Anniversary- A Scary Place

I started this blog 3 years ago today. Happy Anniversary to me.

My first words (after the introduction) were:

We The People, we need to take back the responsibility for our choices and to hold those politicians accountable for theirs. They serve us, it’s not the other way around.

But it does seem that in the last 20+ years that has been turned on it’s head.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country. ”

–President John F. Kennedy Jan 20th, 1961

We are long way from there now aren’t we!

And we are even farther now than when I wrote this 3 years ago.

Hence, I still firmly stand in the middle of the partisan road, ready to be run over by both sides. But I just have less of a chance on my right than on my left. 🙂

I started it because of my massive frustration over ObamaCare and it has grown to be also my frustrations with Republicans who have wussed their way through these last 3 years.

I can hope that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan meant at least some of what they said at the Republican Convention.

There’s that word again. 3 years ago “Hope and Change” had already died by now. Will history repeat itself? Will Obama managed to snooker enough people into letting him destroy the country?

We’ll know soon enough.

“Fact Checking”

Watch out for Mainstream Media “Fact Checking”. The problem is that the mainstream press is now abusing the “fact check” label, using it to more aggressively push a liberal agenda without feeling the need to provide any balance whatsoever. (IBD)

It’s largely a very partisan rouse from the leftist propaganda Ministry of Truth.

******

Now is the moment when we can stand up and say, “I’m an American. I make my destiny. And we deserve better! My children deserve better! My family deserves better. My country deserves better!”

So here we stand. Americans have a choice. A decision.— Republican Candidate for President Mitt Romney

Do you want 4 more years of Carter Malaise, false promises, Executive fiats, government nanny-isms,and “don’t blame me, blame Bush”??

Do you really?

How many days have you woken up feeling that something really special was happening in America?

Many of you felt that way on Election Day four years ago. Hope and Change had a powerful appeal. But tonight I’d ask a simple question: If you felt that excitement when you voted for Barack Obama, shouldn’t you feel that way now that he’s President Obama? You know there’s something wrong with the kind of job he’s done as president when the best feeling you had was the day you voted for him.-Romney

I hope he gets elected for all our sakes. But also, I hope he means it. But I am too cynical to believe he will.

Besides the Democrats, who have been mad about Rush saying “I hope he fails” (about Obama) for years will be sticking voodoo dolls with nuclear weapons and praying to every god they have that Romney fails. And the Ministry of Truth will be there to taut his “failures” every second of every day of those 4 years.

And that saying nothing about the Democrats in Congress who will obstruct like nothing their fevered imagining of Republicans can manifest.

They will not only hope he fails, they will actively pursue his failure with grim abandon.

And that’s the real problem today with the volatile, acidic, and corrosive partisanship that has been fostered, especially by Democrats over the past decade or so.

The Democrats will not be happy with anything less than total annihilation. They are the Daleks from “Doctor Who” whose sole goal is to exterminate every life form out there that isn’t them.

Or at the very least cow them into total submission, same difference.

And this atmosphere is so corrosive,so toxic, that if someone actually succeeds they will destroy them anyhow just because that’s all they know how to do (and THEY didn’t do it).

And that’s a scary place to be.

Michelle Malkin: Thumper the Rabbit’s parents always taught him, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say nothing at all.” If the left’s self-appointed Omniscient Diviners of True Meaning have their way, conservatives in the public square won’t be left with anything at all to say. Ever.

It’s a treacherous business exercising your freedom of speech in the age of Obama. As a public service, I present to you: “The 2012 Condensed Liberal Handbook of Racial Code Words.” Decoder rings, activate!

–Angry. On the campaign trail this summer, President Obama has become — in the words of the mainstream Associated Press — more “aggressive.” But don’t you dare call him “angry.” According to MSNBC host Toure, that’s racist!

“You notice he said ‘anger’ twice,” Toure fumed in response to a speech last week by GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney. “He’s really trying to use racial coding and access some really deep stereotypes about the angry black man.” Or maybe Romney is just accurately describing the singular temperament of the growling, finger-jabbing, failure-plagued demagogue-in-chief. It’s about the past four years, not 400 years. Sheesh.

–Chicago. The Obamas and their core team of astroturfers, pay-for-play schemers and powerbrokers hail from the Windy City. This is a simple geographic fact. But in progressive of pallor Chris Matthews’ world, it’s an insidious dog whistle. The frothing cable TV host attacked Republicans this week who have the gall to remind voters of the ruthless Chicago way.

“(T)hey keep saying Chicago, by the way. Have you noticed?” Matthews sputtered. “That sends that message: This guy’s helping the poor people in the bad neighborhoods and screwing us in the ‘burbs.”

Actually, it’s a pointed reminder that the radical redistribution politics of Chicago-on-the-Potomac have done little to alleviate the suffering of impoverished Americans in violence-plagued, job-hungry inner cities everywhere. Racist!

–Constitution. Fox News contributor Juan Williams, who proudly calls himself a “real reporter,” has apparently added real telepathist to his curriculum vitae. Earlier this year, he read the minds of Republicans and conservatives whom he accuses of deep-seated bigotry when they show any public reverence for our founding principles, documents and leaders.

“The language of GOP racial politics is heavy on euphemisms that allow the speaker to deny any responsibility for the racial content of his message,” Williams wrote. “References to a lack of respect for the ‘Founding Fathers’ and the ‘Constitution’ also make certain ears perk up by demonizing anyone supposedly threatening core ‘old-fashioned American values.'”

So, if you ever find yourself wanting to hum the “Schoolhouse Rock” version of the Preamble, heed these three words: Stop the hate!

–Experienced. A significant population of American voters believes that qualifications actually matter when running for the highest office in the land. Chilling, isn’t it? They might as well sport KKK hoods. In the judgment of one Basil Smikle of The Century Foundation, “experienced” is a dreaded “racial code word.”

Intoned Smikle: “Experienced? Does it really mean the time that he spent in the Senate, or does it mean, ‘Well, does that guy have the same kind of experience in life that I have?’ … What does inexperience really mean?”

Maybe it just means what critics meant it to mean: “Does this guy have experience beyond the measly 304 days he served when the U.S. Senate was in session before he announced his first presidential bid?” I know: Racist!

–Food Stamp President. At the dawn of the modern federal food stamp program, one in 50 Americans was enrolled. This year, one in seven Americans is on the food stamp rolls. The majority of them are white. Obama’s loosening of eligibility requirements combined with the stagnant economy fueled the rise in dependency. “Food stamp president” is pithy shorthand for the very real entitlement explosion.

Democrats fumed when former GOP candidate Newt Gingrich bestowed the title on Obama and decried its purportedly racist implications. But who are the racists? As Gingrich scolded the aforementioned race troll Chris Matthews last week: “Why do you assume food stamp refers to blacks? What kind of racist thinking do you have? You’re being a racist because you assume they’re black!” Time to find a new code word.

–Golf. This one’s a gobsmacker. Beltway barnacle Lawrence O’Donnell appeared on cable TV to decry Republicans who mention Obama’s frequent golf outings. He singled out Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s convention speech Wednesday night, which joked that Obama “was working to earn a spot on the PGA tour.” The warped racial radar of pasty Lawrence O interpreted this golf joke as “Obama equals Tiger Woods equals RACISM.”

Huh? “These people reach for every single possible racial double entendre they can find in every one of these speeches.” O’Donnell expertly explained. “Things are getting lower and lower by the day,” host Martin Bashir agreed.

I’d say this is all Greek to me. But that’s probably racist, too.

–Holding down the fort. Obama’s State Department diversity officer now advises us, based on admittedly dubious history, that “holding down the fort” is an anti-Native American idiom that has no place in U.S. discourse. Example: “I know you guys have been holding down the fort.” Oops, that was Obama at a Tampa rally in 2008. Next…

–Kitchen cabinet. Radio talk-show host Mark Thompson jumped on Romney for using this phrase — coined to describe Andrew Jackson’s administration in the 1800s — at the NAACP convention in July. Romney was referring to a close member of his staff during his tenure as Massachusetts governor.

“To talk about being in the kitchen and not talk about an African-American actually being in your cabinet is really not a good metaphor to use with African-Americans,” Thompson blasted. Is it racist to ask: Huh?

–Obamacare. Left-wing Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky accused Romney of “race-baiting” by wielding the term “Obamacare.” The Beltway shorthand for this behemoth federal spending program exposes Romney as a “spineless, disingenuous, supercilious, race-mongering pyromaniac” because it is a “heavily loaded word,” Tomasky railed.

How then to explain the use of the Bull Connor-channeling epithet by none other than the Obama campaign, which peddles “I like Obamacare” T-shirts on its website? Logic is racist.

–Privileged. Stay with me here. Washington Post writer Jonathan Capehart has a problem with Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry calling Obama “privileged.” Spotlighting his elite education is tantamount to racial bigotry because it insinuates that “he took the place of someone else through affirmative action, that someone else being someone white.”

And here I thought it was a simple description of an out-of-touch academic whose crony Chicago ties of all colors gifted him with access, money and power that the vast majority of Americans don’t have.

–Professor. Several progressive black intellectuals excoriated 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin for this statement: “They know we’re at war, and to win that war we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at the lectern.”

“Professor,” professor Charles Ogletree said, was code for “uppity.” This translation service is available only to credentialed Ivy League eggheads. A saner criticism would be that Obama was never a professor of law, but an untenured lecturer. Racist? Tell that to Hillary Clinton, whose 2008 campaign made that very point.

–You people. Asked last month whether her husband would release more tax returns, Ann Romney told a pack of reporters: “We’ve given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how, you know, how we live our life.”

A chorus of faux-ragers from the Huffington Post to NBC’s Andrea Mitchell hammered Mrs. Romney for her double-whammy sandwich of elitism and racism. Apparently, “you people” is the verbal equivalent of putting black people back in chains. One little, teeny-tiny problem: ABC News admitted: “Our ruling after reviewing the original audio is that she did not include the ‘you.'”

In other words, it was manufactured out of whole cloth. Give the dog-trombone media another black mark for ridiculous bias denial. “Black mark”? I know: Raaaaaaaaaaacist!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

You Decide

VP Candidate Paul Ryan: ”

President Barack Obama came to office during an economic crisis, as he has reminded us a time or two. Those were very tough days, and any fair measure of his record has to take that into account. My home state voted for President Obama. When he talked about change, many people liked the sound of it, especially in Janesville, where we were about to lose a major factory.

A lot of guys I went to high school with worked at that GM plant. Right there at that plant, candidate Obama said: “I believe that if our government is there to support you. this plant will be here for another hundred years.” That’s what he said in 2008.

Well, as it turned out, that plant didn’t last another year. It is locked up and empty to this day. And that’s how it is in so many towns today, where the recovery that was promised is nowhere in sight.

Right now, 23 million men and women are struggling to find work. Twenty-three million people, unemployed or underemployed. Nearly one in six Americans is living in poverty. Millions of young Americans have graduated from college during the Obama presidency, ready to use their gifts and get moving in life. Half of them can’t find the work they studied for, or any work at all.

So here’s the question: Without a change in leadership, why would the next four years be any different from the last four years?

The Difference would be ALL bad. Massive tax increases. Massive entitlements. Massive cuts to Defense of this country and Executive Fiat President “unchained” and “more flexible” to whatever the hell he wants.

Then there’s the Supreme Court. He gets one more social justice crony on the Court and the Progressive Social Justice Liberals will have a majority and the Rule of Law is void.

Simple Choice, really. America, or Russia. Which do you want to live in and raise your children in?

America or North Korea?

America or Venezuela?

Which one?

You would think that any president, whatever his party, would make job creation, and nothing else, his first order of economic business.

But this president didn’t do that. Instead, we got a long, divisive, all-or-nothing attempt to put the federal government in charge of health care.

Obamacare comes to more than two thousand pages of rules, mandates, taxes, fees, and fines that have no place in a free country.

Do you really want the Government in control of who lives and who dies?

Do you?

It began with a financial crisis; it ends with a job crisis.

It began with a housing crisis they alone didn’t cause; it ends with a housing crisis they didn’t correct.

It began with a perfect Triple-A credit rating for the United States; it ends with a downgraded America.

It all started off with stirring speeches, Greek columns, the thrill of something new. Now all that’s left is a presidency adrift, surviving on slogans that already seem tired, grasping at a moment that has already passed, like a ship trying to sail on yesterday’s wind.

FEAR IS HOPE

In this generation, a defining responsibility of government is to steer our nation clear of a debt crisis while there is still time. Back in 2008, candidate Obama called a $10 trillion national debt “unpatriotic”- serious talk from what looked to be a serious reformer.

Yet by his own decisions, President Obama has added more debt than any other president before him, and more than all the troubled governments of Europe combined. One president, one term, $5 trillion in new debt.

He created a bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report. He thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing.

Republicans stepped up with good-faith reforms and solutions equal to the problems. How did the president respond? By doing nothing- nothing except to dodge and demagogue the issue.

So here we are, $16 trillion in debt and still he does nothing. In Europe, massive debts have put entire governments at risk of collapse, and still he does nothing. And all we have heard from this president and his team are attacks on anyone who dares to point out the obvious.

They have no answer to this simple reality: We need to stop spending money we don’t have.

AMEN!!!!!!

The issue is not the economy as Barack Obama inherited it, not the economy as he envisions it, but this economy as we are living it.

None of us have to settle for the best this administration offers- a dull, adventureless journey from one entitlement to the next, a government-planned life, a country where everything is free but us.

I never thought of myself as stuck in some station in life. I was on my own path, my own journey, an American journey where I could think for myself, decide for myself, define happiness for myself. That’s what we do in this country. That’s the American Dream. That’s freedom, and I’ll take it any day over the supervision and sanctimony of the central planners.

AMEN!!

GIT’ER DONE!

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

 

 

That Easy Road

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”– Thomas Jefferson

The greatest lesson Mom ever taught me, though, was this one: she told me there would be times in your life when you have to choose between being loved and being respected. She said to always pick being respected, that love without respect was always fleeting -- but that respect could grow into real, lasting love.

Now, of course, she was talking about women.

But I have learned over time that it applies just as much to leadership. In fact, I think that advice applies to America today more than ever.

I believe we have become paralyzed by our desire to be loved.

Our founding fathers had the wisdom to know that social acceptance and popularity is fleeting and that this country’s principles needed to be rooted in strengths greater than the passions and emotions of the times.

Our leaders today have decided it is more important to be popular, to do what is easy and say “yes,” rather than to say no when “no” is what’s required.

In recent years, we as a country have too often chosen the same path.

It’s been easy for our leaders to say not us, and not now, in taking on the tough issues. And we’ve stood silently by and let them get away with it.

But tonight, I say enough.

I say, together, let’s make a much different choice. Tonight, we are speaking up for ourselves and stepping up.

We are beginning to do what is right and what is necessary to make our country great again.

We are demanding that our leaders stop tearing each other down, and work together to take action on the big things facing America.

Tonight, we choose respect over love.

We are not afraid. We are taking our country back. -Gov Chris Christie.

As I have said many a times, the Truth doesn’t care if you like it. It’s still the truth.

10 years ago I was facing a mountain of debt that I had no hope of fixing. Then I looked at myself and my situation very honestly.

I didn’t like what I saw. But unlike today, I didn’t blame others and then just keep doing it because it was there fault. I didn’t take the easy road.

Sure my ex-roommate had a lot to do with my nearly bankruptcy, but I also was responsible for helping him do it!

I decided that “It is what it is” and I don’t have to like it. But I do have to do something about it.

My parents come from the Depression as young kids and World War II as young adults. They came from an industrious, hard working, background.

I was rediscovering my roots.

I worked 2 jobs from 7:30am to 1am 5 days a week for years. My parents also saw that I had finally risen to the challenge but didn’t help me until years down that road.

I remade my life. From near bankruptcy (I had $125 in the bank and a rent payment for more than that in 2 weeks) nearly every week for 3 years to owning a home with a job with a 401K and a pension plan.

Now that was hard work. And it’s FAR from over. Far from over. But, I used to joke that it would have benefited me if I could have had a microwave in the passenger seat of my car because then I could eat commuting between jobs and get a longer nap (which was an hour). I settled for fast food and microwave dinners. Not the healthiest choice. But it was what it was.

But now I have an obsessive work ethic that drives my boss crazy.

I made the choice.

My ex-roommate is probably still living with his mother wondering why the universe doesn’t bow down and kiss his lazy ass brilliance.

That’s the difference.

And I see that today also.

And I applaud any politician who will stand up and not only tell you the truth about the shit we’re in, but actually wants to do something about it.

Mind you all the “roommates” want to complain to you about how mean you are.

Tough Crap. Tough Love. Tough Times.

My parents survived them so can we. But the spoiled brats have to grow up.

The Truth is what it is. You don’t have to like it.

16 Trillion in Debt isn’t going to go away if you just talk to it nicely and try to reason and appease it.

8%+ unemployment for nearly 4 years is going to go away if you keep savaging the people you want to hire them and sabotaging the workers who want to work rather than just sit on their buns watching Ellen all day.

Medical Costs must be controlled, but Obamacare is not the solution. It’s throwing napalm on the fire.

Inflation will not go away.

And most importantly, not everything in the universe is all about you! You are NOT the center of the universe and everyone must kiss your royal ass.

Get over it.

Then go out and do something extraordinary, not sit around blaming others.

Life ISN’T Fair. Never will be. Deal with it!

And anyone who says they can make it “fair” is a DAMNED LIAR!

“A government big enough to supply you with everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have….”–Thomas Jefferson

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”–Thomas Jefferson

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

SEE TRUTH I DARE YOU

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Insurance 201

Thomas Sowell has column today that is very well sad and I personally know the impact of it. And I have preached at this pulpit before.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/insurance-101/

In insurance markets, moral hazard occurs when the behavior of the insured party changes in a way that raises costs for the insurer, since the insured party no longer bears the full costs of that behavior. Because individuals no longer bear the cost of medical services, they have an added incentive to ask for pricier and more elaborate medical service—which would otherwise not be necessary. In these instances, individuals have an incentive to over consume, simply because they no longer bear the full cost of medical services.

And does this not sound like ObamaCare to you?? :)

Take it away Mr. Sowell.

Insurance is all about risk. Yet neither insurance companies nor their policy-holders can do anything about one of the biggest risks — namely, interference by politicians, to turn insurance into something other than a device to deal with risk.

By passing laws to force insurance companies to cover things that have nothing to do with risk, politicians force up the cost of insurance.

Annual checkups, for example, are known in advance to take place once a year. Foreseeable events are not a risk. Annual checkups are no cheaper when they are covered by an insurance policy. On the contrary, they are one of many things that are more expensive when they are covered by an insurance policy.

All the paperwork, record-keeping and other things that go with having any medical procedure covered by insurance have to be paid for, in addition to the cost of the medical procedure itself.

If automobile insurance covered the cost of oil changes or the purchase of gasoline, then both oil changes and gasoline would have to cost more, to cover the additional bureaucratic work involved.

In the case of health insurance, however, politicians love to mandate things that insurance must cover, including in some states treatment for baldness, contraceptives and whatever else politicians can think of. Playing Santa Claus costs a politician nothing, but it can cost the policy-holder a bundle — all of which the politician will blame on the “greed” of the insurance company.

(see Adverse Selection).

Insurance companies are regulated by both states and the federal government. This means that, instead of there being one vast nationwide market, where innumerable insurance companies compete with each other from coast to coast, there are 50 fragmented markets with different rules. That adds to the costs and reduces the competition in a given state.

When there are innumerable insurance companies, it is by no means clear that political regulation of them will produce better results than the regulation provided by competition in the market. In a competitive market, insurance companies would cover only those things that their policy-holders are willing to pay to have covered. Policy-holders would have no reason to pay to have insurance cover things that would be cheaper if paid for directly — or not paid for at all, in the case of things that are not a real concern to many people, such as baldness cures.

One of the factors in the number of the “uninsured,” for whom politicians are willing to turn the whole medical care system upside down, is the high cost of insurance that covers far more things than most people would be willing to pay for, if it was up to them. The uninsured who use hospital emergency rooms and don’t pay are a problem only because politicians passed laws forcing hospitals to let themselves be taken advantage of in this way.

Too many political “solutions” are solutions to problems created by previous political “solutions” — and will be followed by new problems created by their current “solutions.” There is no free lunch. In the case of health insurance, there is not even an inexpensive lunch.

Health insurance would be a lot less expensive if it covered only the kinds of risks that can involve heavy costs, such as a major operation or a crippling disability. While such things can be individually very expensive, they don’t happen to everybody, and insurance is one way to spread the risks, so that the protection of a given individual is not prohibitively expensive.

The problem of “pre-existing conditions” is a problem largely because of the way that politicians have written the laws — more specifically, by giving a tax break to employer-provided health insurance. If individuals bought their own health insurance, with the same tax advantages, the fact that an illness occurred after they changed employers would not make it a “pre-existing condition.”

There is no inherent reason for employers to be involved, in the first place. The fact that some guy manufactures furniture or plumbing fixtures in no way qualifies him to understand insurance for his employees. Including him in the loop adds another unnecessary layer of bureaucratic costs.

Political risks are the biggest risks.

So you want to know why your auto insurance is going up “even though I’m a good driver” or your Home insurance is going up “even though my house is worth less”??

Well, it’s very simple. Along with all of what has been discussed there is INFLATION.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

And the medical costs, repair costs and the lawyer  (you know all those “call me now” lawyer commercials?) costs go up and guess what happens to your premiums. They go up. It’s not personal.

And any real homeowners policy will be based on the replacement cost of the home and not the market value because the market value is a) fickle (just think about 5 years ago) b) includes land and locational factors that have nothing to do with the home.

Example, my home. It’s located with the “noise zone” of Sky Harbor International Airport. Thus my house is technically worth less because you can hear plane noise at a certain level.

If my house burns down do I want the replacement cost based partially on that or do I want it based on the materials to rebuild it?

And if inflation in the cost of those materials cause the premium to go up?

I hope you see the point.

Most people don’t.

Why?

Narcissistic Greed. It’s all about ME! and Insurance should only be about ME.

I don’t want MY policy based on other people.

Which is a fundamentally flawed understanding of the entire concept of insurance in the first place.

And that lack of education is a real problem because it leads people to misunderstand the entire process and the fundamentals underlying the entire concept.

And lets politicians and manipulative Liberals get away with their “solutions” that just cause more problems but make them look good.

And thus, you go for “get rich quick” type schemes by manipulative politicians that actually CAUSE more problems than they solve. But you get the satisfaction of “sticking it” to them. But it’s you that ultimately gets stuck.

Oh, there are ways to bring it down, but reforms to litigation laws and practices (by politicians who are mostly lawyers) is very hard. Lobbyists are very strong in the area. This is their meat and potatoes.

Medical costs are skyrocketing and ObamaCare will just make them worse. Trying to reform that gets you “thrown grandma off the cliff” rhetoric.

So, in the end RHETORIC HAS IT’S CONSEQUENCES.

Consequences in your wallet.

That’s the risk.

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

We have Issues

A study released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center highlights diminished hopes, too, for the roughly 50 percent of adults defined as middle class, with household incomes ranging from $39,000 to $118,000. The report describes this mid-tier group as suffering its “worst decade in modern history,” having fallen backward in income for the first time since the end of World War II.

Three years after the recession technically ended, middle class Americans are still feeling the economic pinch, with most saying they have been forced to reduce spending in the past year. And fewer now believe that hard work will allow them to get ahead in life. Families are now more likely to say their children’s economic future will be the same or worse than their own. (KFYI)

So re-elect Obama for more of the same! Because, after all, it’s Bush’s Fault!:)

“Why be a Taxpayer when I can be a Tax spender…” LOL!

Thomas Sowell:  There are some very serious issues at stake in this year’s election — so many that some people may not be able to see the forest for the trees. Individual issues are the trees, but the forest is the future of America as we have known it.The America that has flourished for more than two centuries is being quietly but steadily dismantled by the Obama administration, during the process of dealing with particular issues.For example, the merits or demerits of President Obama’s recent executive order, suspending legal liability for young people who are here illegally, presumably as a result of being brought here as children by their parents, can be debated pro and con. But such a debate overlooks the much more fundamental undermining of the whole American system of Constitutional government.The separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches of government is at the heart of the Constitution of the United States — and the Constitution is at the heart of freedom for Americans.No President of the United States is authorized to repeal parts of legislation passed by Congress. He may veto the whole legislation, but then Congress can override his veto if they have enough votes. Nevertheless, every President takes an oath to faithfully execute the laws that have been passed and sustained — not just the ones he happens to agree with.If laws passed by the elected representatives of the people can be simply over-ruled unilaterally by whoever is in the White House, then we are no longer a free people, choosing what laws we want to live under.When a President can ignore the plain language of duly passed laws, and substitute his own executive orders, then we no longer have “a government of laws, and not of men” but a President ruling by decree, like the dictator in some banana republic.When we confine our debates to the merits or demerits of particular executive orders, we are tacitly accepting arbitrary rule. The Constitution of the United States cannot protect us unless we protect the Constitution. But, if we allow ourselves to get bogged down in the details of particular policies imposed by executive orders, and vote solely on that basis, then we have failed to protect the Constitution — and ourselves.Whatever the merits or demerits of the No Child Left Behind Act, it is the law until Congress either repeals it or amends it. But for Barack Obama to unilaterally waive whatever provisions he doesn’t like in that law undermines the fundamental nature of American government.President Obama has likewise unilaterally repealed the legal requirement that welfare recipients must work, by simply redefining “work” to include other things like going to classes on weight control. If we think the bipartisan welfare reform legislation from the Clinton administration should be repealed or amended, that is something for the legislative branch of government to consider.There have been many wise warnings that freedom is seldom lost all at once. It is usually eroded away, bit by bit, until it is all gone. You may not notice a gradual erosion while it is going on, but you may eventually be shocked to discover one day that it is all gone, that we have been reduced from citizens to subjects, and the Constitution has become just a meaningless bunch of paper.Obamacare imposes huge costs on some institutions, while the President’s arbitrary waivers exempt other institutions from having to pay those same costs. That is hardly the “equal protection of the laws,” promised by the 14th Amendment.John Stuart Mill explained the dangers in that kind of government long ago: “A government with all this mass of favours to give or to withhold, however free in name, wields a power of bribery scarcely surpassed by an avowed autocracy, rendering it master of the elections in almost any circumstances but those of rare and extraordinary public excitement.”If Obama gets reelected, he knows that he need no longer worry about what the voters think about anything he does. Never having to face them again, he can take his arbitrary rule by decree as far as he wants. He may be challenged in the courts but, if he gets just one more Supreme Court appointment, he can pick someone who will rubber stamp anything he does and give him a 5 to 4 majority.

All Hail Big Brother! All Hail King Obama! Ruler of of all he surveys!
NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Fascinating

He is after all, the most Interesting Man in The World. Stay thirsty my friends.
🙂

Here’s what I find fascinating.

VP Biden makes his “chains” comment and almost immediately every liberal and liberal biased media person comes screaming out of the wood work to “contextualize” it to minimize it, to “explain” it away.

But a Republican makes a gaffe and nearly  week later those same people are still having a field blaming every Republican that has ever lived for it.

Well, count veteran Congressman Charlie Rangel among Mr. Biden’s critics on the Democratic side of the aisle.

“The Vice President said he’s going to put “y’all in chains,’” Mr. Rangel told The Perez Notes in a recent free-wheeling interview. “Was he talking about slavery? You bet your ass he was. Was he using the vernacular? Yes, he was. Did he think it was cute? Yes, he did. Was it something stupid to say? You bet your life it was stupid.”

“It was something that if a black had said it, we would have been laughing, because we would know deep down, they may be beating the hell out of us but they ain’t thinking about putting us into any chains,” he added.

But will that change anything? No. The extreme partisan bias and un-“fair” treatment will continue.

As I have said before, Liberals believe they can say anything, but you can’t. They can do anything, but you can’t.

You didn’t “build it” but they did.

The level of hubris and sheer balls is fascinating. And the fact that it’s also utter shameless is truly fascinating.

Mr. Biden raised eyebrows this afternoon with a speech in Minneapolis likening Mr. Romney and his fellow Republicans to “squealing pigs.”

Congressman Charlie Rangel blamed gridlock in Washington on an “extreme, conservative new element” in the Republican party that’s “willing to bring down the United States of America”

It sure a hell can’t be them!! The facts that the US Senate controlled by Democrats hasn’t passed a Budget in over 1200 days and continuously stonewalls anything the Republicans pass is the Republicans fault after all.

Fascinating.

“When the Democrats had the majority, we liberals who thought we were the heart of the party had to yield to conservative Democrats, because without them we would not have had the majority,”

Virtually every “conservative” Democrat was exterminated in the 2010 elections, by the extremists on the Left. But we won’t talk about that. They were a “centrist” majority. 🙂

Fascinating.

California’s Barbara Boxer opened the bidding this week in her familiar low-key style.

“There is a war against women, and Romney and Ryan — if they are elected — would become its top generals,” Boxer told a Planned Parenthood meeting. “There is a sickness out there in the Republican Party, and I’m not kidding. Maybe they don’t like their moms or their first wives.”

Reichsmarschall Romney and Generalissimo Ryan are both still married to their first wives, so it must be the moms. No wonder Ryan wants to throw his off a cliff.

To win the “war on women,” the Democratic Party’s general staff is planning its own Normandy invasion, adding to their convention line-up a host of stellar “pro-choice” speakers, including Desperate Housewife Eva Longoria, Planned Parenthood’s head honchette Cecile Richards, NARAL Pro-Choice America abortion supremo Nancy Keenan, and Georgetown Law’s contraceptive coed Sandra Fluke.

President Obama’s lavishly remunerated strategists have presumably run the focus groups and crunched the numbers. But if I were a moderate, centrist, eternally indecisive swing-voter in a critical state, and I switched on the Democrat convention to find a bunch of speakers warning about the threat to your abortion rights, I would find it a very curious priority in the summer of 2012.

None of us can know what the world will be like in four years, but one thing can be said for certain: an American woman will still enjoy her “right to choose.” Whether one supports or opposes abortion, the practical reality is that the biggest “threat” to your “right” to one is that you might have to drive a little bit farther for it.

Still, one should never underestimate the peculiar lens through which “progressives” view reality: The “war” on women boils down to Sandra Fluke, a 30-year old schoolgirl, demanding Georgetown Law should pay for its students’ contraceptives — notwithstanding that the entire cost of that four-year contraceptive bill works out to less than the first week’s paycheck of a Georgetown Law graduate’s first job (average starting salary: $160,000 per year). War is hell.

If you think Boxer’s right about Gen. Romney’s war on woman, feel free to waste your vote. But what else is likely to happen between now and the next time you cast a presidential ballot?

We’ve rehearsed the fiscal stuff in this space before: China becoming the world’s biggest economy, another American downgrade, total U.S. liabilities equivalent to about three times the entire planet’s GDP.

A “non-partisan” Pew Research study says the American middle class faces its “worst decade in modern history” — and the first bump down starts on Jan. 1. The equally “non-partisan” Congressional Budget Office now says that the tax and budget changes due to take effect at the beginning of 2013 will put the country back in recession and increase unemployment. This is a revision of their prediction earlier this year that in 2013 the economy would contract by 1.3%. Now they say 2.9%.

These days, CBO revisions only go one way — down. They’re gonna need steeper graph paper. In a global economy, atrophy goes around like syphilis in the Gay Nineties: A moribund U.S. economy further mires Europe, and both slow growth in China, which means fewer orders for resource-rich nations . . . Four wheels spinning in the mud, and none with a firm enough grip to pull the vehicle back on to solid ground.

Oh, well, it was like that in the 1930s and then, as the ever-optimistic Paul Krugman likes to trill, the Second World War came along to stimulate the economy. Given that in Afghanistan the U.S. and its allies have just taken 11 years to lose to goatherders with fertilizer, I’m not sure I’d want to bet on the global-conflagration chips falling our way next time round.

But don’t worry, ObamaCare will “lower costs.” Since passage of the bill in 2010, the CBO has revised its estimate of ObamaCare’s gross costs over 10 years. Can you guess in which direction, boys and girls? Yes, up from $944 billion to $1.856 trillion.

That’s some “revision.” I wonder where it’ll be in another two years.

Well, I’m not the CBO, but I’ll take a wild guess: ObamaCare is going to be expensive on a scale unknown to European health systems.(Mark Steyn)

Or human history, but that will be someone else on the right’s fault, after all. It can’t possibly be a Liberals fault, that never happens in their universe and shouldn’t happen in yours, you ignorant bigot.

Fascinating.

Here’s Stephanie Cutter’s quote in full — uttered Wednesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” — just so no one can accuse us of taking anything out of context:

“Well, I think that worker probably has a good understanding of what’s happened over the past four years in terms of the president coming in and seeing 800,000 jobs lost on the day that the president was being sworn in, and seeing the president moving pretty quickly to stem the losses, to turn the economy around. And over the past, you know, 27 months we’ve created 4.5 million private-sector jobs. That’s more jobs than in the Bush recovery (or) in the Reagan recovery.”

You’d think that if the Obama campaign wanted to peddle outright fabrications, they’d at least do it so they weren’t so easily debunked.

Not that the mainstream press, so deep in the tank for Obama, will bother. (IBD)

Fascinating.

What’s more, after 29 months of allegedly stellar job growth under Obama, the jobless rate is still 8.3% (Over 8% since February 2009). By this point in the Reagan and Bush jobs recoveries, the unemployment rate was 7.2% and 4.9%, respectively.

If we were one of those fact-checking organizations, we’d give Stephanie Cutter the “Lying Liar from Liersburg” award. (IBD)

But she wouldn’t accept. After all, you’re just a partisan extremist if you don’t agree with a liberal.

To quote the 20th century American philosopher Mel Brooks, “It’s good to be king!”

Obama: “It is very rare I come to an event where I’m like the fifth or sixth most interesting person. Usually the folks want to take a picture with me, sit next to me, talk to me. That has not been the case at this event and I completely understand.” (ibd)

He is after all, the most Interesting Man in The World. Stay thirsty my friends.
🙂

Fascinating.

Anyway, the new Rasmussen poll reports that this time 51% of likely voters now fully expect reporters to help the incumbent Democrat keep his office, while only 9% expect reporters to help the Republican ticket of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Nine percent? Really that much?

Other Rasmussen findings: 18% of likely voters, presumably deaf, blind and living in closets, can’t make up their minds, while 22% absolutely expect unbiased coverage throughout the remaining national agony and bonanza for commercial TV stations. Obviously, they only watch C-SPAN. (IBD)

Fascinating.

A choice between a career pol from the crooked Chicago machine with his aged crony who’s clearly off his meds, who want to insert government into every conceivable crevice of American life because they know best how to over-spend other people’s money; and on the other side, two handsome Republican men with clean records, lovely families and long lists of impressive achievements in both politics and business, who honor their countrymen by trusting that every American knows best how to build their own lives within a safe, prosperous and free society.

Once you remove the bias, see, the choice is really pretty simple.(IBD)

🙂

Fascinating.

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Deficits of Many Kinds

By the end of this year, the federal debt is expected to be $16.2 trillion, which is $6.2 trillion more than when President Obama first came into office four years ago. Moreover, new analysis by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee finds that, over the next 4 years, if Barack Obama remains president and his budget is enacted, $4.4 trillion will be added to the federal debt.

Here’s a chart illustrating the projected debt over the next four years:

As the chart notes, staying on the same path will mean that debt is expected to hit $17.5 trillion in 2013, $18.5 trillion in 2014, $19.4 trillion in 2015, and $20.3 trillion in 2016.

The last full year of Obama’s presidency, if he is reelected, will be 2016.

“Federal debt will increase to $25.4 trillion by the end of 2022, an increase of $10.6 trillion (72 percent) under the president’s budget policies,” the Senate Budget Committee notes. 

It’s been 1,212 days since Senate Democrats brought a budget to the Senate floor.

After 14 years at National Public Radio, Andrea Seabrook left in July and, to hear her talk about her experience covering Capitol Hill, it’s clear that she had one takeaway: It’s damn frustrating.

“I realized that there is a part of covering Congress, if you’re doing daily coverage, that is actually sort of colluding with the politicians themselves because so much of what I was doing was actually recording and playing what they say or repeating what they say,” Seabrook told POLITICO. “And I feel like the real story of Congress right now is very much removed from any of that, from the sort of theater of the policy debate in Congress, and it has become such a complete theater that none of it is real. … I feel like I am, as a reporter in the Capitol, lied to every day, all day. There is so little genuine discussion going on with the reporters. … To me, as a reporter, everything is spin.” (Politico)

NPR for heaven’s sake! NPR!! Yikes!

A SENIOR MOMENT

Americans nearing retirement age have suffered disproportionately after the financial crisis: along with the declining value of their homes, which were intended to cushion their final years, their incomes have fallen sharply.

The typical household income for people age 55 to 64 years old is almost 10 percent less in today’s dollars than it was when the recovery officially began three years ago, according to a new report from Sentier Research, a data analysis company that specializes in demographic and income data.

 

As of June, the median household income for all Americans was $50,964, or 4.8 percent lower than its level three years earlier. (KFYI)

But I’m sure that’s Bush’s Fault! 🙂 We Need more entitlements!! 🙂
Michael Ramirez Cartoon
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

 

Concern

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Latest Liberal Hypocrisy Alert of the this second: Swiss Bank Accounts are evil. But have fundraisers IN Switzerland are Gold. 🙂

And then there is this one:

Here’s the allegation:

Instead of being asked to account for ridiculous statements from his campaign staff and the outrageous claims of Harry Reid, President Obama is using hand-picked local journalists and requiring them to ask about the budget deal he signed with Republicans a year ago which requires automatic budget cuts called sequestration in the event no official budget is signed. Many of these cuts will be to the military, something that the Obama White House is keen on letting swing state voters know about.

Dial back a few months, and you’ll find another example resembling this practice. The Obama White House was ready to announce a new position on gay marriage. It called ABC News and asked them to send Robin Roberts on down. OK! came the answer. Most of journalism was just fine with the setup…

Now this. Thing is, turning to local reporters with a wink-wink deal that they ask a particular question is sound politics. We’ll see it for decades and decades to come. It’s hard to argue that local reporters shouldn’t get a turn with the president, even though they don’t live the issues day in and day out the way the White House press corps does. The trouble comes when the outreach to local reporters and Entertainment Tonights comes at the same time that the president is stingy with full-blown news conferences. (WP)

So only talk to the already friendly who are loaded with questions that will only make you look good and avoid anyone who might ask you a real question.

Meanwhile, all you do with the opposition is “gotcha” and smear questions.

Gee, sounds like “Vote for me, Man that other guy is a real asshole!” while covering up what an asshole you really are, and the media is in on it. What a stroke of luck for you! 🙂

Reports that TSA officers showed up alongside Secret Service and the local Sumter County Sheriff’s Office, and proceeded to rifle through bags and conduct pat down searches.

Airport security style checkpoints and inspection procedures are already in place at bus terminals , train stations , and are rapidly being expanded to the streets of America.

Agents have even been spotted roaming around at public events such as sports games and music concerts, and even at high school proms . (KFYI)

The TSA has also announced its intention to expand the VIPR program to include roadside inspections of commercial vehicles, setting up a network of internal checkpoints and rolling out security procedures already active in airports, bus terminals and subway stations to roads and highways across the United States.

These internal checkpoints, run by Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, and the TSA, involve trucks being scanned with backscatter x-ray devices in the name of “safety” and “counter terrorism”.

Homeland Security is also developing technology to be used at “security events” which purports to monitor “malintent” on behalf of an individual who passes through a checkpoint.

If people think they can avoid the TSA by staying away from airports, they’re going to be in for a rude awakening. TSA is clearly engaged in a total takeover of society and plans to have its agents searching, patting down, scanning and harassing Americans at all levels of society, not just at transport hubs but at public events, in the street and on highways and roads across the country.

The implementation of ‘Checkpoint USA’, where citizens are routinely stopped, searched and radiated by federal VIPER teams is further evidence of how America is crumbling into a Soviet-style police state where the presumption of innocent until proven guilty is abolished and the 4th amendment eviscerated. (infowars)

BIG SIS is Watching You! 🙂

Illegal immigrants could receive more than $7 billion this year in federal tax credits, according to one estimate, thanks to a loophole in the law that allows people not authorized to work to reap the government payments with no questions asked.

Immigrants could receive roughly $7.4 billion through a provision known as the Additional Child Tax Credit. That’s more than quadruple what the payout was four years ago, but the payments have been steadily increasing over the past decade.

Though illegal immigrants are prohibited from receiving similar tax credits, a quirk in the law allows them to qualify for the child tax credit. And it’s a “refundable” credit, meaning recipients can reap the money — with average checks totaling about $1,800 — even if they’ve paid no taxes.

Illegal immigrants can qualify because even people not authorized to work in the U.S. are supposed to file returns with the IRS. If they don’t have a Social Security number, they are provided what’s known as an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number in order to file returns.

And those filers are not excluded from claiming the Additional Child Tax Credit, which is offered to some families with children under 17 years old. (KFYI)

And soon they will be able to vote for Democrats. Aren’t you excited?!!
The Public Education system at work:
It’s “OHIO” NOT OIHO you nincompoop!

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

 Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 

2016

Something I’ve already said:

“All of a sudden this man gets up and says, ‘How long will you blame the previous administration for all of your problems?'” former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright recounted. “I said, ‘Forever.'”

The story prompted laughter and applause from the crowd.

**********

  • Obama America

2016themovie.com

D’Souza: The movie is divided into two parts. One looks backward into Obama’s past and the other looks forward into what we can expect over the next four years. There’s roughly equal time in the movie to both themes. The movie is also based on two books – my earlier book, The Roots of Obama’s Rage (2010), and a new book I have coming out next month called Obama’s America. The earlier book looks back and the new book looks forward, and the movie combines both.

D’Souza: One of the themes in the movie is the anti-colonial goal of downsizing America in the name of global justice. So, the core idea here is that America has become a rogue nation in the world and also that America enjoys a standard of living that is unconscionably high compared to the rest of the world. So, anti-colonialism is a program of global reparations, not racial reparations. It’s reparations for global injustice. Obama’s goal is to shrink America. He wants to reduce America’s footprint in the world because he thinks we are stepping on the world. He wants to redistribute money away from the rich and toward the poor. But we are not talking about the rich and the poor in America solely. We are talking about a redistribution of income away from the rich countries – America included – toward the poor countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Columbia, and so on. This is where I think we misunderstand Obama when he talks about the 99 percent. We think he means the 99 percent only in America. He doesn’t. He actually means worldwide. It’s important to realize that the middle class or even poor Americans are rich by global standards.
Well, the film is intended to [offer] a debate about what’s the future of America. Nowhere in the film do we mention the election. We certainly don’t tell people how to vote. The film is about the American dream and Obama’s dream. In some ways it’s about my dream, which is the immigrants’ dream. Also, worked in there is Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream and the dream of the founders. In that sense it’s very different. In some ways I was inspired to do this by Michael Moore. I feel embarrassed to say that because Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11” is an intellectual disaster, but nevertheless that film was about a controversial president and it was received at a time when one half of the country was for the president and one half was against him and it was dropped in the middle of an election. So that gave me the idea to make a film under similar conditions – controversial president, one half of the country is for him, one half is against him, and drop it in the middle of this year’s debate. But I wanted to make and have made a very different kind of a film that is not fast with the facts and is intellectually and factually very sound. So far, no one has alleged the contrary. (CP)
Thomas Sowell:Years, and sometimes decades, pass between my visits to movie theaters. But I drove 30 miles to see the movie “2016,” based on Dinesh D’Souza’s best-selling book, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage.” Where I live is so politically correct that such a movie would not even be mentioned, much less shown.

Every seat in the theater was filled, even though there had been an earlier showing that day, and more showings were scheduled for the rest of the afternoon and evening. I had to sit on a staircase in the balcony, but it was worth it.

The audience was riveted. You could barely hear a sound from them, or detect a movement, and certainly not smell popcorn. Yet the movie had no bombast, no violence, no sex and no spectacular visual effects.

The documentary itself was fascinating, as Dinesh D’Souza presented the story of Barack Obama’s life and view of the world, in a very conversational sort of way, illustrating it with visits to people and places around the world that played a role in the way Obama’s ideas and beliefs evolved.

It was refreshing to see how addressing adults as adults could be effective, in an age when so many parts of the media address the public as if they were children who need a constant whirlwind of sounds and movements to keep them interested.

Dinesh D’Souza’s own perspective, as someone born in India who came to America and became an American, provided a special insight into the way people from the Third World often perceive or misperceive the United States and the Western world.

That Third World perspective is Obama’s perspective, D’Souza demonstrates in this documentary, as in his book — and it is a perspective that is very foreign to that of most Americans, which may be why some believe that Obama was born elsewhere.

D’Souza is convinced that the president was born in Hawaii, as he claims, but argues that not only Obama’s time living in Indonesia and his emotionally charged visits to his father’s home in Africa, have had a deep and impassioned effect on his thinking.

The story of Barack Obama, however, is not just the story of how one man came to be the way he is. It is a much larger story about how millions of Americans came to vote for, and some to idolize, a man whose fundamental beliefs and values are so different from their own.

For every person who sees Obama as somehow foreign there are many others who see him as a mainstream American political figure — and an inspiring one.

This D’Souza attributes to Barack Obama’s great talents in rhetoric, and his ability to project an image that resonates with most Americans, however much that image may differ from, or even flatly contradict, the reality of Obama’s own ideological view of the world.

What is that ideological view?

The Third World, or anti-colonial, view is that the rich nations have gotten rich by taking wealth from the poor nations. It is part of a much larger vision, in which the rich in general have gotten rich by taking from the poor, whether in their own country or elsewhere.

Whatever its factual weaknesses, it is an emotionally powerful vision, to which many people have dedicated their lives, and for which some have even risked their lives. Some of these people appear in this documentary movie, as they have appeared throughout the formative phases of Barack Obama’s life.

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is just the most visible and vocal of a long line of such people who played crucial roles in Obama’s evolution. When Jeremiah Wright thundered about how “white folks’ greed runs a world in need,” he captured the essence of the Third World or anti-colonial vision.

But many of the other mentors, allies, family and friends of Barack Obama over the years were of the same mindset, as this documentary demonstrates.

More important, the movie “2016” demonstrates how so many of Obama’s actions as President of the United States, which D’Souza had predicted on the basis of his study of Obama’s background, are perfectly consistent with that ideology, however inconsistent it is with the rhetoric that gained him the highest office in the land.

http://www.amazon.com/Want-Your-Money-Ken-Blackwell/dp/B004Q4PEBQ

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Choice

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood told The Daily Caller that he is “very proud” of the Economic Recovery Act of 2009 that put 65,000 people to work with $48 billion in federal funds for the Department of Transportation, amounting to $738,461 per job.

The Recovery Act of 2009, which in total cost taxpayers $825 billion, has been criticized because it did not prevent the unemployment rate from rising above 8 percent, contrary to what the Obama administration predicted.

“Yeah, we spent $48 billion and we put 65,000 people to work in 15,000 projects in two years with no problems,” LaHood told The Daily Caller in a video interview in Alexandria, Va., on Friday. “I’m very proud of that. I know that the governors can spend this money because over two years we gave them $48 billion, they created 65,000 jobs in 15,000 projects. This is doable. We’re going to get the money out and get people to work.” (DC)

So with around 13 million unemployed this is doable. 🙂 That’s only 96,000 Billion!!!

$96,000,000,000,000

The Liberals were right, the Stimulus was too small! 🙂

On Monday’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “The Five,” co-host Greg Gutfeld said Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter wasn’t that far off when she told CNN’s “State of the Union” that entertainment media outlets and national press outlets are equally important.

What she said (and look for the childish attack at the end): According to Cutter, making time for those outlets is as important as focusing on traditional media.

“I don’t think that they’re more important, but I think that they’re equally important,” Cutter said. “I think that’s where a lot of Americans get their news. And I think the president’s going to continue doing that. You know, Mitt Romney might have had two media availabilities, but what did he tell you, Jim, in those media availabilities?

“He told you he wasn’t going to release his taxes because he was afraid of getting attacked. And you know, he spouted off lies [about] the president’s Medicare system. So, do you find that media availability really useful if he is not being transparent about his own policies and distorting the president’s? ”(DC)

Gutfeld explained that Hollywood, and by extension the Hollywood press, both want Obama re-elected.

“The reason Obama prefers Tinseltown rags to national press is simple: If Hollywood is the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, then the Hollywood press is the propaganda arm for the propaganda arm,” Gutfeld said.

“It’s just another vehicle to make a political disaster tastier to a dismayed public,” said Gutfeld “And since entertainment hacks must kiss the stars’ behind to survive they must embrace the pet causes, too. Before it was global warming, but now it’s Obama, who is bigger than the globe. It’s another Obama first — a U.S. president who finds the job too local for him. Be honest, Jasper [‘The Five’ co-host Dana Perino’s dog] knows more about politics than the Hollywood act. Look at him.”

“But the biggest joke in all of this — that the national press thinks it’s different. No guys, you’re not. You’re every bit as shallow and coopted as the typical entertainment reporter fawning over Ryan Gosling’s chiseled pecks — they are chiseled,” Gutfeld added.

“So Cutter is right, there is no difference between the news press and the entertainment press. They are two industries united by hero worship, protecting the president’s flanks when they should be challenging him. And the public ends up with a presidency that feels like another summer repeat that needs canceling because in the real world, you can’t turn turkey into a blockbuster no matter how many positive reviews you buy.” (DC)

So if Obama wants to hang out with Entertainment Tonight and People Magazine rather than, say, a Press Conference. It really doesn’t matter because they are all fluff all the time for him anyhow and he’s going to stay in the fluff.

VOTER ID

On August 15, a Pennsylvania judge upheld the Commonwealth’s new law requiring one of a plethora of forms of identification — including a driver’s license, accredited school ID, government employee badge and a new voter-specific ID, among others — be used at a polling place to certify a voter is who they say they are.

The next day, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit got the ID she needed to vote despite the alleged hurdles her ACLU lawyers said stood in her way.

Viviette Applewhite took two public buses to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation office on her own. In its filing on her behalf, the ACLU insisted the elderly civil rights movement veteran whose purse was stolen years ago and lacks a birth certificate “has been unable to obtain photo identification required by Pennsylvania’s photo ID law” and “will no longer be able to vote.”

Yet a frayed, partially legible Medicare card and copies of correspondence from Pennsylvania’s welfare office and elsewhere was enough for the clerks to give Applewhite the ID she can use to vote in November.

The ACLU, planning to appeal the ruling, is unsure if Applewhite will remain a plaintiff. The answer seems obvious.

This episode should end all arguments that voter ID is voter suppression. Applewhite’s ability to easily get an ID card is a complete repudiation of the vicious campaign of deceit against voter ID that has seen ample plays of the race card (Applewhite is black) and the age card (she is 93 and uses a wheelchair), as well as the amplification of the left’s class-warfare strategy (she is poor).

Viviette Applewhite didn’t need an army of ACLU lawyers to secure her vote — but she could have used a ride. Therein lies the inherent irresponsibility of liberal voter ID complaints.

Liberals appear adept at registering people to vote. The NAACP, for instance, has a website dedicated to helping people register. Groups such as the Voter Participation Center are sending out absentee ballots to seemingly every mailing list they can find with such zeal that family pets are receiving VPC’s partially completed requests for ballots. Similar groups are devoting significant resources to educating potential voters about liberal candidates and issues. And there will undoubtedly be massive get-out-the-vote efforts in November.

Yet there never seems to be a point where potential voters are asked: “Do you know you need proper ID to vote? Can we help you get that ID?”

The ACLU has lawyers. The NAACP has lawyers. The Brennan Center for Justice and other groups against voter ID have lawyers who should be able to help those who think they may have trouble obtaining proper ID on a case-by-case basis.

Judge Robert E. Simpson, Jr., in his ruling, called the Pennsylvania law a “reasonable, non-discriminatory, non-severe burden when viewed in the broader context of the widespread use of photo ID in daily life.”

Do voter ID opponents want to keep people who don’t have photo IDs from entering the 21st century? More likely, they want an excuse. In 2000, liberals blamed their electoral loss on the design of certain ballots. In 2004, it was electronic voting machinesmade by a company owned by a Republican. With so many close races to be decided this November, it appears liberals are looking for a handy excuse to challenge their losses.

And anyway they can cheat the system. After all, if you have no morals about voter fraud then y6ou want to strike down as many Voter ID laws as possible and “racism” and “grandma” are always your go-to weapons of choice.

 

Let’s Not Talk Facts

Townhall: The year 1965  (US Population 194 Million) brought us a new program aimed at securing health care for Americans over the age of 65. This program is now becoming the centerpiece of the 2012 presidential campaign, yet many Americans don’t understand the basic financial facts about the plan, or why its sustainability is considered so essential to America’s future.

Funded by payroll tax deductions, Medicare was implemented to help pay for medical procedures, hospital costs, and doctor visits. Later a prescription drug benefit was added. Since workers paid for the plan throughout their work years, they naturally felt entitled to this important retirement benefit when they turned 65. Unfortunately, the incoming money wasn’t set aside in a separate trust fund, but was instead borrowed by the federal government to pay for other government expenses. Our leaders put slips of paper into the fund equivalent to IOUs. They called them bonds, but elected officials were borrowing the money, just like they now sell bonds to the Chinese.

So now we have what some believe is a crisis. The amounts being paid out by Medicare now far exceed what we are taking in, and reputable analysts agree that the fund will run dry by 2024 or near that time. (population projected to be 335 Million- that 141 million people MORE) The reasons are simple:

The population of the United States is aging and many people are living much longer. (up from 73 to 83 since Medicare started so people are living on the benefits much longer than they used to-costing more. So more people living longer and costing more.)

• Technological innovation has driven up the cost of medicine. Things like MRIs, knee replacements, and heart stents have preserved lives, but cost lots of money.

• Third party payments for services. You may not agree with this point, but when a “customer” doesn’t personally pay for a service, there is usually less concern about the price. Because insurance companies and government programs pay for so much health care, people are less diligent about controlling costs.

Hey, it’s Free! 🙂

See: http://www.census.gov/prod/2/pop/p25/p25-1131.pdf

Life Expectancy: http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=195

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

A Dollar in 1965 is now the equivalent of $7.27 now. So by 2025 it could easily be 8 times as much. Those are the facts. Something a Liberal will not acknowledge under any circumstances.

Its throw grandma off a cliff, kill seniors, crush the poor, destroy the middle class, steal candy from babies…et al.

FEAR IS HOPE!

In 1965, the cost of the Medicare program was projected to be $9 billion in 1990; it was actually $65 billion. Since then, the number has skyrocketed. Medicare spending was about $560 billion in 2011, and is slated to grow to nearly $1 trillion by 2022 – an amount generally agreed by both political parties to be unsustainable. There may be a few diehards who don’t believe we need a significant change of trajectory, but I haven’t spoken to them.

Now we have a Vice-Presidential candidate who has come out (before he was selected) with a plan to reform Medicare. You can disagree with his proposal, but you can’t disagree with the fact that he has a thoughtful, concrete plan, co-sponsored by Democratic Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon – which makes it bipartisan.

Simply put, it does the following:

• Anyone over 55 years old wouldn’t see any change to Medicare as it is currently constituted.

• Anyone younger than 55 would be given an option. Either they could choose a private insurance company (similar to the Medicare Advantage program instituted in the 1970’s), or they could enroll in Medicare as a fee-for-service program that would continue to pay directly for care. The difference is they would be given a quantified amount to pay for their insurance where there would be caps depending on financial need.

No one currently receiving Medicare would be affected and everyone else would have a ten- year window to plan for the changes ahead. This may be a perfect plan, a lousy plan or something in-between depending on your perception, but it is a plan to confront the problem.

The President doesn’t like to speak of how he has altered Medicare, but his spokesperson, Stephanie Cutter, admitted on Face the Nation that there is a $700 billion cut to Medicare in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). She stated that this was a reduction of payments to insurance and drug companies, but they are clearly cuts and they go into effect on January 1, 2013. She also stated that the President plans another $300 billion in cuts in his current plans.

American politicians are afraid of discussing cuts to any program; after all, whenever there’s a cut, someone gets less than they currently receive. But many people are also legitimately frightened by our out-of-control budgets at all levels of government, and the realization that we have made future commitments that are completely unsustainable. You may not believe that, but more and more Americans clearly shiver as cities are going bankrupt while we’re mortgaging our future with annual trillion dollar budget deficits and a national debt of $16 trillion.

The question that we all must face is can either Medicare or Social Security remain sustainable when we have deficits this large? With the national debt ballooning, expenditures for entitlement programs will be squeezed out by interest payments. What happens to these programs when interest rates rise which we all know will have to happen sometime and probably not too long from now?

The President and his allies have confronted the issue, but appear reluctant to say they have. This is made worse by the fact that it’s unlikely that Congress will ever approve the cuts. After all, for each of the past several years, Congress has approved a bill to “adjust” (raise) Medicare payments to doctors so that seniors don’t scream when their doctors refuse to provide services.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are betting that the American people will not be scared into believing that Medicare is going away. They believe that Americans realize that there is a severe crisis, and that things have to change before we’re forced to change. And they have faith that seniors understand that even though they won’t be personally affected by Ryan-Wyden, changes must be made for the benefit of their children and grandchildren. Time will tell whether they are correct. But let us be clear, Mr. Romney has never adopted the Ryan-Wyden Plan and he is the presidential candidate not Paul Ryan.

You now have the facts in terms as simply as can be stated and hopefully in as unbiased a way as possible. You are smart enough to make your own decision.

So that’s why you’re going to throw grandma off a cliff after she has been eating dog food, according to the Left.

After all, facts are worthless to them so they aren’t interested in them.

Facts are boring, Fear is exciting.

And besides, it’s great for the Public Sector Unions (and their incestuous monetary relations with the Democrats):

Eye-popping salaries proposed for employees of the health benefits exchange being formed in Colorado grabbed the attention of Republicans and Democrats alike on Thursday. A subcommittee of the board charged with establishing the exchange  is considering a draft budget for its federal grant application that would create 24 positions and pay those employees a total of more than $3 million annually to manage the health care cooperative. The average annual salary of a health benefits exchange employee would exceed $125,000 under the plan. …“We have executive directors (of state departments) that are in charge of thousands of people here that make significantly less than that,” said Sen. Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs. …A Democrat on the committee overseeing enactment of health benefits exchange legislation in the state agreed that the figures are worthy of scrutiny. …Under the health care overhaul, states were required to establish exchanges. Colorado authorized its exchange this year in SB200.

Keep in mind that the $125,000 figure is an average, which means many of the bureaucrats will be getting much bigger paychecks.

“Obamacare is a great racket!”

And also remember that we’re talking Colorado, not someplace like New York City where the cost of living is a bit higher. (townhall)

So Fear, Intimidation, and Crony Capitalism. What could be better?

4 More Years!  🙂

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Extremes

Bill O’Reilly: New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd writes: “Ryan should stop being so lovable. People who intend to hurt other people should wipe the smile off their faces.”

So in Dowd’s estimation, Ryan is in politics to harm the folks. He gets up every day and plots the personal damage he might be able to achieve.

This is now where we are in American politics. If Ryan’s reform vision will harm Americans, let’s hear some specifics. So far, under Obama, we have a sluggish economy, high employment and record debt. Sounds harmful to me.

But then again, I’m an extremist. (human Events)

🙂

If a person is to believe his media, he would have to accept that bringing discretionary spending back to 2008 levels, as Ryan has suggested, is like letting a Koch-funded plutocrat in war paint shred the social contract and throw it into a Klan-lit bonfire. Nearly every outlet, every interviewer, every reference about Ryan’s plan is imbued with a tone that asks, “Isn’t this nuts?”

But adding $11 trillion to the national debt, as Obama’s proposed budget does, well, that passes the levelheaded policy test. One day, perhaps when fact checkers take a break from crunching every uncompromising decimal point in Ryan’s budget proposal, they can explain how Obama’s plan is supposed to work and how spending without end ends — you know, for the kids.

If, that is, they survive. Medicare, as you’ve also heard, will cease to exist in its present form once free market jihadists storm the White House, abolish the program and exact their revenge on the elderly. And no, forcing Americans to participate in an entitlement mere years from its collapse is not a radical proposition. Rather, offering Americans who are 55 or younger a menu of (slightly more) competitive market options to drive down prices — funded at approximately the same level Obama proposes — can be forever referred to as “controversial.”

And when the president carves out $700 billion from Medicare as seed money for a new trillion-dollar entitlement project, we are keeping with our nonradical traditions, even if we have to force everyone to participate. When Ryan proposes similar cuts to extend the life of Medicare, he is a granny-starving Pericles.

Put it this way: Ryan’s plan injects the same reactionary idea into Medicare that the average American struggles with every day as he heads out into the marketplace to buy food or furniture or a phone — which, according to many Democrats, is the kind of social Darwinism that no decent person should ever be subjected to.

Which reminds me: If you happen to be attracted to some of the broader ideas in an Ayn Rand book, you, my friend, are an extremist for life. If, on the other hand, your ideological education was provided by an all-star lineup of leftist thinkers, you’re good. Certainly, no one is going to demand that you accept or repudiate the teachings of Frank Marshall Davis or Karl Marx in toto.

This is the world we’re in. In Washington, extremists stand (somewhat) firm on the idea of preserving decade-long tax rates in a terrible economy, whereas reasonable presidents have no qualms heading toward a fiscal cliff, as long as they have a class-envy tax hike to campaign on (for what is, in the context of spending, a pittance).

As it turns out, radicals provide budgets that curb growth by a few percentage points over many years, whereas rational politicians don’t even bother passing budgets.

Then again, Ryan the Unreasonable supported TARP, auto bailouts and Medicare expansions, so we can agree that radicalism does exist. It just depends, I suppose, on how you look at things. (human Events)

They generally shriek about “new tone” and “civility,” while trying to paint the Right as dangerous extremists, consisting of “hate groups.” The tolerance tyrants preach anti-”hate,” while being full of hate themselves. The shooting that occurred at the Family Research Council yesterday is further exposing this. And the media should be ashamed.

After first trying to sweep the news under their lapdog rugs, they then moved onto trying to spin it all away. (Michelle Malkin)

From The Washington Post news item:

Family Research Council security guard shot

A security guard a was shot and wounded after a scuffle with a man who expressed disagreement with the group’s conservative views.

Huh. Kind of like how Politico called SWAT-ting, a potentially deadly form of political terrorism, “an elaborate practical joke.” It’s totally hilarious when conservatives are put in harm’s way. What’s a little scuffle? It was simply a disagreement and stuff!

One of the Commentors on the Washington Post site:

Even Nazis like the FRC hate group should not be shot or murdered.

but the FRC is not just about self-righteous we are right you are wrong speech a la radio talk hosts.

It’s about advocating death and violence against gays and fomenting hatred spewing lies about gays such as  that they are child molesters.

Another:

When will we ever learn that this can only continue in the climate of hate created by the incendiary words of the Tea Party, regressive Right Radio and Fox News. First Gabby Gifford, then Aurora and now in DC, disturbed people have reacted to the words of fear and hate shouted by the reactionaries. The only way out is to go FORWARD!

Another:

Incidentally, I consider this man’s action foolish and counterproductive. As a convicted felon he may not be able to vote in November. He would have been more effective had he chosen to vote to keep Romney out of the office of president where, if he reaches, he will try to repeal Rowe vs, Wade and doom poor women to seek back street abortions or raise undernourished, underprivileged and undereducated children doomed to do menial jobs for his rich friends and cronies?

But What do I bnow, I’m just another “extremist” after all… 🙂

FEAR IS HOPE

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Fear is Hope 2012

FEAR IS HOPE

Because they are constantly talking about hope. But all they do is spread fear, anger, envy, and other negative emotions.

So Fear must therefore be Hope.

“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”-Orwell.

And since the liberals view of the past decade is one of total evil and you should fear that evil coming back, and you should have hope for a brighter, more vibrant America under their rule than letting that evil back in, Fear is Hope.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”-Orwell

And there can’t be more deceit going on now than in any recent memory.

“It’s still fear versus hope; the past versus the future,” Obama said from Cleveland, Ohio Sept 8th, “It’s still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That’s what this election is about. That’s the
choice you’ll face in November.”

Mind you, that was September 2010. Sounds like now doesn’t it! 🙂
The same tune. The same Pied Piper.The same Rats.

Hope lays in the Democrats and only the Democrats. We will save you!

FEAR IS HOPE

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

I wrote this almost 2 years ago now. It’s still true.
https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/the-4th-precept/

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

In another sign of the ongoing jobs recession, fully 44 states saw their unemployment rates climb in July, according to state-level data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

As a result, more than three years after the economic recovery officially started under President Obama, 10 states still have jobless rates of 9% or higher. (IBD)

The national unemployment rate has been over 8% for nearly 4 years straight.

But confront a liberal and all they’ll say is “well he’s created 4 million jobs” and that’s it. That’s all you’ll get.

Deception and misdirection is all they want to give and all you’ll get.

This doesn’t even keep up with the population growth and the retiring of baby boomers that started 2 years ago.

There are now 305 million Americans (it was 250 in 1990). In just 12 years there is projected to be 352 million. And how many millions will have retired and expect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security to be their own personal bank account?

But the Left will never tell you that.

But if you disagree with them you must be a rich-loving, poor-hating SOB!

In times of of universal deceit the truth is revolutionary. 🙂

FEAR IS HOPE

“Spreading the Wealth” by Stanley Kurtz

“Re-elect him and you’ll see that he is after the pocketbooks of a whole lot more than just 1% of us,” he warned in the book. “His real target is America’s middle class, suburbanites in particular.”

Added Kurtz, a senior fellow at the Ethics & Public Policy Center: “Many suburban voters now planning to support him will find their incomes and their children’s schools the targets of his redistributive schemes in a second term. The 1% slogan is a sham. If your income is in the top 50%, Obama is after you.”

Citing recent White House policy meetings with radical community organizers, Kurtz warns that Obama is saving his most jarring initiatives for a second term, when he no longer has to court the middle class.

They’ll see “concerted moves to force regional tax-base sharing on the states,” he said, “and federal pressure to equalize urban and suburban school funding.”

Kurtz, an expert on Obama’s community-organizing days, says the president is following the playbook of his philosophical mentor, Saul Alinsky.

The socialist Alinsky wrote in “Rules for Radicals” that the best way to revolutionize society is to convince the middle class you are on its side. That requires talking and dressing like that group of Americans while issuing bland slogans about “hope” and “change.”

“Tactics must begin with the experience of the middle class, accepting their aversion to rudeness, vulgarity and conflict,” Alinsky said. This will anesthetize middle America “prior to the social surgery to come.”

“Start them off easy,” he said, “don’t scare them off.”

Alinsky and his disciples believe the suburbs create “structural racism” and “economic segregation.”

The goal is to abolish them by pushing urban poor into the suburbs through a combination of discrimination lawsuits and regulations while redistributing suburban wealth to the cities through “regional equity” programs.

Alinsky’s followers believe the middle class is racist and greedy. This notion, Kurtz notes, is what drew Obama to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church and its attacks on the “the pursuit of middleclassness.”

Kurtz says Obama’s stealth plan to abolish the suburbs includes:

• Forcing bedroom communities to build subsidized housing units under the threat of HUD lawsuits.

• Forcing regional tax-redistribution plans on the states by conditioning receipt of federal funding on such “regional equity plans,” which are now being formulated under the administration’s Sustainable Communities Initiative.

• Using the carrot of federal funds to usurp state and local control of schools.

• Forcing public schools to adopt politicized curricula and lower education standards, which are now being formulated under the administration’s Common Core Initiative.

The president’s talk about defending and helping the middle class is essentially a smoke screen. Behind the scenes, he and his Alinsky pals are scheming to redistribute the wealth of the suburban middle class. (IBD)

FEAR IS HOPE

And CHANGE is only good if their is no change, in leadership.

When he becomes free to do whatever he wants because he no longer has to pander to anyone. He can just do it. The Executive Order Fiat President who is more “flexible” because he is not Chained by re-election.

Now if that doesn’t scare you, you’re a Liberal.

That’s real FEAR.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Think like the Media

Did the hear about the massacre that was avert 2 days ago?

Probably not. Since no violent, sociopathic Tea Party member was potentially the shooter and the target was a Conservative group the liberal media isn’t interested in covering as the victim.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_21326781/security-guard-called-hero-thwarting-family-resource-council

ABC was the only broadcast network that offered a full story on the FRC office shooting on Wednesday night. They led with the story and gave it two and a half minutes. None of the network newscasts reported the breaking detail that shooter Floyd Corkins volunteered for six months at the D.C. Center for the LGBT Community, adding depth to his political motivation.

On NBC Nightly News, Brian Williams gave the story just 17 seconds: “In Washington today, police say a man with a gun walked into the offices of the conservative lobbying group the Family Research Council, and opened fire. He never made it past the lobby. He shot a security guard in the arm before the guard was able to subdue him.”

On CBS Evening News, substitute anchor Bob Schieffer offered 20 seconds: “A gunman opened fire today at the Washington headquarters of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobbying group. The man shot a security guard in the arm before that guard and others tackled him, and he was arrested. Police say that the suspect made negative comment about the council’s work just before the shooting.”

Does anyone believe that under the same circumstances — hostile ideological shooter captured after security guard only shot in the arm — a conservative nut attacking a gay activist group or abortion advocacy group would draw just 20 seconds?

They can say they covered it. But Did Brian Ross jumped to a Tea Party Conclusion here? Did they cover it for days with endless speculations?

Nope. It was 20 seconds and gone. Who cares. Not them. No “gun violence” story here for them to brow beat people with and “agonize” over.

On both NBC and CBS, the FRC brief was followed by a full story promoting President Obama’s new deferral program for illegal alien “Dream Act” students. NBC gave that two minutes, CBS two minutes and fifty seconds. (Newsbusters)

But don’t worry, they aren’t biased. 🙂
ABC NEWS: Sources have identified the suspect as Floyd Corkins of Herndon, Virginia, but so far, his motives are unclear.

They are very clear. The shooter admitted to them. But the liberal media doesn’t like this aspect so they’ll ignore it.
Sources say the suspect had material from fast food giant Chick-fil-A in his bag, but it was unclear whether today’s incident has any connection to the recent controversy over gay marriage.

Yeah, let’s not jump to conclusions like Brian Ross, your ABC News colleague did with the Aurora Shooting… 🙂

AP: Corkins had been volunteering for about the past six months at The DC Center for the LGBT Community, said David Mariner, executive director of the community center, which is in Northwest Washington. He usually staffed the center’s front desk on Saturdays, and his most recent shift was about two weeks ago.

“He always struck me as a kind, gentle and unassuming young man. I’m very surprised that he could be involved in something like this,” Mariner said….

Ah, I bet he loves puppies and unicorns too. Not like those violent, hateful racist bigots in the Tea Party!!
The Southern Poverty Law Center decided in 2010 to place the FRC on its list of hate groups for its rhetoric on gays.
Janet Napalitano and Homeland Security think Tea Partiers are “right wing terrorists”. But this guy is an aberrations and nice, quiet guy who did something unfortunate.
“There are unconfirmed reports that the shooting was ideologically motivated,” said Richard Cohen, the president of the SPLC, in a statement.
Despite numerous reports that the shooter was very specifically politically motivated.
No bias here.
The motivation and circumstances behind today’s tragedy are still unknown LGBT Organization quickly said.
But just minutes after the Aurora shooting Brian Ross is looking for a Tea Party Member to blames. The same in Tucson.
No bias here.
And Another Laugh from MSDNC:“That really bothered me,” MSNBC’s Toure’ said. “You notice he said anger twice. He’s really trying to use racial coding and access some really deep stereotypes about the angry black man. This is part of the playbook against Obama, the ‘otherization,’ he’s not like us.”“I know it’s a heavy thing, I don’t say it lightly, but this is ‘niggerization,’” Touré said to the apparent shock of his co-panelists. “You are not one of us, you are like the scary black man who we’ve been trained to fear.”

“This is not a revolutionary comment,” Touré later said. “This is a constituency all-white party that rejects the black vote.”

But he’s not calling them racists and he certainly isn’t one. Kettle anyone?

Ann Coulter: My smash best-seller “Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America” has just come out in paperback — and not a moment too soon! Democrats always become especially mob-like during presidential election campaigns.The “root cause” of the Democrats’ wild allegations against Republicans, their fear of change, their slogans and insane metaphors, are all explained by mass psychology, diagnosed more than a century ago by the French psychologist Gustave Le Bon, on whose work much of my own book is based.Le Bon’s 1896 book, “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind,” was carefully read by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini in order to learn how to incite mobs. Our liberals could have been Le Bon’s study subjects.

With the country drowning in debt and Medicare and Social Security on high-speed bullet trains to bankruptcy, the entire Democratic Party refuses to acknowledge mathematical facts. Instead, they incite the Democratic mob to hate Republicans by accusing them of wanting to kill old people.

According to a 2009 report — before Obama added another $5 trillion to the national debt — Obama’s own treasury secretary, Tim Geithner, stated that in less than 10 years, spending on major entitlement programs, plus interest payments on the national debt, would consume 92 cents of every dollar in federal revenue.

That means no money for an army, a navy, rockets, national parks, food inspectors, air traffic controllers, highways, and so on. Basically, the entire federal budget will be required just to pay for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — and the cost of borrowing money to pay for these programs.

When Social Security was enacted in 1935, the average lifespan was 61.7 years. Today, it’s almost 79 and rising. But liberals believe the age at which people can begin collecting Social Security must never, ever be changed, even to save Social Security itself.

Mobs, according to Le Bon, have a “fetish-like respect” for tradition, except moral traditions because crowds are too impulsive to be moral. That’s why liberals say our Constitution is a “living, breathing” document that sprouts rights to gay marriage and abortion, but the age at which Social Security and Medicare benefits kick in is written in stone.

Le Bon says that it is lucky “for the progress of civilization that the power of crowds only began to exist when the great discoveries of science and industry had already been effected.” If “democracies possessed the power they wield today at the time of the invention of mechanical looms or of the introduction of steam-power and of railways, the realization of these inventions would have been impossible.”

Liberals exhibit this exact group-think fear of science not only toward light bulbs and nuclear power, but also toward medical inventions. Thus, when a majority of the country objected to Obamacare on the grounds that — among many other reasons — a government takeover of health care would destroy medical innovation, liberals stared in blank incomprehension.
They believe every drug, every diagnosis, every therapy, every cure that will ever be invented, has already been invented. Their job is to spread all the existing cures, while demonizing and stymieing pharmaceutical companies that make money by inventing new drugs.

Democrats haven’t the slightest concern about who will formulate new remedies because they are enraged at profit-making and suspicious of scientific advancement.

Apart from cures that will never be invented, liberal elites will be mostly untouched by the rotten medical care to which they are consigning the rest of us. Note how Democrats’ friends, such as government unions, immediately received waivers from Obamacare. Rich or connected liberals, such as George Soros, Warren Buffett, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, will always have access to the best doctors, just as Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez do.

It is similar to the way that Democrats, who refuse to pass school choice, always seem to bypass the disastrous public schools for their own children, who end up at Sidwell Friends or St. Albans.
Democrats don’t worry about how bankrupting Social Security and destroying the job market hurts black people, bitter divorcees and young people, because they can always demagogue these one-party Democratic voters simply by repeating that Republicans are racist, hate women and aren’t cool like Obama.

The truth is irrelevant; only slogans and fear-mongering delight mobs.

The rest of us are forced to live in a lawless universe of no new pharmaceuticals, foreign doctors, gay marriage, girl soldiers, a health care system run by the post office, and bankrupt Social Security and Medicare systems, because liberals can’t enjoy their wealth unless other people are living in squalor.

The country will have the economy of Uganda, but Democrats will be in total control.

And they would be soo happy. And you want to be happy now don’t you Citizen…

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Psychology

People are more likely to believe false arguments when they think they’ve come up with them on their own!

Or someone they share a partisan divide with tells them it.

So tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs.

Like rich people are evil, greedy, step-on-everyone,thrown grandma to the curb, outsourcing, scrooge-like ruthless assholes who just take advantage of everyone and everything!!!

Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

The “Cancer” ad run by the Democrat Super PAC anyone? 🙂

Confirmation biases can be used to explain why some beliefs remain when the initial evidence for them is removed. This belief perseverance effect has been shown by a series of experiments using what is called the “debriefing paradigm”: subjects examine faked evidence for a hypothesis, their attitude change is measured, then they learn that the evidence was fictitious. Their attitudes are then measured once more to see if their belief returns to its previous level.

A typical finding is that at least some of the initial belief remains even after a full debrief.

So who care if the “Cancer” ad and others like it are completely bogus, if we can create a lasting impression in our favor (or at a nuclear slag pile of crap on our opponent) then it’s all good.

And we have 90% of the Mainstream Media to hammer it home to boot. What’s not to like about it!!

Turn your opponent into a pile of crap that no one will vote for with falsehoods and you win!

What’s the downside? 🙂

And Best of all, you don’t have to even bother defending your own crap. No one will care after 24/7/365 about the other guys crap (even if it’s false).

What could be better.

Biased interpretation offers an explanation for this effect: seeing the initial evidence, people form a working hypothesis that affects how they interpret the rest of the information.

And you can’t get more biased than the Left and the Mainstream Media.

The truth is irrelevant; only slogans and fear-mongering delight mobs.

Thomas Sowell: If this year’s election is going to be decided on the basis of hard facts, the Obama administration is doomed. But the Obama campaign is well aware of that, which is why we are hearing so many distracting innuendoes and outright lies about such peripheral issues as what Mitt Romney is supposed to have done while running Bain Capital — or even what is supposed to have happened at Bain Capital, years after Mitt Romney was long gone.

The Obama campaign’s big smear, about how Romney is supposed to have caused a woman to die of cancer, has been exposed as a lie by CNN, hardly a Republican network. What smears like this show is that the Obama administration cannot run on its track record, so it has to run on distractions from the country’s real problems.

When Senator Harry Reid claims that Mitt Romney hasn’t paid his income taxes, and demands that Governor Romney disprove this unsubstantiated allegation, that raises an obvious question as to why the Internal Revenue Service has not prosecuted Romney, instead of leaving that to a partisan politician in an election year.

What makes this a farce is that Senator Reid himself has not released his own income tax records, while claiming that Romney’s release of only two years of his income tax records is not enough, even though it has been enough for other candidates in other years.

If Mitt Romney releases all his tax records going back to his childhood, it will not put a stop to this fishing expedition, much less bring an apology when those records show nothing illegal. It will just provide more material for making more distracting claims to change the subject from the track record of the Obama administration.

This election is a test, not just of the opposing candidates but of the voting public. If what they want are the hard facts about where the country is, and where it is heading, they cannot vote for more of the same for the next four years.

But, if what they want is emotionally satisfying rhetoric and a promise to give them something for nothing, to be paid for by taxing somebody else, then Obama is their man. This is not to say that the public will in fact get something for nothing or that rich people will just pay higher taxes, when it is easy for them to escape taxation by investing overseas — creating jobs overseas.

Even if most Americans do not have their own taxes raised, that means little, if they end up paying other people’s taxes in the higher prices of goods and services that pass along the higher taxes imposed on businesses.

There are no doubt voters who will vote on the basis of believing that Obama “cares” more about them. But that is a faith which passeth all understanding. The political mirage of something for nothing, from leaders who “care,” has ruined many a nation.

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

 

Ponying Up

VP Biden: “Look at what they [Republicans] value, and look at their budget. And look what they’re proposing. [Romney] said in the first 100 days, he’s going to let the big banks write their own rules — unchain Wall Street,” Biden said a rally in Danville, Va. “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.” (Politico)

No hyperbole here… 🙂

Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul claims that “President Obama’s campaign keeps sinking lower.” What was the offense? Vice President Biden said the word “chains.”(WP)

No big deal.

Then Biden “clarified” his comments. And the “journalists” are ok with that.

No big deal.

But Ryan wants to kill your grandma! 🙂

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.–Gov Huckabee

Biden’s Best though: “First mainstream African American who is articulate, bright, clean”

“Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago,” Romney said while campaigning in Ohio.

I’m sure that’s “racist” from a hateful, angry, rich white guy! 🙂

Sirius XM radio host Dave Rubin called Romney-Ryan “the whitest ticket since the KKK voted for their box social chairperson.” 🙂

Liberals have taken Chicago politics to a whole new level this campaign cycle with baseless accusations suggesting their opponents are unsympathetic, money-grubbing extremists who will feed your grandmother cat food and steal her Medicare benefits and Social Security check before they push her backwards off a cliff without a blindfold.

 

There’s a certain truth to the old nursery rhyme, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me,” but in the game of politics, names are like mud, and mud sticks. The Democratic Party is replete with lazy cowards who choose to sling mud rather than debate issues. Why waste one’s energy hurling sticks and stones when slander will do the job without lifting a finger?

 

The Obama administration has nothing to run on, save a campaign of character destruction, given its deplorable record of supersized governmental policies leading to high unemployment and an economy teetering on the brink of insolvency. As juvenile as it is, mudslinging is the only hand desperate liberals have left to play. They’ve got nothing.

 

According to Politico, Obama’s plan is to “destroy Romney” utilizing the same methods he’s used in previous races. Former White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said the campaign will focus on attacking Romney’s character to “portray him as “inauthentic, unprincipled and weird.” Here is weird: to date, liberals have painted presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney as a liar, a miser, a felon, a tax evader, an accomplice to a woman’s cancer death – without a shred of evidence.

 

Circumstances are no different for Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). Prior to being chosen as Romney’s running mate, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan was already a source of liberals’ angst and a target of their attacks simply because he is a freethinking financial genius who embraces the free market.

 

Liberals are already hollering Ryan doesn’t have enough private sector experience to be qualified to be Vice President. Prior to his public service, Ryan was employed at a variety of jobs, including a stint driving the Oscar Meyer Weinermobile, making him better qualified than our president was in 2008. And then we have as next in line, Vice President Biden. Biden has his mindless blundering, and Ryan has his arithmetic. You do the math.

Some label Ryan as a flip-flopper for his support of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and auto company bailouts Ryan justified as a way to halt the raging economic firestorm. Responding to the Daily Caller, Ryan said he believed the economy was “on the cusp of a deflationary spiral which would have created a Depression” and had that happened, we would have had “a big government agenda sweeping through this country so fast that we wouldn’t have recovered from it.”

With time ticking closer to the November elections, frantic and radical liberals will ramp up their attacks to paint a proven job creator and a budget hawk in the most unattractive light possible in hopes voters will be distracted from the real issues surrounding a failed and visionless presidency. (Susan Brown)

But you’re a pathetic racist for criticizing it.

 Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

It’s a Liberal Thing

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

And my own…FEAR IS HOPE!

More of the same:

On a special broadcast of MSNBC’s “Hardball” on Saturday, weekend morning host Melissa Harris-Perry expressed her displeasure with the selection of Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate.

In particular, Harris-Perry took issue with Ryan quoting Thomas Jefferson’s line in the Declaration of Independence, in which he declared rights come from God and nature and not from government.

“The thing I really have against him is actually how he and Gov. Romney have misused the Declaration of Independence,” she said. “I’m deeply irritated by their notion that the ‘pursuit of happiness’ means money for the richest and that we extricate the capacity of ordinary people to pursue happiness. When they say ‘God and nature give us our rights, not government,’ that is a lovely thing to say as a wealthy white man.”

“But we could not have them until there was a Civil War that allowed the federal government to impose those nature and God-given rights would actually be respected by our government. And I think that they cannot continue to go down this line on the Declaration of Independence.”

Should we mention the Wealthy White Slave owners in the South and the Freed Slaves in the North?
Probably not. She’d probably think we we were making it up.
Racism, it’s a Liberal Thing! 🙂
“There’s only one president that I know of in history that robbed Medicare, $716 billion to pay for a new risky program of his own that we call Obamacare,” Romney told Schieffer. “What Paul Ryan and I have talked about is saving Medicare, is providing people greater choice in Medicare, making sure it’s there for current seniors. No changes, by the way, for current seniors, or those nearing retirement. But looking for young people down the road and saying, ‘We’re going to give you a bigger choice.’ In America, the nature of this country has been giving people more freedom, more choices. That’s how we make Medicare work down the road.”

According to HotAir.com, the following remark by Ryan was cut and did not air but is crucial in explaining to viewers, especially Florida seniors, that his plan does not affect senior citizens and that his own mother is a Medicare senior.

“My mom is a Medicare senior in Florida,” Ryan said. “Our point is we need to preserve their benefits, because government made promises to them that they’ve organized their retirements around. In order to make sure we can do that, you must reform it for those of us who are younger. And we think these reforms are good reforms that have bipartisan origins. They started from the Clinton commission in the late ’90s.”

HotAir.com called the broadcast cut “journalistic malpractice.”

“Ryan’s plan doesn’t affect those already eligible for Medicare,” Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com wrote. “In fact, one of the conservative criticisms of the plan was that he didn’t give current Medicare recipients the option to choose a private-insurance plan, as younger Americans will get once they become eligible. That’s a pretty newsworthy detail, no?”

The Ryan budget proposes the partial privatization of Medicare by turning it into a premium-support system within a federal exchange, where insurance companies compete for business while meeting coverage requirements.  That’s really no different than Medicare Advantage, which puts market power into cost control and gets the government out of paying providers over a period of several years.  It’s not a perfect solution, as it maintains the third-party-payer system that interferes with pricing signals, which is the main problem driving the cost spiral.  However, it’s as close as we can get to a good political solution, since there is absolutely no support for dismantling Medicare entirely, and it at least lessens the problems of price-signal opacity.

This demonstrates the advantage that Romney gets in picking Ryan as his running mate.  Democrats would have hung the Ryan plan around his neck anyway.  Now Ryan himself gets to answer those attacks on the biggest stage, and the more people hear what Ryan actually proposes, the more apt they are to like it.

Update: The CBS broadcast transcript shows pretty clearly that none of this actually aired on 60 Minutes. (Hot air and Newsmax)

Journalistic “editing” it’s a Liberal Thing. 🙂
Medicare Advantage was scheduled to be destroyed by ObamaCare because the liberals didn’t like it’s cost containment success and beside they had some crony capitalism to dole out, TO AARP!!
It’s called Medi-Gap. It costs most and is less efficient, but politically, it’s a winner!
Now that’s definitely a Liberal thing.
And then there’s the debates:

Apparently, ABC News’s Brian Ross was busy, so the ABC moderator chosen for the vice presidential debate in Danville, Ky., on Oct. 11 of this year will be the network’s Chief Foreign Correspondent, Martha Raddatz.

Matt Drudge has the rest of the debate lineup: Jim Lehrer, of PBS, will ask the questions at the first presidential debate, which is Oct. 3 in Denver. Next comes CNN’s Candy Crowley, who will pick questioners at a town hall-style event in Hempstead, N.Y. on Oct. 16. Bringing up the rear will be veteran CBS reporter Bob Schieffer, who will host the final debate in Boca Raton, Fla., on Oct. 22, Boca Raton.

All moderated by Liberal Journalist who will be in gotcha mode looking for to destroy their evil opponents. Journalism will not be anywhere in sight.

The fix is in. “objectivity” is nigh.

So the side will be loaded and very heavily biased in the Liberals favor so it’s “fair”.

That’s a very liberal thing.

To believe that Ryan’s budget will somehow hurt the ticket is to buy deeply into the notion that U.S. Hispanics are pre-ordained to live as helpless wards of the State, unable to function without the benevolent guidance and assistance that can only come from the enlightened experts of our government Überklasse.

The fact is that Hispanics are just as exposed to debt and deficits as anyone else, and have as much of a stake in the coming debate over debt and deficits, if not more so.  For Hispanics (as well as other immigrants), this election presents a stark choice between a return to the promise of the America they emigrated to, or a continued march down the road to an America that more closely resembles the country they intended to leave behind. (Hot air)

But guilt,fear and self-editing is a very Liberal thing. And they want you to practice it every moment of your life.

You can’t possibly succeed in life without them.

Oh, and anyone who opposes them is an extremist!

Congressman Paul Ryan is the poster boy for the extreme Republican leadership in a Congress whose overall approval rating is 12 percent. His plan to dismantle Medicare is deeply unpopular with the general public, and especially undecided voters.

You might be wondering why the hell Romney picked this guy. But this is a strategic pick that carries real danger for us.

Here’s the calculation: Mitt Romney doesn’t need or expect Paul Ryan to convince even one undecided voter to cast their ballot for him. That’s not what he’s on the ticket for. He’s there to reassure and inspire ultraconservative ideologues and corporate interests that they will have one of their own a heartbeat from the presidency.

That means tens or even hundreds of millions more dollars for the Romney campaign and the array of outside groups supporting him — and if current trends hold, more than 90 percent of that money will be spent on TV ads — lying, distorting and trashing Barack Obama. Those ads will have more impact on undecided voters than anything Paul Ryan himself does or says.

Please donate $3 or more today:

<<website address deleted by me>> (it’s a conservative thing! 🙂 )

More soon.

Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

Its a Liberal thing. 🙂

So, why the hell did Romney choose Paul Ryan as his running mate? Because Ryan has a plan, he has a vision and he’s working. (Katie Pavlich)
And boy do they HATE that.
And HATE is a very Liberal Thing.
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Voices

Good Old Debbie Wasserman Schultz, On the Priorities USA Obama SuperPAC “Cancer” attack ad: “I have no idea the political affiliation of the folks who are associated with that SuperPAC.”

oh really, maybe it’s the Green Alien Sex Probe Party? 🙂

Every single viewer knows she’s BS’ing here.  Every last one.  If she’s unable to tell a basic, obvious truth in this circumstance, why should anyone believe a single thing that comes out of her mouth?  After the interview, DWS got pummeled online for her performance, which she attempted to clean up with a belated tweet:

RT @DWSTweets: Clearly Priorities USA is a Democratic SuperPAC. Was trying to state the obvious: we have no control over their activities.

So you lied previously then, eh. I guess she didn’t build those lies either. 🙂

Then Rich Lowry (“right winger”) met Rachael “Mad Cow” Maddow (MSDNC):

LOWRY: Do you support $700 billion in cuts in Medicare over the next ten years?

MADDOW: I’m not running for president.
(the usual escape clause for Liberal pundits)

LOWRY: Do you?

MADDOW: I’m not running for anything. Paul Ryan is running for vice president.

LOWRY: Do you? Why can’t you answer? See, you can’t answer.

MADDOW: But wait, I’m not running for anything..

LOWRY: This is the key vulnerability. Democrats have cut $700 billion out of Medicare which you won’t or can’t defend it. Defend it.

MADDOW: Is it good or bad?

LOWRY: Do you support it? You can’t answer.

MADDOW: But wait. Why are you asking me?

LOWRY: You can’t answer. Because you’re an opinion maker who is supposed to give us your opinion. But you will not tell us what your opinion is.

MADDOW: What I want to know is the logic of…

LOWRY: Democrats cannot defend that.

MADDOW: Wait. I want to know is the logic…

LOWRY: Go ahead. Defend it.

MADDOW: What I want to know is the logic.

LOWRY: [Laughs].

MADDOW: Wait. Rich, hold on.

LOWRY: Answer me. You’re not answering.

MADDOW: Can I say something?

LOWRY: Can you answer?

MADDOW: Can I say something?

DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Let her answer because I want to go back to Bill Bennett on something.

MADDOW: What I want to know is the logic of attacking somebody for something that you yourself are proposing to do? Paul Ryan proposes keeping those same cuts.

LOWRY: Mitt Romney is not doing it, and those are meat axe cuts. Can I make one last point? One last point?

GREGORY: No, no. I’m going to pull back on this. I want to ask Bill Bennett a separate question. This debate will go on.

Hilarious.
And her childish response later: Ah, a Drudge link. Welcome, 3-day onslaught of ALL CAPS swearing misspelled tweets & emails informing me that I am gay.
The Best and Brightest Leftist Attack Dogs, indeed. 🙂
Speaking of Attack Dogs: SeeBS Snooze

Incredible. CBS News has an anti-Romney “fact check” articleup this morning supposedly debunking statements made by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan during yesterday’s introduction of the veep pick.  At the end, CBS actually snuck in the hyper-partisan, DNC-talking-point assertion that it was “clear” that when President Obama utttered his infamous “you didn’t build that”, he was talking about “teachers and infrastructure.”

CBS claims that in criticizing “you didn’t build that,” Republicans “seized on only part of Obama’s quote.”  In fact, it is CBS itself that edited out another, most telling, part of Obama’s comments.  The network omitted the following Obama lines which make irretrievably clear that he was indeed disparaging the achievements of entrepreneurs. More after the jump.

BARACK OBAMA: “[I]f you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.  You didn’t get there on your own.  I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.  There are a lot of smart people out there.  It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.  Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.”
Not that it comes as even the slightest surprise, but CBS News reveals itself as little more than an arm of the Obama campaign . . . infrastructure. (Newsbusters)

Then on 60 Minutes one of the First questions they can come up with, a Talkign point: Bob Schieffer: How many years of tax returns did you turn over to the campaign?

Ryan shoots back: I’m going to be releasing two, which is what he’s releasing. What I hear from people around this country, they’re not asking where the tax returns. They’re asking where the jobs are. Where’s the economic growth? Those are the issues that matter. I think these are more or less distractions to try and take us off the fact that the president has given us failed policies that aren’t working, that are putting us deeper into debt, that are costing us jobs. And so, we’re going to focus on what it takes to turn this country around and get people back to work.

So much for that Talking Point. But they keep at it because they are childish bullies and it’s the only “journalism” they know how to do.

David Axelrod: Starting now, we can expect even more wealthy, right-wing ideologues lining up to support the Romney-Ryan ticket.
The people on the other side who are trying to buy this election are putting nasty, deceptive TV ads on the air right this very minute. They’re not going away. They’re getting worse.

He ignores his own nasty, deceptive ads, of course. He’s a Liberal. His attacks don’t count.

Paul Ryan is simply a guy who knows how to do math, something the Obama administration isn’t very good at.

For the GOP’s conservative base, Ryan’s entry holds the tantalizing promise of elevating Romney’s game, inciting a debate on the familiar and friendly battlefield of the tea party-dominated 2010 midterms.

The 42-year-old Wisconsin congressman “knows the game — he knows math — he knows exactly what the country needs,” said Alan Simpson, the former Republican senator from Wyoming Obama tapped to co-chair his deficit commission.

“There will be an adult conversation, therefore the children will throw emotion, fear, guilt, and racism on him,” he added. “They will bomb him, bomb him, shell him coastline and bunker, and he will survive. He has facts. He uses math. He’s damn good. He’s excellent.

And boy do liberals hate FACTS!!:)

Ryan:“We won’t replace our Founding principles, we will reapply them,” he effectively challenged Obama to say what Obama believes, which is: Madison was an extremist in enunciating the principles of limited government — the enumeration and separation of powers. And Jefferson was an extremist in asserting that government exists not to grant rights but to “secure” natural rights that pre-exist government. (hot air)

So do you want a government that takes “care” of you or a government that lets you take care of yourself!

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Remember When…

Which should be more inspiring:

“We look at one another’s success with pride, not resentment, because we know that as more Americans work hard, take risks, succeed, more people will prosper, more communities will benefit. And individual lives will be improved,” Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said today at the Romney campaign event announcing him as the VP.

“America, America is just more than a place, though. America is an idea. It’s the only country founded on an idea. Our rights come from nature and God, not from government. That’s right. That’s who we are, that’s how we built this country. That’s who we are. That’s what made us great. That’s what made us great. We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes,” Ryan said.

Or Class Warfare, envy , blame Bush/Rich and throwing grandma off a cliff? 🙂

Remember this From Poltifact: Lie of the Year 2011: ‘Republicans voted to end Medicare’

So what are the Democrats saying now because Ryan is the VP Choice.

The Lie of The Year!!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/

What else would you expect from people who have no morals or ethics and will say or do anything to maintain their power to run your life for you.

This debate is just getting (re) started, so here are a few key points to keep in mind as the “kill Medicare” falsehood gets spread far and wide:

(1) The Republican reform plan totally exempts anyone over the age of 55 from any changes.  When President Obama promised Americans “if you like your plan, you can keep it” to push Obamacare, he didn’t tell the truth.  The Ryan plan explicitly, in black and white, protects current and soon-to-be seniors.  No changes.

(2) The Democrats’ non-plan does the opposite.  It has already slashed more than half-a-trillion dollars (Update: $741 Billion, according to the latest CBO score) from Medicare to fund Obamacare, and it has established an unaccountable and extremely powerful bureaucratic board to ration care in order to keep costs down.  To repeat, current seniors have already seen their Medicare cut by President Obama, not Republicans.

(3) Medicare’s own accountants have calculated that Medicare will be insolvent within 12 years.  As Democrats claim that Romney and Ryan want to “kill Medicare” or “end Medicare as we know it,” they fail to mention that the calendar and basic arithmetic will do that in the face of inaction.  Doing nothing is President Obama’s plan because it tempts voters with the illusion that everything is going to be just fine, and that he’s protecting them from “draconian cuts.”  He hopes this charade will get him through the election cycle.  But reality is gaining on us.  Medicare “as we know it” will be obliterated for generations to come unless we start making changes for the future, while shielding people currently at or near retirement from any switch.  Between items two and three on this list, the truth is revealed: Democrats’ plans cut Medicare, and Democrats’ calculated inaction will result in its ultimate demise.  The Republican plan is an urgently necessary move to save the program.

(4) After his plan was criticized for being too partisan in the first “Path to Prosperity” budget, Paul Ryan adjusted his reforms in the FY 2013 version.  He updated his Medicare reform to embrace a bipartsian solution he co-crafted with progressive Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), which maintains the original “premium support” model, but includes traditional Medicare as an option for future seniors.  Again, the Medicare reform plan for future seniors is bipartisan, and co-authored by a committed liberal who understands that the clock is running out to save the program.  The updated version’s provisions are also means-tested, meaning they entail more federal assistance to poorer and sicker future seniors than richer and healthier ones.

(5) The Romney/Ryan plan does not impose “draconian and radical cuts.”  In fact, the Republican budget increases spending.  Every year.  It simply slows the rate of increase.  The most recent House-passed budget increases spending from $3.53 Trillion to $4.88 Trillion within the next ten years.  This does, however, spend trillions less than President Obama’s unanimously-defeated budgets envisioned.  In case you hadn’t noticed, we’re broke, and it’s getting worse.

Democrats are going to go all-in to ensure that these facts never see the light of day.  They will try to frighten current seniors and paint Romney and Ryan as heartless monsters.  The best response is to tell the truth, early and often — and to push back hard.  Why are Democrats actually cutting Medicare to pay for a new expensive entitlement program?  Why have they set up a rationing board for the elderly?  And what is their plan to avoid the 2024 Medicare expiration date, according to their own government numbers?  As we’ve learned, they don’t have answers to these questions. The president hopes he will evade these issues by constantly blaming and distorting.  Don’t let him get away with that abdication of leadership (Guy Benson)

Just minutes after the announcement of Ryan: Today, at 9:22 a.m., Obama campaign manager Jim Messina sent out an email blasting Mitt Romney’s vice presidential running mate, Wisconsin congressman and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan. “[Ryan’s] plan also would end Medicare as we know it by turning it into a voucher system, shifting thousands of dollars in health care costs to seniors,” Messina wrote.

TELL A LIE OFTEN ENOUGH AND IT BECOMES THE TRUTH.

Ryan justifies the delayed implementation of the plan because retirees or those near retirement have planned their lives around Medicare in its current form, and those under 55 will have more time to plan for some modest changes necessary to avert a fiscal crisis. Delayed implementation is also what makes Ryan’s plan politically viable. Voters 55 and over won’t be affected at all, so they really shouldn’t have anything to worry about. And the vast majority of voters under the age of 55 don’t believe big entitlement programs will even be around to pay them a benefit when they retire, as this Gallup poll on Social Security revealed: http://www.gallup.com/poll/141449/six-workers-hold-no-hope-receiving-social-security.aspx

But that won’t deter the Left from their campaign of Fear, loathing, disgust, and envy!

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Not “biased” “journalist Andrea Mitchell: “This is a base election. This is not a pick for suburban moms, this is not a pick for women.”

Obama campaign: Paul Ryan is the mastermind behind the extreme GOP budget plan. It’s a plan Mitt Romney endorses.

But what does that budget mean for America? The GOP budget plan hurts seniors, it hurts middle-class families, and it hurts students. All to pay for tax cuts for those at the top..

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan: back to the failed top-down policies that crashed our economy.

The very predictable hoary. And the “new way” has worked SO WELL. They just need more time… <<BARF BAG OVERLOAD IN PROGRESS!>>

The Mad Cow: Rachel Maddow: “Can I also just say can you imagine the uproar if two Democrats who had never served in the military and do not have family service, history of serving in the military, literally ran out of a battleship and onto the podium to declare the vice-presidential nomination in their party — if two Democrats, without military service records, as Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan don’t have service records, using this battleship and using this military setting, a setting essentially as a stage set for themselves as people who don’t have that background themselves.”

Rachel Maddow also called the backdrop “offensive.”

So if they aren’t supposed to be seen at something they’ve never experienced then doesn’t that mean Obama has no right to be using any business as a “backdrop” or am I just being “offended”? 🙂

And the dodging and lying continues: “We do not control third party ads,” Mr. Carney repeatedly said when asked if President Obama would condemn the Priorities USA ad.

TODD: The law says you can’’t condemn an ad?

CARNEY: Again, I think I’ve made my point, and I’m looking forward to the press conference for my counterpart where the

TODD: You stood on that podium and asked — You made this general request, you say to the Romney campaign: Mitt Romney ought to distance himself, whether it’s a Donald Trump thing, whether it was Mr. Ricketts. So you’ve actually made those same requests, so, if you believe that they either stand by it or don’t stand by it, how are you not held to the same standard?

CARNEY: I think the campaign, and this is entirely a campaign issue, has answered these questions, and I would refer you to them for more.

TODD: You’ve gone after the campaign…
CARNEY: Again, millions of dollars spent by the other campaign running ads across the country blatantly misrepresenting the President’s policy on an issue.

TODD: On that, you will speak for the campaign?

CARNEY: It’s not a policy, and I take issue, as someone who speaks for, defends, and explains the President’s policies, with that representation of it. What I’m not going to do is become a judge, an assessor, of every third-party ad that’s out there. Again, just the other day, there was an ad broadcast with real money. Paid for by some group out there, some conservative group, questioning the President’s citizenship.

REPORTER: On something else, Governor Romney said yesterday that he’d love to have a pledge or some kind of agreement on negative ads. On personal, negative attack ads. Would you, or the President, be open to something like that?

CARNEY: I would only point to, I saw some of his comments… It’s as if his campaign hadn’t been, as its principle effort right now, running an ad that has been judged across the board as false. By fact-checkers, by Republicans, by Bill Clinton, the author of welfare reform. I find it interesting that he would make that [statement]. But, in terms of campaign pledges, I would refer you to the campaign.

Don’t you just love the Don’t do as I do double standard. It comes from having no moral, ethics, or standards. In Alinsky terms it means I expect you to live up to YOUR standards but I don’t have to even address any I might have had because I don’t hold myself to even my own standards.

It’s all you, not me.

Enjoy!

NOVEMBER IS COMING