hauck and Deputy Attorney General Thomas Perrelli that indicates Kagan played a key role in coming up with a legal defense.

“Brian, Elena would definitely like OSG [Office of Solicitor General] to be involved in this set of issues … we will bring Elena as needed.”

In an email on March 21, 2010, Katyal urged Kagan to attend a health-care litigation meeting on defending the law. “I think you should go, no?” wrote Katyal. “I will, regardless, but feel like this is litigation of singular importance.”

The documents also show that once Kagan was nominated to the Supreme Court, she and Katyal immediately switched course to distance her from discussions about the legislation. (DC)

Gee, I wonder why? 🙂

But don’t worry, it’s all very TRANSPARENT! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Rats Abandoning Ship

You have Republicans openly criticizing the Ryan Budget because they are too scared politically to have the courage.

Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare plan is called into question by Gingrich and other critics as “too big a jump”.

And Pelosi and the Democrats continue the parade of apparatchiks and favors in the Obama Waiver game.

The ship is sinking and the rats are working deals to save themselves. Screw everyone else. Save themselves and their apparatchiks!

The Tin Men (no heart) vs. The Coward Lion (elephants)!

Then there’s Mit Romney, the media’s choice for a Republican (just like John McCain). The father of RomneyCare. The precursor of ObamaCare.

How is this guy even taken seriously?

Because the politicians in Washington want to give us The Father of Romney Care vs ObamaCare.

The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea of debt, despair and agony on us.

Can you tell I’ve lost hope that there is any hope 😦

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich apologized in a telephone call to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Tuesday afternoon for his remarks on “Meet the Press,” where the presidential candidate referred to Ryan’s Medicare proposal as “radical change.”

“Newt apologized,” said Rick Tyler, his press secretary and longtime aide. “The call went very well.”

Ryan had said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show on Monday, “With allies like that, who needs the left?”

On the Sunday show, Gingrich had referred to the GOP Medicare proposal as “right-wing social engineering.” When moderator David Gregory pressed specifically on Ryan’s plan, Gingrich added: “I think that that is too big a jump. … I’m against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change. And I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.” (Politico)

So what is legislation, but imposition?  The people honestly don’t have an actual voice. We have “representatives” that are supposed to be our voice. But in the end they are there for their own voice.

Then there’s good old Nancy Pelosi. More grooving in Waiver Town.

It’s now 1,372 in 15 months. At this rate, more than 3,000 more to come before the 2014 implementation death knell to come.

All apparatchiks of someone, probably a Liberal like Nancy Pelosi.

Hear that? It’s the escalating cry of American employers and workers trying to hold on to their health care benefits in the age of stifling Obama health insurance mandates: Gangway! Gangway! Save me! Waive me!

Obamacare refugees first began beating down the exit doors in October 2010. As I’ve documented since last fall, waiver-mania started with McDonald’s and Jack in the Box; spread to Dish Networks, hair salon chain Regis Corp and resort giant Universal Orlando; took hold among every major Big Labor organization from the AFL-CIO to the CWA to the SEIU; roped in the nationalized health care promoters at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (whose board of trustees includes health care czar Nancy Ann DeParle); and is now gripping entire states (Maine, New Hampshire and Nevada all recently got in on the act).

The latest to catch the waive? West Coast liberals.

Yes, smack dab in the middle of House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi’s congressional district, a cluster of San Francisco small businesses is among the latest recipients of get-out-of-Obamacare passes. As Jamie Dupree of Cox Media Group and Matthew Boyle of The Daily Caller pointed out this week, there are at least two dozen Bay Area companies — including bars, restaurants, hotels, tourist shops, real estate and auto firms — that have secured temporary, one-year reprieves from the federal law. It’s the San Francisco Treat that voters didn’t foresee until after the bill was rammed down their throats.

Another noteworthy waiver winner: Seattle-based REI. The trendy Pacific Northwest outdoor equipment retailer’s progressive CEO and Democratic campaign donor, Sally Jewell, appeared with President Obama in 2009 to tout White House health care reform initiatives. Two years later, REI snagged a waiver to protect the health benefits of a whopping 1,180 workers from the very tentacles of the big government bureaucrats Jewell embraced at Obama’s roundtable.

To date, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has granted federal health care law exemptions to more than three million American workers covered by more than 1,300 unions, companies and insurers who had voluntarily offered low-cost health plans with annual benefits limits. Meddling Obamacare architects outlawed those private plans — nicknamed “mini med” plans — in the name of “patients’ rights.” But without special waivers, the escapees would have been forced to hike premiums or drop insurance coverage altogether for mostly low-wage, seasonal and part-time workers.

Among the most recent union affiliates to secure pardons from the one-size-fits-all health policy that their bosses spent hundreds of millions of dollars of worker dues lobbying for:

— Teamsters Local 485 Health and Welfare Fund in Brooklyn, N.Y.

-_- Detroit and Vicinity Trowel Trades Health and Welfare Fund_

— Communications Workers of America (CWA) Local 1182 Security Benefits Fund_

— CWA Local 1183 Health and Welfare Fund

-_- Bakers Union and Food Employees Labor Relations Association Health and Welfare Fund

_– Service Employees International Union Healthcare Illinois Home Care and Child Care Fund_

— United Food and Commercial Workers San Diego Employers Health and Welfare Trust_

— Welfare Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 15, 15A, 15C, 15D AFL-CIO

-_- United Steelworkers Local 1-0318 Health and Welfare Trust Fund_

— United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices Local 198 AFL-CIO Health and Welfare Trust

_– Teamsters Local 617 Welfare Fund in Ridgefield, N.J.

— Teamsters Local 734 Welfare Fund in Chicago

— Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 60 Health and Welfare Fund

— New York State Nurses Welfare Plan for New York City Employed Registered Professional Nurses

The ultimate goal, it bears repeating, is to force a massive, revolutionary and irreversible shift from private to public insurance designed by government-knows-best bureaucrats.

Pelosi and the Golden Ticket Administrators in Washington deny preferential treatment for waiver beneficiaries. But the stench of waivers-for-favors won’t be dispelled until and unless the Obama administration releases a full list not only of those who won exemptions, but also of those who applied and were denied.

With San Francisco businesses caught with their hands in the waiver jar, Pelosi’s office could do nothing else but pout: “It is pathetic,” said Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill, “that there are those who would be cheering for Americans to lose their minimum health coverage or see their premiums increase for political purposes.”

It is far more pathetic to have cheered, as Pelosi did on the one-year anniversary of Obamacare, the law’s onerous benefits limits from which thousands of her own constituents have now been exempted.

Once again, the rest of America wants to know: Dude, where’s my waiver? (Michelle Malkin)

Sorry, you aren’t apparatchik enough to deserve one and that waiver would be getting rid of the government control of your life and death and that just ain’t going to happen.

But they do have a PLAN:

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced last week that a new federal alert system will let the government text you when there’s an emergency. Flanked by local and federal officials, the nation’s leading Nanny Statist announced gleefully that the feds will have the ability, through a special chip installed by wireless companies, to send alerts about natural disasters, terrorist attacks, and missing or abducted children to the nation’s cell phones.

The chip will come installed in every phone by 2012, and will implement the government’s hyper-literally named Personal Localized Alert Network—PLAN. Cell-phone users can opt out of all messages but those from the presidential level.

We shudder to think of the mission creep.

After all, they can track you everywhere you go… 🙂

Will some politician come along and actually work for the people?

Yeah, but the rest of the gang will be working for themselves so just forget it.

Turn out the lights, it’s over.

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The Darkness Will Fall

Telomere test could predict how long you’ll live.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid!

Indiana High Court Rules People Cannot Resist Illegal Entry by Police Into Homes

Yes, your home in now the Police’s Castle in Indiana (for now)!!

INDIANAPOLIS — People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law.

The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said.

“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

Both dissenting justices suggested they would have supported the ruling if the court had limited its scope to stripping the right to resist officers who enter homes illegally in cases where they suspect domestic violence is being committed.

But Dickson said, “The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad.”

Thursday’s decision was the court’s second ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Previously, police serving a warrant had to obtain a judge’s permission to enter without knocking. 

And if you thought that was bad, how about Life Expectancy Discrimination.

You may have read about plans in Britain to bring to the market an over-the-counter blood-test kit that would allow you to learn your biological age — and, from there, to estimate how much longer you might live.

The test, similar to ones already available in the U.S., measures the length of your telomeres. These are like caps at the end of each of your chromosomes. Every time a cell divides, its telomeres are shortened. The more dividing that’s gone on, the more your body has aged. Hence, short telomeres suggest advanced age.

In 2009, three scientists shared a Nobel Prize for identifying telomeres and their likely role in aging.

The notion that telomeres might serve as a potential measure of life expectancy takes on a new aspect when the test kit moves out of the academic lab and into your living room.

The first question for anyone considering such a test has to be, of course, whether you really want to know how much time you still have. It might be reassuring to think you’ve got another 30 years in you, but what if you learn you only have 10? And what if you figure you’ve got plenty of time to tackle your bucket list, only to get hit by a bus tomorrow?

The next question is: Who else do you want to know how much longer you’re likely to be around? Your employer? Your insurance company? Your spouse or your kids? What if insurance companies started requiring telomere testing and adjusted their coverage accordingly?

It’s possible that therapies aimed at lengthening short telomeres or preventing their shortening in the first place will some day be available. Until they’ve been proven to work, I can tell you with absolute certainty that I want nothing to do with telomere testing, even if it proves to be extremely reliable. I don’t want to know how long my telomeres are or, by extension, how many years I might live. That seems like tempting fate. (Washington times)

Now imagine liberals and government bureaucrats and businesses that want to know everything about you or want to control everything about you.

Telomere Discrimination is inevitable.

Obamacare says you can’t have that life saving kidney because your telemere say you only have 5 years to live and it’s not economically prudent (or worse your doctor says you’ll be dead by the end of year anyone so why bother).

Then the insurance company says they won’t approve it anyways no matter where you go to get it for the same reason.

You’re 22 and you just graduated from college, but your telemere’s say you’ll be dead by 40. Just try getting a job or a home loan…let alone health care.

Why should they give you loan you’ll never repay anyhow. You won’t be around long enough anyways….

Imagine, the possibilities for abuse. They are nearly endless.

Imagine, if you knew.

Even Orwell would not have dreamed this one up.

The Darkness will fall… 😦

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok




Circular Firing Squads

SUPERMAN LOVES AMERICA AGAIN

In Action Comics #900, a back up strip by David Goyer, showed Superman announcing he was to go to the UN and give up his citizenship of the USA, so to ensure his actions were not mistaken for US government policy.

There was a Firestorm! (and I don’t mean a DC comics character).

Well, today, from DC Comics, on the last page of Superman #711, we see a very different situation. Superman loving America after all! That (thankfully) doesn’t spoil the story having on its own right here.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The challenge of a U.S. corporate tax overhaul only seems to grow.

At a House Ways and Means hearing on Thursday, some business executives were even nodding to the possibility of a value-added tax to offset the budget impact of significantly lowering the U.S. corporate tax rate.

“As you take a holistic view… the value-added tax is one of those things that needs to be on the table,” Greg Hayes, CFO of United Technologies Corp., said in response to a lawmaker’s question.

In fact, there’s a surprising amount of interest in that idea on all sides. Many Democrats see a VAT as a way to pay for new infrastructure and shore up spending programs. Some Republicans – and corporate executives – see it as a way to pay for tax cuts that would spur investment, and make U.S. businesses more competitive. Much of the corporate-rate cutting that has gone on around the rest of the developed world in recent years has been paid for by increasing value-added taxes. Other countries view it as a necessary tradeoff to boost domestic manufacturing and exports.

Mind you, corporations don’t actually pay these taxes, they just pass them on in the cost of goods. So you get the old double whammy.

It all goes to show how knotty the long-neglected problems of the U.S. corporate tax system have become. The painful reality, as several lawmakers suggested, is that the U.S. would have to get rid of many if not most of its current corporate tax breaks just in order to lower the U.S. corporate rate to the high 20s. It’s currently 35%, the second highest in the developed world. And to be truly competitive, the U.S. rate probably needs to get down to around 20%. That would leave room for state corporate rates. (WSJ)

************

Students in New London will not only have to pass English to graduate, but they will have to prove that they know the American English language and be able to demonstrate it as of 2015.

The board of education on Thursday approved the major change to city education policy, according to the Day of New London.

Only 16 percent of New London High School 10th graders scored at the highest levels for English on standardized tests in 2010, the Day reports.

The student body includes immigrants from 28 countries, the Day reports. And the school district Web site includes translations in 52 languages.

“We know from colleges and employers, that our students are going to have to know how to read and write in English if they are going be successful,” Supt. Nicholas Fischer, told the Day.

The state department of education does not have a policy of this kind. (NBConnecticut)

Wonder how long before it’s ruled as “racist” and “insensitive”??…

*********************

Washington is full of self-interested political characters, and it’s always amusing to watch ambitious schemers with common enemies harm each other instead. Inside the beltway, this is called a “circular firing squad.”

There’s no shortage of this in-fighting in flailing political campaigns. One recent example was the public scrum over President Obama’s birth certificate.

It’s natural to think that the whole “birther” phenomenon was cooked up by right-wing conspiracy theorists, but it was actually the brainchild of Hillary Clinton partisans during the 2008 Democratic primaries.

Even the White House’s late April disclosure of Obama’s long-form birth certificate didn’t quell the noise level completely, with some continuing to allege fraud. The smart money says this issue — created by supporters of Obama’s current secretary of state — will remain on the national radar for some people through the 2012 elections.

America’s food fringe has its share of circular firing squads too.

VegNews magazine — which, as you probably guessed, advocates against eating meat, cheese, or using any animal products — recently found itself embroiled in a major scandal (“major” within its tiny cultural niche, anyway).

Bloggers discovered that VegNews was airbrushing meat and dairy foods out of “stock” photography, sanitizing them just enough to credibly accompany vegan recipes. (Apparently, some animal activists were shocked to learn that a juicy burger looks more tempting than faux-meat soy loaf.)

Among the 1 percent of Americans who eat a PETA-approved diet, mass outrage ensued. And VegNews, sensing the loss of its subscription base, issued a groveling retraction.

You’d think vegans would have a great enough sense of common purpose to avoid targeting their own kind.

But to a certain degree, it’s predictable. This is what happens when you look at dinner as a political statement instead of as — well, food.

Some food revolutionaries, to be fair, are well intentioned and genuinely look for ways to improve agriculture, even if their solutions aren’t terribly practical. But there’s definitely a current of holier-than-thou snobbery running through today’s “foodie” movement. And the food-politics stage is seldom big enough for two giant egos.

A celebrity chef announces an all-organic menu. Then a school lunch program (usually somewhere like Berkeley) limits itself to organic and “local.” Eventually the one-upmanship results in someone marketing organic, local, and “heirloom” produce. Grass-fed, organic, locally raised, artisanal beef, anyone? You get the picture.

The results for organic-food crusaders are mutually destructive squabbling, fractured messages, and a confused consumer base. The same thing happens when one organic interest directly attacks another, as we’ve seen with the Cornucopia Institute’s broadsides against large, “corporate” organic marketers.

We see some flavor of this with egg marketers. Some of them may find it appetizing, for competitive advantage if no other reason, to embrace “cage free” and organic niches and promote their supposed benefits in a way that undercuts larger, “conventional” egg interests.

This may — underline “may” — be a winning strategy in the short-term. But in the long run, profit margins on cage-free eggs will creep down closer to those of regular eggs. And the whole industry will be left more vulnerable to vegan-promotion organizations like the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), whose foot in the door will eventually become two feet, and then a leg.

For the uninitiated, an HSUS vice president admitted a few years ago that her organization’s goal was to “get rid of the entire [animal agriculture] industry” by “promoting veganism.”

She now runs the “Global Animal Partnership,” which Whole Foods created to legitimize its feel-good animal welfare niche marketing and help it cling to its elite status.

Whole Foods, of course, is the paragon of “progressive” food. But it still has circular firing squad problems.

Anti-biotechnology activists now claim that many products in Whole Foods stores are “contaminated” with genetically modified organisms. This might be technically true, but GMOs are harmless. Americans have been eating them for 15 years without credible evidence of any health risks.

Ultimately, Whole Foods’ purer-than-thou positioning hasn’t insulated it from pitchfork-wielding ideologues. The self-proclaimed “Millions Against Monsanto” movement even hints that an organized boycott of Whole Foods could come as soon as October.

Conventional wisdom in Washington holds that if an opponent wants to hang himself, you should give him some rope. When annoying “foodie” factions publicly bicker over who’s the most gastronomically chaste, sometimes the best thing to do is grab some non-organic popcorn and watch the fireworks. (DC)

So anyone else want to stand in front of the Firing Squad? Because there are plenty of people out there that will volunteer YOU for one!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

The Amnesty Bandwagon 2011

What is old, is new again. It’s not like Liberals actually care what you think. They just want to force you to think their way.

In his speech, Obama referred to “immigrants” six times and “immigration” seven times and said the United States is a “nation of laws.” But he did not use the words “legal” or “illegal” in his speech.

“It can be tempting to think that those coming to America today are somehow different from us,” Obama said. “And we need to not have amnesia about how we populated this country.”

Obama said we should “look at that migrant farmer and see our own grandfather disembarking at Ellis Island, or Angel Island in San Francisco Bay,” he said, “and to look at that young mother, newly arrived in this country, and see our own grandmothers leaving Italy or Ireland or Eastern Europe in search of something better.”

Notice the Orwellian use of language (or lack of it- like legal and illegal). Classic Orwell.

Notice, that Ellis Island was Legal Immigration and crossing the border without permission, documentation or any kind of screening at all, is made to be the equivalent.

Illegal Immigrant= Immigrant. Not distinction.

So if you think there is one, it must be because of race. 🙂

So when did you stop being a racist? 🙂

And you can never, ever be too hyperbolic if you’re a liberal…Case in point:

illegal immigration t-shirt

The public relations campaign for President Obama’s latest revival of “immigration reform” makes one thing crystal clear: This is not, and never has been, about homeland security. This is not, and never has been, about economic security. It’s about political security, plain and cynical.

In conjunction with Tuesday’s renewed White House push in Texas for a “new pathway to citizenship” for millions of illegal immigrants, disgruntled Latino activists are ratcheting up their radical anti-enforcement rhetoric. Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez — a persistent critic on Obama’s left flank — lambasted federal workplace enforcement raids this weekend. On Sunday, he repeated his hyperbolic attacks on homeland security agents “terrorizing” neighborhoods and ripping babies from the breasts of nursing moms. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made no public effort to defend her employees.

On campuses across the country, unhappy ethnic college student groups have turned up the heat on Democrats to resurrect the “DREAM Act” nightmare for the 12th time in a decade. The legislation — persistently rejected by a bipartisan majority on Capitol Hill — would provide illegal aliens (not just teenagers, but students up to age 35) federal education access and benefits, plus a conditional pass from deportation and a special path toward green cards and U.S. citizenship for themselves and unlimited relatives.

Obama argues that his comprehensive amnesty plan would boost America’s bottom line. But the open-borders math doesn’t add up. The Congressional Budget Office score of the last DREAM Act package estimates that “the bill would increase projected deficits by more than $5 billion in at least one of the four consecutive 10-year periods starting in 2021.” And that doesn’t include the costs of the unlimited family members the millions of DREAM Act beneficiaries would be able to bring to the U.S. A separate cost analysis by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies concluded that the illegal alien DREAM Act bailout would cost taxpayers $6.2 billion a year and “crowd out” U.S. students in the classroom.

To help gloss over those sobering realities and blur the lines between legal and illegal immigration, Obama summoned Latino celebrities such as actresses Eva Longoria and Rosario Dawson. The starlets — deemed important “stakeholders” in the immigration policy debate by the celebrity in chief — have served as glamorous distractions from the vocal complaints of Southwest governors, ranchers, farmers and other victims of continued border chaos. These are the real stakeholders whose lives and livelihoods are at risk. But none had a seat at the Hollywood-filled table.

While proudly emphasizing her ethnic loyalties, Dawson (an outspoken critic of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law) insists immigration reform “isn’t just a Mexican” or Latino issue. But for more candid liberal strategists, the illegal alien amnesty bandwagon is nothing more than a tool to motivate current and future Latinos to protect the Democrats’ grip on power. Eliseo Medina, secretary treasurer of Obama’s deep-pocketed backers at the Service Employees International Union, laid out the stakes in an interview with MSNBC:

“Clearly with immigration reform and any other kind of reform that would benefit the Latino community, we have to make sure that our voices are heard in the ballot box. There are approximately 23 million Latinos that are eligible to vote, yet only 10 million voted in 2008.”

SEIU’s goal: “If we increase the turnout from 10 million to anywhere between 12 and 15 million, we’re going to have an outsized impact on the election in 2012.”

If, as widely expected, Obama fails to deliver amnesty through the legislative process, there’s always amnesty by executive fiat. White House insiders first floated the idea in June 2010 to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. This administration has accomplished its major policy agenda items through force, fiat and fraud. Immigration will be no different.

Unfortunately for the law-abiding, there is no Hollywood-Washington-Big Labor lobby to speak for them. While Obama’s homeland security officials hang their “mission accomplished” banner over the border, the feds have barely made a dent in the three-year naturalization application backlog or the 400,000-deportation fugitive problem.

Meanwhile, law enforcement witnesses told a House subcommittee last month that border smuggling has grown so out of control that federal prosecutors are simply declining to pursue cases. Cochise County, Arizona, Sheriff Larry Dever testified about the feds’ so-called “Turn Back South” policy — which includes lowering thresholds for drug and smuggling prosecutions, and permitting border-crossers at least seven strikes before being charged with immigration misdemeanors. And just last week, the General Accounting Office reported another massive 1.6 million illegal visa overstayers backlog — a problem exposed by five of the 19 September 11 hijackers who benefited from systemic failure to enforce visa regulations.

So much for “never forget.” (Michelle Malkin)

There’s a lot of wrestling today over what Barack Obama’s immigration speech means. I would submit it means about the same thing it did the last time he gave it— in July 2010.

Here is the transcript of one Obama immigration speech. Here is the text of another immigration speech. Without looking at the dates, I dare you to tell them apart.

Below are the pertinent parts of, well, both speeches. Remember when the 2010 speech kicked off a serious, concentrated effort to move comprehensive immigration reform through Congress through the heroic efforts of Obama, the bipartisan zen master? Yeah, me neither. Often, an Obama speech is just a kick-off for…more Obama speeches.

2011: At times, there has been fear and resentment directed towards newcomers, especially in hard economic times.

2010: Now, we can’t forget that this process of immigration and eventual inclusion has often been painful. Each new wave of immigrants has generated fear and resentments towards newcomers, particularly in times of economic upheaval.

2011: And then when I think about immigration I think about the naturalization ceremonies that we’ve held at the White House for members of our military.  Nothing could be more inspiring.  Even though they were not yet citizens when they joined our military, these men and women signed up to serve…

Another was a woman named Perla Ramos who was born and raised in Mexico and came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and joined the Navy.  And she said, “I take pride in our flag and the history we write day by day.”

2010: This past April, we held a naturalization ceremony at the White House for members of our armed forces. Even though they were not yet citizens, they had enlisted. One of them was a woman named Perla Ramos — born and raised in Mexico, came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and she eventually joined the Navy. And she said, “I take pride in our flag and the history that forged this great nation and the history we write day by day.”

2011: What matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded; that you believe that all of us are created equal, endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights.  (Applause.)  All of us deserve our freedoms and our pursuit of happiness.  In embracing America, you can become American.

2010: …and that being an American is not a matter of blood or birth. It’s a matter of faith. It’s a matter of fidelity to the shared values that we all hold so dear. That’s what makes us unique. That’s what makes us strong. Anybody can help us write the next great chapter in our history.

2011: We can point to the genius of Einstein, the designs of I. M. Pei, the stories of Isaac Asimov, the entire industries that were forged by Andrew Carnegie.

2010: The scientific breakthroughs of Albert Einstein, the inventions of Nikola Tesla, the great ventures of Andrew Carnegie’s U.S. Steel and Sergey Brin’s Google, Inc. -– all this was possible because of immigrants.

2011: That’s the promise of this country — that anyone can write the next chapter in our story

2010: That’s what makes us unique. That’s what makes us strong. Anybody can help us write the next great chapter in our history.

2011: That’s one reason it’s been so difficult to reform our broken immigration system.  When an issue is this complex, when it raises such strong feelings, it’s easier for politicians to defer until the problem the next election.

2010: Unfortunately, reform has been held hostage to political posturing and special-interest wrangling -– and to the pervasive sentiment in Washington that tackling such a thorny and emotional issue is inherently bad politics.

2011: Today, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants here in the United States.  Some crossed the border illegally.  Others avoid immigration laws by overstaying their visas.  Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families.

2010: The overwhelming majority of these men and women are simply seeking a better life for themselves and their children.

2011: Also, because undocumented immigrants live in the shadows, where they’re vulnerable to unscrupulous businesses that skirt taxes, and pay workers less than the minimum wage, or cut corners with health and safety laws, this puts companies who follow the rules, and Americans who rightly demand the minimum wage or overtime or just a safe place to work, it puts those businesses at a disadvantage.

2010: Many settle in low-wage sectors of the economy; they work hard, they save, they stay out of trouble. But because they live in the shadows, they’re vulnerable to unscrupulous businesses who pay them less than the minimum wage or violate worker safety rules -– thereby putting companies who follow those rules, and Americans who rightly demand the minimum wage or overtime, at an unfair [dis]advantage. (Mary Katherine Ham)

So what if they were defeated the last time and the time before that. Liberals don’t care.

As Charlie Sheen would say, “winning!” 🙂

An Inefficient Truth

May 13 (Bloomberg) — Medicare, the U.S. health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, and the Social Security trust for the disabled and retirees are running out of money sooner than the government had projected.

While Medicare won’t have sufficient funds to pay full benefits starting in 2024, five years earlier than last year’s estimate, Social Security’s cash to pay full benefits runs short in 2036, a year sooner than the 2010 projection, the U.S. government said today in an annual report.

Both forecasts were affected by a slower-than-anticipated economic recovery, the government said. The estimates for funding add urgency to talks between Democrats and Republicans on ways to cut spending to reduce the U.S. budget deficit.

“Projected long-run program costs for both Medicare and Social Security are not sustainable under currently scheduled financing, and will require legislative corrections if disruptive consequences for beneficiaries and taxpayers are to be avoided,” according to the report summary.

When Medicare and Social Security funds run short, they will pay less in benefits rather than stop paying entirely. Social Security would have to cut payments by 23 percent, while Medicare would reduce by 10 percent what it pays hospitals and other inpatient care providers.

And if Obamanomics continues how much to you want to bet it will continue to get closer and closer…

Democrats, who have resisted changes to Social Security, said the trustees’ analysis shows there’s time to respond.

“The current situation does not necessitate rushed or severe action,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana. “We must continue to protect the Social Security benefits our seniors count on.”

Yeah, lets wait at least until after the 2012 Presidential Election…Then if Obama wins we can still do what we want, and if a Republican wins we can start sounding like the Republicans now so as to scare people into voting for us in 2014. 🙂

It’s all about self-interest, after all.

We just need another panel to “study” the issue, issue a report that we can ignore but it wastes lots of time with “well let’s see what the panel comes back with” like Obama did in 2010 with the Debt Commission.

It’s been 744 days since a Democrat in Congress passed a Budget. So what’s another year+ 🙂

Let’s not do something that might hurt my re-election, after all…

Social Security law requires program spending to match revenue, so a lack of action by lawmakers by that time will mean benefits will have to be cut 23 percent — or the Social Security payroll tax increased to 16 percent, or a combination, the report said. Congress has never allowed the program’s two trust funds to be depleted.

Medicare, to stay solvent for the next 75 years, would have to immediately raise payroll taxes by 24 percent, or cut current benefit payments by 17 percent, Cori Uccello, a senior health fellow with the American Academy of Actuaries in Washington, said in a phone interview.

The longer the U.S. waits to address the coming shortages in Medicare and Social Security, the more painful it may be, said Uccello. A U.S. delay in extending Medicare’s fiscal life may force cuts for current beneficiaries rather than diminishing them for people who enter the program several years from now. (Bloomberg)

Democrats’ endless refrain is that the Ryan plan would “end Medicare as we know it.”

Let’s be clear: Maintaining the status quo would also “end Medicare as we know it.”  The program would go belly-up, resulting in involuntary European-style austerity measures, dramatically slashed benefits, and vastly higher taxes.  Which of these options is truly unacceptable? (townhall.com)

Long Before I began even a little bit political I knew Social Security was doomed to failure.

The people in charge of it are totally immune. Always a bad idea. Because then it’s all about THEIR self-interest. Not yours.

P.s.

Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed into law on Friday an immigration bill giving police authority to question suspects about their immigration status which is similar to a controversial measure passed in Arizona.

The law also requires many private employers to check the immigration status of newly hired workers on a federal database called E-Verify.

Deal said the law will take the burden off Georgia’s schools, hospitals and prisons by reducing the number of illegal immigrants in the state.

“This legislation is a responsible step forward in the absence of federal action,” Deal said during a signing ceremony in his office at the Capitol.
Cries of racism in 3…2…1…. 🙂  (Townhall.com)

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

The Devil You May Not Know

(ARLINGTON, Va.) – A draft executive order that would force government contractors to disclose all political contributions would make it too easy for political appointees to punish contractors for their political views or to coerce contributions from firms, officials with the Associated General Contractors of America warned today in testimony submitted to Congress.

“The process outlined in the draft executive order would make it much easier for government officials to use the political activities of government contractors as a factor when awarding contracts,” Stephen E. Sandherr, the association’s chief executive officer noted in testimony submitted today to a hearing held jointly between the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Small Business. “This order actually introduces, instead of excludes, politics from government contracting.”

So you have if you give your political contributions to the wrong source (aka Republican or Tea Party) then you might not get that big fat government contract.

Be a toadie and and an apparatchik or else. Even if you hate me (a Liberal Democrat), give me money or else!!

Now that’s good for business…

“This rule makes it look like the Administration is more interested in punishing political opponents and propping up political allies than protecting public taxpayers.”–Stephen E. Sandherr, CEO Associated General Contractors of America.

It does indeed. Now ask them if they (the liberal progressives) care? 😦

My bet, Not even a little bit.

Oh, and the journalists covering the stories, well, they just might not be very impartial either.

Gov. Mike Huckabee (2010): I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004 (and millions getting Obama elected), has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press (see later story), NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press. 

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Party “extreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.” 

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features: 

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Oh and that polling data showing how Obama is now Mohammad Ali and is staging a miraculous comeback and people love him after he gave the order to Kill bin Laden like something out of a Video Game…

Well… IT JUST MIGHT BE RIGGED!!

Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected!

And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval!

It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.

But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.”

With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream?

(Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)

AP response: Some conservatives criticized the AP-GfK poll as heavy with responses from Democrats that skewed the results. AP-GfK polls use a consistent methodology that draws a random sample of the population independent of party identification.

But the question isn’t really whether the sample changed too much from their poll in April; the question is whether the sample accurately reflects the American public at large, and whether we indeed have 1.63 Democrats in this country for every 1 Republican. If their sample had an unrealistic proportion of Democrats one month, it’s entirely possible they can get a similar unrealistic proportion the following month. (NRO)

Ya Think? 🙂

Naw, Liberals would never do that…

Lying, cheating, and stealing…Naw, never happen.

Dishonesty, disingenuous and pure self-interest…never happens… 🙂

So Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Ve Vill Crush You!

The announcement that Americans are set to be bombarded with mandatory government propaganda via their cellphones represents a shocking lurch forward in the Obama administration’s bid to launch a total takeover of all communications as part of a wider move towards controlling the Internet, developing an omnipresent wiretap system, and creating a constant environment of suspicion and distrust by enlisting citizens to spy on each other.

So, what elese can these chips be used for? The government-mandated chips would also help achieve the Department of Transportation’s aim of <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40418794/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/t/govt-evaluating-cell-phone-blocking-tech-cars/>blocking all cellphone use in cars. The chip would allow authorities to prevent use of the phone by measuring the speed you are traveling via GPS technology and shutting down the handset.

The system is also wide open for abuse in more prosaic terms, with some fearing that the messages could include PR talking points and political electioneering

No, Obama is above such crass things! 🙂

And of course, tracking everything you buy and tracking everywhere you go and what you do is nothing to be worried about! 🙂

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a
human face – forever.”– George Orwell

And just to add insult to lethal injury to your freedom:

The government’s Consumer Price Index recently announced that inflation over the last 12 months <http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm> has been 2.7 percent

Well, one expert says actual inflation, dollars and cents that consumers have to pay to cover their living expenses, food, clothing, utilities and such – actually are well above 8 percent, not 2.7 percent.

John Williams of Shadowstats.com says that since 1980, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics has changed the way it calculates the Consumer Price Index – in order to account for the substitution of products, improvements in quality and other things.

Recalculating the data without the methodological changes BLS began in 1990 reveals inflation getting worse.

The Producer Price Index increased 0.7 percent last month, which equates to an 8.4 percent annual wholesale inflation in the pipeline for consumers.

Inflation data last month confirms that the cost of living is rising much faster than wages. We are on a trajectory to crush the middle class within five years unless urgent, decisive action is taken now. The traditional safety net of home equity today no longer exists.

And in what society is there only the Rich and the Poor and no actual middle class? Where their are only apparatchiks and everyone else (peasants).

Communism, Socialism, Marxism…. TA DA! 🙂

But don’t worry, Obama is a likeable guy. There is no harm. He’s a good guy at heart…

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

In search of Hispanic votes and a long-shot immigration overhaul, President Barack Obama on Tuesday stood at the U.S.-Mexico border for the first time since winning the White House and declared it more secure than ever. He mocked Republican lawmakers for blocking immigration over border security alone, saying they won’t be happy until they get a moat with alligators along the border.

“They’ll never be satisfied,” he said.

“Maybe they’ll need a moat,” he said derisively to laughter from the crowd. “Maybe they’ll want alligators in the moat.”

I’m for the moat! 🙂

The approach also allowed the president to make clear that it’s Republicans — not him — standing in the way of immigration legislation. As his re-election campaign approaches it’s a message he wants broadcast loud and clear to Latino voters who don’t like his administration’s heavy deportations and feel he never made good on his promise to prioritize immigration legislation during his first year in office.

“I am asking you to add your voices to this,” Obama said. “We need Washington to know that there is a movement for reform gathering strength from coast to coast. That’s how we’ll get this done.”

Politically, Obama sought to have it both ways.

He said he would lead a “constructive and civil debate” on the issue but publicly questioned the motives of Republicans and their ability to keep their word.

And it remained unclear how mocking Republican calls for border security would get Obama any closer to his goal of bipartisan legislation.

Given Republican opposition the bills likely won’t get far, but Obama will try to make certain voters know who to blame.

Divide and Conquer! 🙂  Classic Liberal tactic.

In full campaign mode, he’s been deploying his administrative agencies to do favors for his big contributors, to the detriment of ordinary Americans.

Last week, Obama made the gutsy call to threaten public schools that are asking students for proof of residency. The memorandum warned school districts that it’s illegal to ask students for proof of citizenship or legal residency status.

Obama’s wealthy donors need illegals so they can get cheap nannies, cooks and pool boys.

On the other hand, illegals being paid off the books are not helping Americans find jobs.

According to a May 4, 2011, report from the (liberal) Pew Research Center for the People

& the Press, 76 percent of “hard-pressed Democrats” — defined as “religious, financially

struggling” — agree with the statement: “Immigrants today … are a burden on our country

because they take our jobs, housing and health care.”

As Kausfiles observes, maybe financially struggling Democrats believe immigrants

“take our jobs” because, in fact, they do.

How many illegal servants do Obama’s friends need? Another million? How about 10 million? Then will Obama start enforcing immigration laws? And isn’t it his job to enforce the law, irrespective of whether his campaign contributors need slave labor?  (Ann Coulter)

And he can count on the Ministry Of Truth Media to back him up.

The trip had a more overtly political component too. From El Paso, the president headed to the relatively liberal bastion of Austin to raise money for the Democratic National Committee at two events. A total of about 800 people paid $44 to $35,800 to attend.(Newsmax)

There was the REAL reason! $$$$$$$ Gotta raise that Billion Dollars to buy the election.

After all, it’s really all about HIM.

What are Americans supposed to do to earn money? Obama doesn’t care: Ordinary Americans are irrelevant to the Democrats’ electoral ambitions — they exist only to justify the hiring of more government workers.

The Democrats have now officially abandoned working-class Americans.

Obama is doing what’s in his and his party’s self-interest, rather than concerning himself with the mass of American citizens. He is using his executive authority to reward gays, illegal aliens, do-nothing government employees, far-left union bosses, abortion industry executives and global warming kooks.

Are you on that list of Obama’s friends?

Democrats blithely act as if big labor, pro-illegal-immigration, pro-government union policies combined with massive government red tape and huge socialist programs will have no effect on jobs.

They incessantly repeat “gutsy call” for “you’d have to have been brain-dead not to make the call to kill bin Laden,” hoping the Democratic Party will suddenly seem macho.

Then, after a few weeks of robotically chanting “gutsy call,” they can get back to their true passion — destroying jobs — at which point they will robotically chant Bush’s name to explain why millions of Americans have lost their jobs under Obama.

How gutsy. (Ann Coulter)

Has he been Deified yet? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel