Cliff Diving

Whenever conservatives bring up the s-word in political discourse, indignant liberals recoil at the term.  How dare you call us Socialists?  Fine.  Let’s make a deal.  We’ll abide by a self-imposed cease and desist order on the socialism label just as soon as you guys explain this to the rest of us (see the final line item):

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Geithner suggested $1.6 trillion in tax increases, McConnell says, but showed “minimal or no interest” in spending cuts. When congressional leaders went to the White House three days after the election, Obama talked of possible curbs on the explosive growth of food stamps and Social Security disability payments. But since Geithner didn’t mention them, those reductions appear to be off the table now, McConnell says.

Obama is pushing to raise the tax rates on couples earning more than $250,000 and individuals earning more than $200,000. But those wouldn’t produce revenues anywhere near $1.6 trillion over a decade.

It’s a TRAP!

And Obama can promise anything he likes, but since he leads from behind and lets his minions do his dirty work they don’t have to follow through and it’s not his fault if they don’t. 🙂

And the media sure as hell won’t remember or care if he does. It is, after all, entirely the Republicans fault no matter what. 🙂

President Obama is insisting that any deal reached to avoid the fiscal cliff — a blend of across-the-board tax increases and massive federal spending cuts set to begin in January — should also include an increase in the nation’s debt ceiling, the amount the government can borrow to maintain its operations. The government is set to reach its current $16 trillion limit in a matter of months.

Spend NOW, talk about cuts later, much later, like 4 years from now when the debt is over $20 Trillion and that will be the Republicans fault (oh, and they raised taxes too!). The 2014-16 strategy is coming into place nicely.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who battled with Obama last year over raising the debt ceiling, said Republicans won’t agree to another hike without corresponding spending cuts at least equal to the increased borrowing authority. The White House called Boehner “deeply irresponsible” for insisting on deeper cuts in programs that will already be reduced by any deal on the fiscal cliff.

“Asking that a political price be paid in order for Congress to do its job to ensure that the United States of America pays its bills and does not default for the first time in its history is deeply irresponsible,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney.

Gee, I thought that price was tax increases and no real spending cuts? 🙂

But the strategy is working. The Ministry of Truth is out in force.

Neither side wants to be blamed for allowing tax increases and sweeping budget cuts to hit Americans still reeling from the recession in the New Year. A recent CNN poll shows 45 percent are ready to blame Republicans if a compromise isn’t reached; 34 percent would blame Obama.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

ObamaCare Update: Food Tax Increase (and not on just over $200,000)

New Obamacare regulations targeting the fast food and grocery store market that require signs detailing calorie and nutritional information on every product will force pizza makers like Domino’s to post up to 34 million different signs in every store: One for every possible pizza order.

“It’s not like a Big Mac. Pizza is customizable, there are options to factor in,” said Jenny Fouracre-Petko, legislative director for Domino’s and a member of the trade group American Pizza Community. “There are 34 million pizza combinations. We’ve done the math.”

Ditto for the grocery stores, which are shifting to providing more fresh made and baked goods, said Erik Lieberman, counsel for the Food Marketing Institute. “Consider just one fresh-baked blueberry muffin. If one is sold, you need a nutrition sign or sticker. If a half dozen are sold, a different one is required. Same if you sell a dozen.”

Lieberman predicted that the new regulations being finalized by the Food and Drug Administration for chains with 20 stores or more will cost the grocery industry $1 billion. He said stores average 1,500 fresh made items each.

Fouracre-Petko said that just posting generic nutrition signs in Domino’s will cost $4,700 per location, senseless, she said, because virtually all Domino’s customers order by phone and get their food delivered, so most will never seen them. She said that 10 percent of pizza customers enter a Domino’s store. “Coughing up almost $5,000 for something like this will hurt,” she said.

Lieberman said that consumers will get stuck with the bill. “It’s one more cost consumers are going to have to pay for,” he said. (examiner)

But at least you’ll have Health Care and will have “fairness” in class envy and stuck it to the rich!!!… 😉

But how many will lose their jobs over it?

Elections have consequences! (and these were not unintended). 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

The Game is a Foot

But with talks to avert the so-called fiscal cliff in full swing, Democrats are resisting proposals championed by Republicans to hit the rich on the spending side by curtailing their government health and pension benefits.
This is called compromise, something the modern Democrat is completely unfamiliar with and completely unwilling to do.
It is you who have to compromise NOT THEM.
As I have said many a time, compromise to a Democrat means you give them everything THEY want and you compromise and get a little to nothing of what you want.
Because if you don’t, then THEY blame YOU for it.
Look at the Budget. The US Senate has not passed a Budget since 2009. It’s nearly 4 flipping years later and they still aren’t interested.
And how’s fault is that? The Republicans!!
They keep “obstructing” them by passing a budget they don’t like and the idea of a Conference committee to work out a deal where everyone gets something but not everything they want is an alien concept to these Democrats.
Look at how they and the media are hammering the Republicans on “tax increases” for the rich, but bring up entitlement reform and they get indignant and stubborn.
They want what THEY want, when THEY want it, and you don’t matter other than to cave in and give them what they want when they want it because they want it!!
Like bratty 2 years with a Ministry of Truth to back them up.
Bob Corker (R) recently put forth a $4.5tn deficit reduction plan that included raising the cost of health coverage for retirees earning more than $50,000, saving about $50bn over a decade, and he is also proposing to make Social Security benefit distribution more progressive. “Especially when Democrats want wealthy citizens to pay more, this is a place hopefully where we would have common ground,” says Mr Corker.
But entitlements are how the Democrats both Bribe and Fearmonger their way into office so no one touches their golden egg!

“Progressives should be willing to talk about ways to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid,” said Dick Durbin, the second-highest ranking Democratic senator, in a speech at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think-tank, this week. “But those conversations should not be part of a plan to avert the fiscal cliff.”

Aka, we’re not going to talk about them at all. Not now. Not seriously at least. But when this latest “get the rich” scheme fails maybe we will go after their entitlements so we can get the money to spend on…you guessed it entitlements like ObamaCare. 🙂

Other Democrats say that some new spending cuts will have to be part of any deal. But they believe that reductions in entitlement programmes should only be considered once Republicans have made a big concession on taxes, which has not occurred yet. (FT)

It’s a game of Chicken. You blink first, then we’ll roast you. Then we won’t have any incentive to do anything later.
I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today” as Wimpy used to say in the Popeye comics.
And then never does.
So you give me Tax increases, and I give you…NOTHING but grief about it. It’s a matter of childish pride to Liberals to make the Republicans crack.
Then like the schoolyard bullies they are, they’ll laugh and mock you for it.
Then they’ll ignore you please, “but you promised…”
They’ll just laugh.
Just wait and see.

It can’t be stressed strongly enough: What President Obama is now up to seeks to destroy the Republican Party as it has existed since the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. (IBD)

Exactly. Why fight them when you can humiliate and destroy them and make them cow-tow to you.

A majority of Americans will never vote for the 21st century version of Tom Dewey “Dime Store Democrat” Republicans.

But the Democrats, who controlled Congress for 40 years straight from 1956-1996 who gladly and gleefully welcome them back.
A weaker, less adversarial, morally dubious, mish-mash of nothing is much easier to manipulate and get what you want when you want it because you want it.
Just like the American people.
Give your soul up the Government Devil and They will eat you alive.
And Obama, as usual is leading from Behind. He says he’ll do anything to get this done.“I’ll go anywhere and I’ll do whatever it takes to get this done,” President Barack Obama said as he sought to build pressure on Republicans to accept his terms — a swift renewal of expiring tax cuts for all but the highest income earners. “It’s too important for Washington to screw this up,” he declared.
He’ll do anything, except lead the charge himself. He has minions to do his bidding instead. The best Leadership is from Behind, you know.
Michael Ramirez Cartoon

ObamaCare Update

For the first time in Gallup trends since 2000, a majority of Americans say it is not the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage.

THEN WHY DID YOU MORONS VOTE FOR OBAMA!

Damn these people are stupid sheeple!!!

Of course it comes out that it’s less Republicans and less Independents really that are less interested. 71% of Democrats are still there.
But if a Majority of Americans say overall that it shouldn’t happen then voting for Obama was exactly the wrong way to express it, you morons!
But it’s too late now, you get to sleep in that bed now!!
There’s not taking it back or “just kidding”. You sold the country down the Progressive toilet. Now you get to swim with the poo!

What’s Fair?

DC: Wall Street Journal’s Stephen Moore: ‘Obama wants to make everyone equally poor’

Economics writer Stephen Moore says President Barack Obama’s obsession with fairness will make everyone poor.

“Fairness is a good principle but should not be put ahead of growth,” Moore said in an interview with The Daily Caller about his new book, “Who’s the Fairest of Them All?: The Truth about Opportunity, Taxes, and Wealth in America,” released Tuesday. “There’s nothing fair about making everyone poor.”

What’s wrong with fairness?

Fairness is a good principle but should not be put ahead of growth. There’s nothing fair about making everyone poor.

When the president talks about fairness, what does he mean? And what would the consequences of his conception of fairness be?

Obama wants to make everyone equally poor. You have to create wealth before you can redistribute it.

What do you say to those who say that America boomed in the 1950s when the top tax rate was 90 percent, so therefore raising taxes on the rich won’t inhibit strong growth?

In the 1950s we were the only game in town and overall taxes were much lower. Now we are in a competitive world where everyone is cutting tax rates except for us. This is a reason businesses outsource jobs.

This is not a “Leave it to Beaver” fantasy 1950’s anymore. And Obama is not Ward Cleaver and Michelle is not June Cleaver.

But there is an Eddie Haskell, Timothy “The Tax Cheat” Geithner. He’s out front on the “tax fairness”.
But don’t worry, Obama is already leading from behind on this one too and all I want to do is hide BEHIND the sofa from the terror that awaits… 🙂

Thomas Sowell: If everyone in America had read Stephen Moore’s new book, “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?”, Barack Obama would have lost the election in a landslide.

The point here is not to ask where Stephen Moore was when we needed him. A more apt question might be:

Where was the whole economics profession when we needed it?

Where were the media?

For that matter, where were the Republicans?

Since “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?” was published in October, there was little chance that it would affect this year’s election.

But this little gem of a book exposes, in plain language and with easily understood facts, the whole house of cards of assumptions, fallacies and falsehoods which constitute the liberal vision of the economy.

Yet that vision triumphed on election day, thanks to misinformation that was artfully presented and seldom challenged.

The title “Who’s The Fairest of Them All?” is an obvious response to liberals’ claim that their policies are aimed at creating “fairness” by, among other things, making sure that “the rich” pay their “fair share” of taxes.

If you want a brief but thorough education on that, just read Chapter 4, which by itself is well worth the price of the book.

A couple of graphs on Pages 104 and 108 are enough to annihilate the argument about “tax cuts for the rich.”

Hidden Money

These graphs show that, under both Republican President Calvin Coolidge and Democratic President John F. Kennedy, high-income people paid more tax revenues into the federal treasury after tax rates went down than they did before.

There is nothing mysterious about this. At high tax rates, vast sums of money disappear into tax shelters at home or is shipped overseas.

At lower tax rates, that money comes out of hiding and goes into the American economy, creating jobs, rising output and rising incomes.

Under these conditions, higher tax revenues can be collected by the government, even though tax rates are lower.

Indeed, high income people not only end up paying more taxes, but a higher share of all taxes, under these conditions.

This is not just a theory. It is what hard evidence shows happened under both Democratic and Republican administrations, from the days of Calvin Coolidge to John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

That hard evidence is presented in clear and unmistakable terms in “Who’s The Fairest of Us All?”

Another surprising fact brought out in this book is that the Democrats and Republicans both took positions during the Kennedy administration that were the direct opposite of the positions they take today.

As Stephen Moore points out, “the Republicans almost universally opposed and the Democrats almost universally favored” the cuts in tax rates that President Kennedy proposed.

Such Republican Senate stalwarts as Barry Goldwater and Bob Dole voted against reducing the top tax rate from 91% to 70%. Democratic Congressman Wilbur Mills led the charge for lower tax rates.

Fear Of Facts

Unlike the Republicans today, John F. Kennedy had an answer when critics tried to portray his tax cut proposal as just a “tax cut for the rich.”

President Kennedy argued that it was a tax cut for the economy, that changed incentives meant a faster growing economy and that “a rising tide lifts all boats.”

If Republicans today cannot seem to come up with their own answer when critics cry out “tax cuts for the rich,” maybe they can just go back and read John F. Kennedy’s answer.

A truly optimistic person might even hope that media pundits would go back and check out the facts before arguing as if the only way to reduce the deficit is to raise tax rates on “the rich.”

If they are afraid that they would be stigmatized as conservatives if they favored cuts in tax rates, they might take heart from the fact that not only John F. Kennedy, but even John Maynard Keynes as well, argued that cutting tax rates could increase tax revenues and thereby help reduce the deficit.

Because so few people bother to check the facts, Barack Obama can get away with statements about how “tax cuts for the rich” have “cost” the government money that now needs to be recouped.

Such statements not only promote class warfare, to Obama’s benefit on election day, they also distract attention from his own runaway spending behind unprecedented trillion-dollar deficits.

http://www.amazon.com/Whos-Fairest-Them-All-Opportunity/dp/1594036845

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The Lie that Keeps on Giving

Others can comment on the entirely of the Sunday New York Times story by Serge F. Kovaleski and Brooks Barnes (used in Monday’s print edition) about Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the maker of the infamous “Innocence of Muslims” YouTube trailer the authors characterize as a “film” a dozen times in their write-up. Nakoula has now been in jail for two months.

The write up begins:

There is a dispute about how important the video was in provoking the terrorist assault on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed the United States ambassador and three other Americans. Militants interviewed at the scene said they were unaware of the video until a protest in Cairo called it to their attention.The two sentences together don’t even makes sense unless one believes that “militants” (i.e., terrorists) decided within hours to prepare and orchestrate from scratch an assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya because they became aware of a video and protests supposedly related to it. Give me break.

Though it only reported the news directly one time, the Associated Press ran a story on October 10 (noted at the time by yours truly at NewsBusters and Daniel Halper at the Weekly Standard) relaying the following:

The State Department now says it never believed the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was a film protest gone awry

… The State Department’s extraordinary break with other administration offices came in a department briefing Tuesday, where officials said “others” in the executive branch concluded initially that the protest was based, like others in the Middle East, on a film that ridiculed the Prophet Muhammad.

That was never the department’s conclusion, a senior official told reporters.

Everyone else has subsequently backed off the idea that a “film protest” or any kind of “protest” had anything to with Benghazi. In the real world, there is no doubt that it was a long-planned, straight-out terrorist attack. Yet two guys at the New York Times want to pretend that there still is some kind of “dispute,” which only exists in their dissembling, confusion-sowing imaginations.

So Susan Rice Said it was a Film’s fault Repeatedly. But now if you bring that up you’re…you guessed it…a RACIST!

Obama said it was film, and apologized for it at the UN.

Hilary said it was film. Then weeks later through herself on the sword for Obama when it was clear it wasn’t.

Then It was the Intelligence communities fault. They blamed the CIA and the FBI.

But Petreaus’s scandal ruined that too.

So Al-Jazeera West, Better known as the New York Times, is back to pushing the Film months after everyone with a brain cell knows its so much bovine fecal matter.

Given the election results, that just might work. 🙂

Evidence for the Prosecution:

On Libya, 54% of the country is dissatisfied with the administration’s response to the Benghazi attack, with only four in ten saying they’re satisfied with the way the White House handled the matter.

“But that dissatisfaction is not because Americans see a cover-up,” said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Only 40% believe that the inaccurate statements that administration officials initially made about the Benghazi attack were an attempt to deliberately mislead the public. Fifty-four percent think those inaccurate statements reflected what the White House believed to be true at the time.”

Amerika, what a Country!

Walk and Talk Like an Egyptian

Update on Obama’s “Arab Spring” and how great at foreign policy he is. How many Egyptian will die this time around but he’ll avoid the issue completely because there is no political advantage any more.(from IBD):

Cairo’s streets are filled with demonstrations against Egypt’s president. It sounds awfully familiar, but since the grievances are against an Islamist this time around, don’t expect “the people” to enjoy U.S. support.

After Morsi’s announcement, the US State Department merely observed that Morsi’s moves “raise concerns for many Egyptians and for the international community”, hardly a resounding US denunciation.

A very tepid, ah who cares, so what, we’re so done with you…more like.

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, who came to power as leader of the “civilizational jihadist” Muslim Brotherhood, is besieged with protests from his people after giving himself Pharaoh-like powers that include a ban on challenges to his decrees and the weakening of Egypt’s judiciary.

Crowds torched Brotherhood offices in cities across the land of the pyramids, and they jammed Cairo’s Tahrir Square with shouts of “Out! Out!”

Gee, isn’t Morsi a man of the people, personifying the “new beginning” of President Obama’s 2009 Cairo University “apology to Muslims” speech? And didn’t Morsi, just a day before his power grab, become the Peacemaker of Palestine by joining with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in forging an Israeli-Hamas cease-fire?

How could Morsi be corrupt, and how could the people turn against their liberator? As the rock singer says, “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

Morsi has become just as tyrannical as his predecessor, Hosni Mubarak — except Mubarak was a staunch U.S. ally who maintained peace with Israelis and kept the Mideast powder keg stable for decades, while Morsi so reviles the Jewish homeland he won’t let the word “Israel” pass his lips.

The seriousness of Morsi’s coup, as many Egyptians are fearlessly calling it, is indicated by the posture of Mohamed ElBaradei, the longtime head of the U.N.’s atomic weapons oversight body and critic of the U.S., who on Friday called on Egyptians to “save the nation,” charging Morsi “blasted the concept of the state and the legitimacy and appointed himself ruler by divine decree.”

The left-leaning Nobel Peace Prize winner also declared: “The revolution is aborted until further notice.”

Just don’t expect White House press secretary Jay Carney to announce that the Egyptian people’s “grievances have reached a boiling point, and they have to be addressed,” as his predecessor Robert Gibbs did when Mubarak was on the ropes.

And don’t hold your breath for Clinton — or whoever her successor is at the State Department — to call for “an orderly, peaceful transition to real democracy, not faux democracy” in which “the people just keep staying in power and become less and less responsive,” as she said two years ago during street demos against Mubarak.

It took 24 hours for Morsi to take advantage of the prestige Obama and his secretary of state handed him. Now he’s using America’s stamp of approval to oppress his own people.

Some “new beginning.”

We swept a vicious dictator who at least listened to us for a new one that won’t. Now that’s Progress!!

And I bet the Ministry of Truth will avoid it like the plague and Jay Carney will dodge faster than “Fast and Furious” or “Benghazi”.

Morsi says it’s “temporary”. Yeah, right. I want to be a dictator , but only temporarily! And I have bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you. Or better yet another Obama “Arab Spring” The Sequel that will never happen.
Mustapha Kamel Al Sayyid, a political science professor at the American University in Cairo.“I think that the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood is planning a big demonstration … on Tuesday suggests that they are not inclined to accept a compromise,” he says. “I think they are planning to send a message that they have more support in the country than the secularists, and they will not change their position.”…

Just Like the Democrats (except it’s the reverse, Democrats are the Secularists and everyone else is “clinging to their guns and religion”)… 🙂

As evidenced by the Gun Store owner in Pinetop, AZ who had the anti-Obama sign up in his window (as mentioned in a previous blog):

Mr. Reynolds, owner of Southwest Shooting Authority says “business is booming” after his sign and newspaper ad caught the attention of various media outlets. The sign read: “If you voted for Barack Obama, your business is not welcome at Southwest Shooting Authority. You have proven you’re not responsible enough to own a firearm.”

Reynolds says he has been inundated with hundreds of calls and emails from media types and supporters. When asked about business, he replied, “I’ve been busier than a cat covering up poop on a marble floor.” (KFYI)

Obamacare Update:

Menu-Labeling that is meant to prevent obesity by making people read how evil their non-vegetarian, non-vegan food is.

And what about the research showing menu labeling helps reduce obesity rates and increase overall health? FMI’s Erik Lieberman writes:

“It has been estimated by industry that the costs of extending menu labeling to supermarkets will exceed $1 billion in the first year of compliance alone, and hundreds of million of dollars annually thereafter. Meanwhile, the evidence that menu labeling has any significant impact on public health is scant. Indeed, of the studies FDA cites in the rule, most demonstrate that menu labeling has little to no effect on purchasing habits. Furthermore, no study shows any link to reduction of obesity rates, the purported benefit which FDA used to justify the menu labeling regulation.”

Amerika, What a Country.

 

Give The People What They Want Chapter II

A Psalm of Obama
(To be sung by children, K-12, every morning of their seven-day school week.)*

The State is my shepherd,

I shall not want.

It makes me lie down in federally owned pastures.

It leads me beside quiet waters in banned fishing areas.

It restores my soul through its control.

It guides me in the path of dependency for its namesake.

Even though our nation plunges into the valley of the shadow of debt,

I will fear no evil,

For Barack will be with me.

The Affordable Care Act and food stamps,

They comfort me.

You prepare a table of Michelle Obama approved foods before me in the presence of my Conservative and Libertarian enemies.

You anoint my head with hemp oil;

My government regulated 16-ounce cup overflows.

Surely mediocrity and an entitlement mentality will follow me

All the days of my life,

And I will dwell in a low-rent HUD home forever and ever.

Amen.

*Special Note: For union workers teaching their subjects this psalm in government schools, it is to be regarded as a psalm of exquisite beauty. The main subject is the watchful care that the Government extends over its dependents and the consequent faux assurance that you must make them feel that the State will supply all their needs. The leading thought—the essential idea—is to get gullible Americans to fully believe that Big Government will provide for them and that they will never be left to want. Make certain the dumb bastards get that message, okay? (Doug Giles)

BRAVO! BRAVO BRAVO!

And speaking of entitlements…

Riding a wave of confidence after his re-election victory, President Obama is eager to collect scalps from the class war he appears to have won. Americans, Obama said in his postelection news conference earlier this month, “want to make sure that middle-class folks aren’t bearing the entire burden and sacrifice when it comes to some of these big challenges. They expect that folks at the top are doing their fair share as well.” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., echoed this point in a fundraising pitch sent out on Monday: “Voters sent a clear message to Republicans in the election: we must stand up for the middle class and ensure the wealthy pay their fair share.”

Although Obama and his fellow Democrats repeatedly call on wealthier Americans to pay their “fair share,” they never specify what percentage of the nation’s tax burden the wealthy would have to bear. As matters stand, the top 1 percent of American households paid 39 percent of income taxes in 2009, according to the most recent data compiled by the Congressional Budget Office, and the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid 64 percent.

But income taxes, taken in isolation, do not tell the whole story, because lower-income Americans do pay payroll taxes. But even taking into account all forms of taxation, the top 1 percent still paid 22 percent of federal taxes while earning just 13.4 percent of household income. The top 5 percent paid 40 percent of all federal taxes, despite earning only 26 percent of all income. No matter how you slice the numbers, it’s hard to understand why anyone would think the wealthy aren’t already shouldering a burden commensurate with their blessings.

In the next few weeks, Obama will keep repeating this “fair share” language as part of his call to raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 per year. He also wants to close additional loopholes and limit deductions to increase their tax burden further. But bear this in mind: On top of whatever new taxes go into effect in the deal to avert the so-called fiscal cliff, there will be additional new taxes due to Obama’s national health care law. These include a 0.9 percent Medicare tax hike for individuals earning more than $200,000 per year and couples earning more than $250,000 as well as a 3.8 percent surtax on investment income.

Moreover, even if Obama gets his way on all of his tax hikes on the wealthy, it still won’t make a dent in the $16.3 trillion national debt. Later in his term, once he has blown all of the new revenue with spending increases and goes back to this well for still more revenues, will the media let Obama get away with claiming the wealthy aren’t paying their “fair share” once again, without specifying what constitutes fairness? (WE)

Unequivocally, Yes, they will. They are drinking from the same poisoned well.

They are The Ministry of Truth. They cannot commit heresy upon their God.

For they are with God, The Almighty, and none shall pass unless they are of The Body (yes, that’s a Star Trek Reference) and you will be Assimilated (another one) or you will be EXTERMINATED! (Doctor Who) Figurative, for now.

It’s what they voted for, after all.

Big Brother is Watching You. 🙂

 

Give The People What They Want

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

After his party’s devastating setback in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama was reelected earlier this month by painting his Republican opponents as heartless in favoring lower taxes for the rich. They were portrayed as nativists for opposing the DREAM Act amnesty for illegal immigrants, and as callous in battling the federal takeover of health care.

Republicans countered with arguments that higher taxes on the employer class hurt the economy in general. They assumed most voters knew that amnesties are euphemisms for undermining federal law and in the past have had the effect of promoting more illegal immigration. They tried to point out that there is no such thing as free universal health care, since Obamacare will only shift responsibility from health-care practitioners and patients to inefficient government bureaucracies and hide the true costs with higher taxes.

And they utterly failed to convince the American people of any of that.

Why doesn’t the Republican-controlled House of Representatives give both voters and President Obama what they wished for?

The current battle over the budget hinges on whether to return to the Clinton-era income-tax rates, at least for those who make more than $250,000 a year. Allowing federal income rates to climb to near 40 percent on that cohort would bring in only about $80 billion in revenue a year — a drop in the bucket when set against the $1.3 trillion annual deficit that grew almost entirely from out-of-control spending since 2009.

Instead, why not agree to hike federal-income-tax rates only on the true “millionaires and billionaires,” “fat cats,” and “corporate jet owners” whom Obama has so constantly demonized? In other words, skip over the tire-store owner or dentist, and tax those, for example, who make $1 million or more in annual income. Eight out of the ten wealthiest counties in the United States voted for Obama. Corporate lawyers and the affluent in Hollywood and on Wall Street should all not mind “paying their fair share.”

Upping federal tax rates to well over 40 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year would also offer a compromise: shielding most of the small businesspeople Republicans wish to protect while allowing Obama to tax the 1-percenters whom he believes have so far escaped paying what they owe, and then putting responsibility on the president to keep his part of the bargain in making needed cuts in spending.

Likewise, instead of hiking death taxes on small businesspeople, why not close loopholes for billion-dollar estates by taxing their gargantuan bequests to pet foundations that avoid estate taxes? Why should a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates act as if he built his own business and can solely determine how his fat-cat fortune is spent for the next century — meanwhile robbing the government of billions of dollars in lost estate taxes along with any federal say in how such fortunes are put to public use?

The president flipped in an election year on the DREAM Act. Suddenly, in 2012, Obama decided that he indeed did have the executive power to order amnesty without congressional approval for those who came illegally as children, stayed in school or joined the military, avoided arrest and thus deserved citizenship. In response, Republicans supposedly lost Latino support by insisting that federal immigration law be enforced across the board, regardless of race, class, gender, or national origin.

But why not make the president’s DREAM Act part of the envisioned grand bargain on immigration? Once it is agreed upon that we have the ability to distinguish those foreign nationals deserving of amnesty, then surely we also have the ability to determine who does not meet those agreed-upon criteria.

Why, then, cannot conservatives allow a pathway to citizenship for the play-by-the-rules millions who qualify, while regrettably enforcing an un-DREAM Act for others who just recently arrived illegally; enrolled in, and have remained on, public assistance; or have been convicted of a crime? Who could object to that fair compromise?

Finally, Obamacare will be imposed on all Americans by 2014. But so far the Obama administration has granted more than 1,200 exemptions to favored corporations and unions, covering about 4 million Americans. Shouldn’t Republicans seek to end all exemptions rather than tackle the improbable task of overturning Obamacare itself? Their motto should be: “Equality for all; special treatment for no one!”

One of the brilliant themes of the 2012 Obama campaign was forcing Republicans, on principle, to systematically oppose most of the things that the administration wanted them to oppose — thereby shielding itself from the unwelcome consequences of its own ideology while winning political points. Now, in defeat, Republicans should agree to let the chips lie where they fall: Tax only the truly rich; reward only the truly deserving illegal immigrants; and exempt no one from Obamacare.

Nothing could be fairer or more equal than that. (Victor Davis Hanson)

So when it all goes to hell, at least you can say, “we gave you everything you wanted” and look what happened.

Fascinating…

 

Black Friday

Happy 49th Birthday!!!

Doctor Who Logo 2010 Onwards

More ObamaCare Love:

Pennsylvania’s Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is slashing the hours of 400 adjunct instructors, support staff, and part-time instructors to dodge paying for Obamacare.

“It’s kind of a double whammy for us because we are facing a legal requirement [under the new law] to get health care and if the college is reducing our hours, we don’t have the money to pay for it,” said adjunct biology professor Adam Davis.

On Tuesday, CCAC employees were notified that Obamacare defines full-time employees as those working 30 hours or more per week and that on Dec. 31 temporary part-time employees will be cut back to 25 hours. The move will save an estimated $6 million.  

“While it is of course the college’s preference to provide coverage to these positions, there simply are not funds available to do so,” said CCAC spokesperson David Hoovler. “Several years of cuts or largely flat funding from our government supporters have led to significant cost reductions by CCAC, leaving little room to trim the college’s budget further.”

The solution, says United Steelworkers representative Jeff Cech, is that adjunct professors should unionize in an attempt to thwart schools seeking similar cost-savings efforts from avoiding Obamacare.  

“They may be complying with the letter of the law, but the letter of law and the spirit of the law are two different things,” said Mr. Cech. “If they are doing it at CCAC, it can’t be long before they do it other places.”

Nah, you think? 🙂

So you can see where Obama and Unions are going with their next fear campaign can’t  you. 🙂 Of course, THEY are the one who created this Frankenstein and now they want to make you fearful of it’s actions that THEY created. Devious isn’t it? 🙂

Under the new CCAC policy, adjunct professors will only be allowed to teach 10 credit hours a semester. Adjuncts are paid $730 per credit hour. 

“We all know we are expendable,” said Mr. Davis, “and there are plenty of people out there in this economy who would be willing to have our jobs.” (Breitbart)

Elections have consequences.

Even Pardoning a Turkey is Political with the Left.

“They say that life is all about second chances and this November I can’t agree more,” Obama said.
“So in the spirit of the season I have one more gift to give.”
“The American people have spoken, and these birds are moving forward.”

That’s a real knee slapper Mr. President. The one you pardoned last year got euthanized in it’s place. There some kind of cosmic joke there but it’s not funny.

******

The Great Union Walkout against EVIL Walmart:

There was an employee walkout at a Walmart Supercenter in St. Cloud, Fla., on Wednesday morning, but even if you were shopping there when it happened you probably would have missed it.

The walkout included just one worker — Vanessa Ferreira, age 59. Ferreira informed her manager publicly Wednesday morning that she was going on strike. The other employees watched her walk out of the store, then went back to doing their jobs.

Within a half hour, Ferreira would be told by police outside that she was trespassing and ordered to leave. She’s worked in the store’s cake department for eight years, and she earns $11.90 an hour, she said. (HP)

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

Jonah Goldberg: If the GOP wants to win more black votes, it will need to get a lot more “racist.”

The scare quotes are necessary because I don’t think the Republican Party is racist now (and, historically, the GOP has a lot less to answer for than the Democratic Party does).

But that hasn’t stopped a lot of people from slandering Republicans as racist for one reason or another.

Right now, many in Washington — particularly the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus — insist that Republican attacks on U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice are racist and, yawn, sexist. The basis for this claim is that some Republicans are calling Rice unfit for the soon-to-be-vacated job of secretary of state. More specifically, they’re cross with Rice for what they contend to be her dishonest and incompetent handling of the Benghazi scandal.

And, because Rice is a black woman, well, blah, blah, blah Racism! Sexism!

Never mind that Republicans haven’t had a white secretary of state since Lawrence Eagleburger concluded his term two decades ago. Never mind that Republicans appointed the first black secretary of state ever (Colin Powell) and the first black female secretary of state ever (Condoleezza Rice, arguably the star of the GOP convention in August).

Also, never mind that Rice’s handling of Benghazi — and several other matters — can quite defensibly be dubbed incompetent.

But that doesn’t stop Democrats or liberal pundits from crying racism.

Just consider some recent examples from over the summer. When Mitt Romney visited Michigan, he joked about not needing a birth certificate to prove he was from there. Not very funny? OK, sure. Poor taste? Eh, maybe, I guess. “The basest and the most despicable bigotry we might be able to imagine”? Errr, no. And yet that’s what one respected “expert” on race, Michael Eric Dyson, called it on MSNBC. Rather than show some skepticism at the claim, MSNBC host Alex Wagner agreed that Romney was “scraping the very bottom of this sort of racist other-ist narrative.”

At the GOP convention, MSNBC host Chris Matthews explained that “Chicago” was a racially loaded code word. Fellow host Lawrence O’Donnell said Republican convention speakers were reaching “for every single possible racial double entendre they can find.” His sole proof? Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made a joke about Obama playing a lot of golf.

Now, the cynical motivations behind this relentless drone of slander and stupidity are too numerous to count. Such moral bullying makes white liberals feel better about themselves. It scares moderates and centrists away from the Republican Party, and it no doubt helps dissuade wavering blacks from even thinking about giving the GOP an honest look. Obviously, it helps boost black voter intensity on Election Day. It also does wonders to stifle journalists terrified of having their racial bona fides questioned in any way. And it helps a feckless left-wing black political class explain away their own failures. Racial slander is like duct tape: There’s no limit to what you can do with it.

It’s worth pointing out that such slander isn’t used to get blacks to vote Democratic in the first place. They already do that.

But can you imagine how much worse it will get if Republicans actually do reach out to black community (as they should)?

One of the points of racial slander is to signal that only liberal policies are guaranteed to be non-racist (even when such policies were forged with racist intent, like the Davis-Bacon Act). This is why the Congressional Black Caucus insists on calling itself the “conscience of the Congress.”

That’s why policies like school choice are routinely denounced as racist, even though they are largely aimed at improving the lives of inner-city blacks trapped in bad schools. Teachers unions don’t like school choice, ergo it’s racist.

Any serious attempt by the GOP to win black votes won’t involve Republicans copycatting liberal policies. It will require going over the heads of the black and white liberal slanderers to offer a sincere alternative to failed liberal policies on schools, poverty, crime, etc. The more effective that effort, the more the GOP will be called racist.

When Romney, whose father marched with Martin Luther King Jr., spoke to the NAACP, Michael Tomasky of the Daily Beast dubbed him a “race-mongering pyromaniac,” primarily for using the term “Obamacare” — a term Barack Obama used himself.

Just imagine the desperate, pathetic attacks in store for a more effective Republican.

If that day ever comes again…

Speaking of Benghazi…

Ambassador Rice finally broke her silence on the subject on Wednesday, and defended her remarks by insisting that they were based on the best information she had at the time provided to her by the intelligence community. Via Reuters:

“I relied solely and squarely on the information provided to me by the intelligence community,” said Rice…

“I made clear that the information provided to me was preliminary and that our investigations would give us the definitive answers,” Rice told reporters at the United Nations in her first comments on the controversy. …

“Everyone, particularly the intelligence community, has worked in good faith, to provide the best assessment based on the information available,” Rice said. “None of us will rest … until we have the answer and the terrorists responsible for this attack will be brought to the justice.” …

Rice said some statements about her by McCain were “unfounded.” “I look forward to having the opportunity at the appropriate time to discuss all of this with him,” she said.

She relied “solely and squarely” on info from the intelligence community? That seems a bit odd, considering that the intelligence community suspected terrorism from the very beginning, which means that something doesn’t fit here — and the most obvious possibility for that missing link is that somebody high up in the food chain tweaked the talking points on a very inconvenient situation with only weeks to go before a close presidential election, although the White House has denied having done so.

Anyhow, there may well be bigger things to focus on than Susan Rice’s personal involvement, i.e. who it was that made the call to have her talk up that stupid “video” thing, why security in Benghazi was so poor, etcetera, but as for McCain and others’ criticisms and objection to her potential appointment to secretary of State being “unfounded”? …I don’t know about that. Rice was an active participant in what we still have reason to suspect was a coverup, and to quote Douglas Adams, “If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.” (Hot air) 

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Turkey Day

I am still thankful I am alive. I have friends and family. I have a job, a roof over my head and food on the table.

I am thankful that, for now at least, I am still free.

I am Thankful for the simple things.

Especially, the ones Liberals have not taken yet.

Economist Paul Krugman wants America to return to the more “moral” tax policies of the 1950s when it “made the rich pay their fair share.” But JFK would take issue with his morals.

In a recent New York Times column, Krugman pines for the days when “the top bracket faced a marginal tax rate of 91, that’s right 91%.”

He calls taking 90 cents of every additional dollar an individual earns at that level “economic justice.”

President Kennedy called it stupid.

He and his economic advisers argued it was stifling business investment. So they slashed the top rate to 70%, ignoring the left’s class warfare arguments.

They understood that a rising tide lifts all boats. Sure enough, Kennedy’s tax cuts spurred economic activity, which in turn created new jobs, expanded the tax base and almost wiped out a $7 billion federal budget deficit.

The results were so impressive, they planned to chop the top rate even lower.

“Because tax revenue would continue to rise with an expanding economy, they argued that it would be possible and even necessary for the government again and again to cut tax rates,” said New York University economist Richard Sylla, co-author of “The Evolution of the American Economy.”

Unfortunately, President Johnson reversed course, hiking rates to fund his disastrous War on Poverty. It would take President Reagan to pick up where Kennedy left off.

Krugman argues today’s lower rate of 35% has somehow created an idle class with “armies of servants and yachts.”

“Today,” he protests, “any hint of policies that might crimp plutocrats’ style is met with cries of ‘socialism.'”

As a matter of fact, that’s what we used to call penalizing success in this country.

In 1960, Barry Goldwater kicked hard against the socialist assumption that government has an unlimited claim on the wealth of the people, and that the only relevant question was what share of its claim politicians should exercise.

“A man’s earnings are his property as much as his land and the house in which he lives,” the Arizona senator argued.

Goldwater asserted it was “immoral” to deny man this basic economic freedom.

“How can he be free if the fruits of his labor are not his to dispose of, but are treated instead as part of a common pool of public wealth?” he demanded in “The Conscience of a Conservative.” “Property and freedom are inseparable: To the extent government takes the one in the form of taxes, it intrudes on the other.”

Are you listening, Bill Kristol?

Goldwater believed the only “fair share” is one flat rate for every taxpayer, working class or wealthy, and no more.

“The idea that a man who makes $100,000 a year should be forced to contribute 90% of his income to the cost of government while the man who makes $10,000 is made to pay 20% is repugnant to my notions of justice,” he said. “I do not believe in punishing success.”

Did you hear that, Gov. Jindal?

Goldwater said the real aim of hyperprogressive taxation is “to redistribute the nation’s wealth.”

Such “an objective does violence both to the charter of the republic and the laws of nature,” he said. “We are all equal in the eyes of God but we are equal in no other respect. Artificial devices for enforcing equality among unequal men must be rejected if we would restore that charter and honor those laws.”

Are you listening, Speaker Boehner?

There is nothing “patriotic” about paying more in taxes just to finance President Obama’s new entitlements. If he gets a 39.6% rate, he’ll just as soon take 91%.

And he and his redistributionists won’t stop with “millionaires and billionaires.” Or those making $250,000.

Once they’re sufficiently soaked, they’ll come after the middle class until we’re all stagnating in the same “swampland of collectivism,” as Goldwater so presciently warned. (IBD)

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Le Pew, It Stinks In Here…

Well, several generations of Socialist thinking and indoctrination in schools and by The Ministry of Truth has lead to this moment…

2011: The reason: based on a Pew survey of America’s youth, or those aged 18-29, more have a positive view response toward Socialism than they do toward Capitalism. We will leave it at that.

Socialism: 49% Positive / 43% Negative:

 

And Capitalism: 46% Positive / 47% Negative:

And keep in mind this is from 2010.

“Socialism” Not So Negative, “Capitalism” Not So Positive

A Political Rhetoric Test

May 4, 2010

“Socialism” is a negative for most Americans, but certainly not all Americans. “Capitalism” is regarded positively by a majority of public, though it is a thin majority. Among certain segments of the public — notably, young people and Democrats — both “isms” are rated about equally. And while most Americans have a negative reaction to the word “militia,” the term is viewed more positively by Republican men than most other groups.

These are among the findings of a national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press that tests reactions to words and phrases frequently used in current political discourse. Overall, 29% say they have a positive reaction to the word “socialism,” while 59% react negatively. The public’s impressions of “capitalism,” though far more positive, are somewhat mixed. Slightly more than half (52%) react positively to the word “capitalism,” compared with 37% who say they have a negative reaction.

A large majority of Republicans (77%) react negatively to “socialism,” while 62% have a positive reaction to “capitalism.” Democrats’ impressions are more divided: In fact, about as many Democrats react positively to “socialism” (44%) as to “capitalism” (47%).

Reaction to “capitalism” is lukewarm among many demographic groups. Fewer than half of young people, women, people with lower incomes and those with less education react positively to “capitalism.”

The survey, conducted April 21-26 among 1,546 adults, measured reactions to nine political words and phrases. The most positive reactions are to “family values” (89% positive) and “civil rights” (87%). About three-quarters see “states’ rights” (77%) and “civil liberties” (76%) positively, while 68% have a positive reaction to the word “progressive.”

Reactions to the word “libertarian” are evenly divided — 38% positive, 37% negative. On balance, Republicans view “libertarian” negatively, Democrats are divided, while independents have a positive impression of the term. “Militia” elicits the most negative reaction of the nine terms tested: Just 21% have a positive reaction compared with 65% who have a negative response.

Partisan Divide over “Socialism”

The most striking partisan differences come in reactions to the word “socialism.” Just 15% of Republicans react positively to “socialism” while 77% react negatively. By more than two-to-one (64% to 26%), independents also have a negative impression of “socialism.” However, Democrats are evenly divided — 44% have a positive reaction to “socialism” while 43% react negatively.

“Capitalism” elicits a less partisan reaction. About six-in-ten Republicans (62%) react positively to “capitalism,” compared with 29% who have a negative reaction. About half of independents (52%) have a positive impression while 39% react negatively. Among Democrats, 47% react positively to “capitalism” while nearly as many (43%) react negatively.

There is a substantial partisan divide in views of the word “progressive.” However, majorities of Democrats (81%), independents (64%) and Republicans (56%) have a positive reaction to “progressive.”

More than four-in-ten independents (44%) react positively to the word “libertarian,” while 32% have a negative reaction. Democrats are nearly evenly divided (39% positive, 37% negative). However, Republicans on balance have a negative impression of this term (44% negative, 31% positive).

Majorities of Democrats (70%), independents (66%) and Republicans (59%) react negatively to the word “militia.” Nearly twice as many Republicans (27%) as Democrats (15%) have a positive view of this term.

Young People Lukewarm Toward “Capitalism”

Young people are more positive about “socialism” — and more negative about “capitalism” — than are older Americans. Among those younger than age 30, identical percentages react positively to “socialism” and “capitalism” (43% each), while about half react negatively to each. Among older age groups, majorities view “socialism” negatively and “capitalism” positively.

People ages 65 and older have a particularly negative reaction to “socialism” — 73% have a negative impression of the term compared with just 14% who are positive. But those 65 and older are no more likely than those ages 30 to 64 to have a positive reaction to “capitalism” (56% vs. 55%).

More than twice as many blacks as whites react positively to “socialism” (53% vs. 24%). Yet there are no racial differences in views of “capitalism” — 50% of African Americans and 53% of whites have a positive reaction.

Those with a high school education or less are evenly divided over “capitalism” (44% positive vs. 42% negative). Among those with some college experience, 49% react positively to “capitalism” as do 68% of college graduates. Those with a high school education or less are more likely to express a positive view of “socialism” than do those with more education.

People with family incomes of $75,000 or more are the only income group in which a clear majority (66%) reacts positively to the word “capitalism.” Views of “socialism” also are much more negative among those in this income category (71% negative) and among those with incomes of $30,000 to $75,000 (64% negative) than among those with incomes of less than $30,000 (46% negative).

Conservative Republicans stand out for their overwhelmingly negative reactions to “socialism” (84% negative) and highly positive reactions to “capitalism” (67% positive). No more than about half in other political groups, including moderate and liberal Republicans (51%), have a positive impression of “capitalism.”

Perhaps surprisingly, opinions about the terms “socialism” and “capitalism” are not correlated with each other. Most of those who have a positive reaction to “socialism” also have a positive reaction to “capitalism”; in fact, views of “capitalism” are about the same among those who react positively to “socialism” as they are among those who react negatively (52% and 56%, respectively, view “capitalism” positively). Conversely, views of “socialism” are just as negative among those who have a positive reaction to “capitalism” (64% negative) as those who react negatively (61% negative).

There are some differences in the relationship between these terms by demographic groups, although the association is not particularly strong among any group. For instance, among college graduates, 71% of those with a positive reaction to “capitalism” have a negative reaction to “socialism.” By contrast, among college graduates who have a negative view of “capitalism” a smaller proportion have a negative view of “socialism” (51%).

Gender Differences in Views of “Militia”

While the word “militia” is viewed negatively, there are gender and partisan differences in reactions to this term. Overall, twice as many men (28%) as women (14%) say they have a positive reaction to the word “militia.” In addition, more Republicans (27%) than independents (20%) or Democrats (15%) have positive impressions.

Republican men have a more positive impression of “militia” (36% positive) than do Democratic men (19%). Moreover, GOP men have a more positive reaction than do Republican women (18% positive).

A sizeable gender gap is also seen in independents’  reactions to “militia.” Among independents, 28% of men have a positive reaction to “militia,” compared with just 10% of women. The gender differences are more modest among Democrats (19% positive among men vs. 12% among women).

What do you think are some of the reasons for the “socialization of America’s youth”?

Here are some of my guesses:

-constant bombardment of anti capitalistic messages from the Main Stream Media & public schools;

-growing up with government programs like social security, pell grants & unemployment insurance;

-growing up In a cashless/credit card (debt based) society where they don’t see the value of things in tangible exchanges;

-child labor laws and regulations that prevent kids from working and running lemonade stands in their formative years and the futility of even trying to work your way through an expensive debt financed 4 year college program;

-growing up with out the threat or recent memory of the harm done to the world by the German Socialst party, the NAZIs and Communist Russia;

-a lack of understanding of history and economics;

-the financial crisis of 2008 ad the anti capitalist responses (Michael Moore’s “capitalism a love story”, occupy wall street
movement) and the massive government response;

-Federal Reserve quantitative easing, stimulus and bailouts that supposedly “saved us”; and

-president obamas frequent socialist remarks-“spread the wealth around”, “free markets don’t work,never have”, “you didn’t build that” “millionaires and billionaires need to pay their ‘fair share'”

Your thoughts? (Daily Paul)

Then there’s this more recently:

Similarly, voters do not have a particularly rosy outlook on national politics going forward. Fully 66% say that relations between Republicans and Democrats will either stay about the same (52%) or get worse (14%) over the next year. And while 56% of voters think Obama will be successful in his coming term, that is down from the 67% who thought his first term would be successful at this point four years ago.

While broad majorities of all voters want Barack Obama (72%) and the Republican leadership (67%) to work with the other side to get things done over the coming year, each party’s political base sends mixed signals. Only about half (46%) of Republicans want GOP leaders to work with Obama to get things done, while about as many (50%) say they should stand up to Obama, even if less gets done. The message to Obama from Democrats is only somewhat more conciliatory: 54% want the president to try to work with Republicans, but 42% do not.

 Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

The Frog and The Scorpion

Quote of the Day:

Obama in Burma- “As President, I cannot just impose my will on Congress — the Congress of the United States — even though sometimes I wish I could,” he stated. “The legislative branch has its own powers and its own prerogatives, and so they check my power and balance my power.”

Yes, Herr Obama, I’m sure you do. 🙂

“We have to double down in 2014. We’ve got to make sure we recruit more women for office, because It’s not just a slogan that when women run, women win. They do, and when women run, Democrats win,” Wasserman-Schultz said.

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said the Republican Party “got whiter and more male” while the Democratic caucus is “majority minority and female.” (CNS)

So do you think the Democrats are going to seed any “minority” ground to Republicans who are fearful they are too white to win?

F*UCK NO! And anyone who thinks so is an idiot. They have their strategy and it works for them so they are going to ramp up the fear, hatred, division, and envy even more! More of a “good thing” in their eyes.

So you thought the hatred, fear and envy was bad in 2012, just wait….

Speaking of hate and fear, How about the coverage of Israel under attack by Hamas?

Heard anything about Israeli’s being killed by hundreds of rockets a day? Or Hamas using women and children as human shields?

UPI: Israeli air raids have pounded Gaza for a sixth successive day, raising to 96 the number of Palestinians killed.

Nothing about the 200+ rockets a day launched AT Israel BY Hamas.

Not relevant to the Ministry of Truth.

When Seal Team Six killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, no one described it as an “assassination.” Why not? Because Osama wasn’t a civilian political leader; he was a terrorist combatant who had declared war on America, and tried to continue his attacks in any way possible.

Why, then, have the New York Times and other media outlets referred to Israel’s killing of Ahmed Jabaari in Gaza as “an assassination?” He was the military commander of a terrorist organization, Hamas, which remains at war with Israel, and takes pride in aiming deadly rockets at Israeli civilian targets every day. There’s a big difference between assassination–the targeting of civilian leaders for political purposes–and striking armed combatants in self defense in the midst of an ongoing war. (Michael Medved)

Because that doesn’t fit the Meme.

A new CNN poll shows only 40 percent of Democrats support Israel’s response to Hamas launching repeatedly rockets into their country.

“Although most Americans think the Israeli actions are justified, there are key segments of the public who don’t necessarily feel that way,” said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Only four in ten Democrats think the Israeli actions in Gaza are justified, compared to 74% of Republicans and 59% of independents. Support for Israel’s military action is 13 points higher among men than among women, and 15 points higher among older Americans than among younger Americans.”

Is anybody really surprised? After all, this is the party that booed Israel and God at this year’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. (Katie Pavlich)

My question is, Why are so many Jews hardcore Democrats?

It makes no sense logically. But then again, Democrats almost never make any sense logically. Ideologically, emotionally, yes. Logically, no.

But it is very curious.

In the film “Groundhog Day,” Bill Murray wakes up each morning and relives the previous day.

A similar scenario is playing out in the Middle East between Israel and her enemies. The deadly “movie” always goes like this: Israel is shelled or attacked by terrorists groups, often called “militants” by the media, each one with the same goal: Israel’s elimination. After demonstrating considerable restraint of the kind that would never be tolerated by any other nation, Israel fires back.

Suddenly, the world awakens from its indifference. World leaders, who said little when Israeli civilians were wounded and killed, now urge “restraint” by “both sides,” as if a moral equivalency exists between victim and predator.

In the run-up to confrontation, it has been reported that Hamas placed weaponry among civilians, hoping that when Israeli airstrikes started they could show photos of dead children, bringing condemnation on Israel. What’s more, according to Breitbart.com, “Hamas has a well-established pattern of faking civilian deaths in Gaza, even as it seeks civilian deaths in Israel.” American and foreign TV networks — particularly CNN and BBC — are then brought in to channel the Palestinian line, portraying Israel as the aggressor. (Cal Thomas)

The way in which the New York Times reports good vs. evil is one of the most important stories of our time.

Take the war between Israel and Hamas that is taking place right now.

This war is as morally clear as wars get. Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to annihilating the Jewish state. It runs a theocratic totalitarian state in Gaza, with no individual liberty and no freedom of speech or press. In a nutshell, Hamas is a violent, fascist organization.

Israel, meanwhile, is one the world’s most humane states, not to mention a democracy that is so tolerant that Arab members of its parliament are free to express admiration for Hamas.

Over the past decade, Hamas had launched thousands of rockets into Israel with one aim: to kill and maim as many Israeli citizens as possible — Israelis at work, at play, asleep in their homes, in their cars. Finally, Israel responded by killing Ahmed al-Jabari, the chief organizer of Hamas violence, the Hamas “military commander” as he was known among Palestinians.

The next day, three more Israelis were killed by rockets.

Then Hamas targeted Tel Aviv, Israel’s most densely populated region, and Israel shelled Hamas rocket launching sites.

In other words, an evil entity made war on a peaceful, decent entity, and the latter responded.

How has the New York Times reported this?

On Friday, on its front page, the Times featured two three-column wide photos. The top one was of Gaza Muslim mourners alongside the dead body of al-Jabari. The photo below was of Israeli Jews mourning alongside the dead body of Mira Scharf, a 27-year-old mother of three.

What possible reason could there be for the New York Times to give identical space to these two pictures? One of the dead, after all, was a murderer, and the other was one of his victims.

The most plausible reason is that the Times wanted to depict through pictures a sort of moral equivalence: Look, sophisticated Times readers, virtually identical scenes of death and mourning on both sides of the conflict. How tragic.

If one had no idea what had triggered this war, one would read and see the Times coverage and conclude that two sides killing each other were both equally at fault.

This is the mainstream (i.e., liberal) media’s approach. The Los Angeles Times headline on the same day was: “Israel and Gaza veering down familiar, bitter path,”

Same presentation: two scorpions fighting in a bottle.

I would add the tale of the Frog and the Scorpion:

The Scorpion and the Frog is a fable about a scorpion asking a frog to carry him across a river. The frog is afraid of being stung during the trip, but the scorpion argues that if it stung the frog, the frog would sink and the scorpion would drown. The frog agrees and begins carrying the scorpion, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is its nature.

(Sounds like the Republicans (Frog) and Democrats (Scorpion) doesn’t it?)

Hamas and Israel. And which is which depends on your Meme. 🙂

Examples are endless. Here is one more:

In 2002, there was widespread Nigerian Muslim opposition to the Miss World pageant scheduled to take place that year in Nigeria. Defending the pageant, a Nigerian female reporter wrote a column in which she said that not only were the contestants not “whores,” as alleged by the Muslim protestors, but they were such fine women that “Muhammad would probably have taken one of the contestants for a wife.”

That one sentence led to Muslim rioting, the beating and killing of Christians, the burning of churches and the razing of her newspaper’s offices.

How did the New York Times report the events?

“Fiery Zealotry Leaves Nigeria in Ashes Again.”

No group is identified as responsible. “Fiery zealotry,” not Muslim violence, was responsible.

The article then begins: “The beauty queens are gone now, chased from Nigeria by the chaos in Kaduna.”

Again, Muslim rioters weren’t responsible for chasing the beauty queens out of Nigeria; it was “chaos.”

The article concludes that what happened in Kaduna was another example of Africa’s “difficulty in reconciling people who worship separately.” In other words, Christians and Muslims were equally guilty.

As the flagship news source of the left, the New York Times reveals the great moral failing inherent to leftism — its combination of moral relativism and the division of the world between strong and weak, Western and non-Western, and rich and poor, rather than between good and evil. (Dennis Prager)

Bernard Lewis, the renowned scholar and expert on the history of Islam, was recently aboard a Post-Election Cruise sponsored by National Review magazine, as was I.

Lewis noted that the Cold War featured “mutual assured destruction” (MAD), which served as a deterrent for both the United States and the Soviet Union from using their nuclear weapons against each other. Lewis said for Islamic nations like Iran (which sponsors Hamas in Gaza), “MAD is not a deterrent, but an inducement.” That’s because, he said, the Iranian regime believes in the apocalyptic end of days in which the 12th Imam — the Islamic “messiah” — will emerge in the midst of a nuclear war with Israel and “save” humanity with Islam the surviving religion. (Cal Thomas)

In God They Trust. In The Ministry we should not.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Government is Your Friend

Ask not what you can do for your country, but what your new country can do for you.

Welcome to USA.gov,” a website maintained by the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), bills itself as the “primary gateway for new immigrants to find basic information on how to settle in the United States” — featuring a prominent section for new immigrants about how to access government benefits.

“Depending on your immigration status, length of time in the United States, and income, you may be eligible for some federal benefit programs,” the Web page reads.

“Government assistance programs can be critically important to the well-being of some immigrants and their families. Frequently, however, there is a lack of information about how to access such benefits. Benefit programs can be complicated and you may be given misleading information about how they operate.”

The DHS page offers links to government websites that explain how to access benefits including food stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, Medicare, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the “official website with information on all available federal benefit programs,” with a nonworking link to Benefits.gov.

WelcometoUSA.gov also boasts to immigrants that “[f]ree public education for children is one reason many immigrants come to the United States.”

Though the website appears to advertise benefits, new immigrants are not necessarily eligible for the benefits displayed on the website; enrollment in SSI and TANF may also serve as impediments to future immigration status adjustments.

“One of the important points about the legal problems with the DHS site and materials is not only the issue of immigrant eligibility, but the fact that U.S. immigration officials are obviously granting visas to those they believe will and should be receiving government assistance,” the staffer wrote in an email to TheDC. “Immigration law is supposed to operate so that individuals at risk for being placed on public assistance are not admitted in the first place.

According to a recent analysis of census data by the Center for Immigration Studies, 36 percent of immigrant heads of households, both legal and illegal, used at least one form of welfare in 2010, compared to 23 percent of native born heads of household.

The heads of household from Mexico, Guatemala and the Dominican Republic constituted the highest users of welfare 57 percent, 55 percent and 54 percent, respectively. The heads of households with the lowest participation were from Canada at 13 percent, Germany at 10 percent, and the United Kingdom at 6 percent.

And Democrats want to grant Amnesty to the Illegal ones so they can vote legally for them too! 🙂

Townhall: (Some time in the not-too-distant future at a public university near you).

Good morning, everyone. My name is Dean Crawler and I would like to welcome everyone to new staff training here in the Dean of Student’s Office at the University of Neo-Communism in Wonderland, or UNCW. I wish to welcome all returning Deans, Associate Deans, Assistant Deans, and Adjunct Deans as well. They say it takes a village to raise a child. One could say that it takes a fiefdom to raise a generation. Of course, we prefer to avoid references to Western civilization here at UNCW. We are soaring to greatness. And that means leaving past traditions behind. Even an Adjunct Dean of Diversity knows that. No offense or disrespect intended.

Our training today will focus on four new programs that will help us gain control over student dissidents in an effort to assure the smooth operation of the university. Diversity and tolerance are very complex concepts. And sometimes rigid conformity is needed to ensure their full realization. I would appreciate it if everyone would give her, his, its, or undecided’s full attention while I explain these new programs:

1. No administrator left behind. We have decided to add a few new positions to help with our ever increasing workload. We will add a new Dean of Noise Complaints this semester. As you know, students often have parties off campus that result in noise complaints. We have partnered with local police to set up a system whereby all noise complaints received by police are channeled into the university administrative structure. When police answer a noise complaint off campus, we soon find out. Then we will call the student into the Dean’s Office and interrogate him, her, it, or undecided concerning the alleged violation. Each violation will be recorded by the Dean’s Office and will be placed in the student’s permanent record. If the student complains loudly in response to interrogation, the Dean of Noise Complaints will then file a separate noise complaint with the UNCW police. This will result in the student being brought back in for further interrogation by the Dean of Noise Complaints.

2. Two strikes and you’re out. All infractions will require recidivism before students can be expelled from UNCW. However, our previous policy of allowing three strikes has been modified. Now, only two strikes will be needed for expulsion. For example, an off campus noise complaint resulting in interrogation to which a student noisily complains will be sufficient for expulsion. Students will forfeit all tuition and fees paid for the duration of the semester, regardless of whether expulsion occurs before or after the official drop date for regular courses.

3. The Universal Administrative Trial Program. To date, we have employed a two-tier system for dealing with student non-conformity issues. Criminal hearings have been used as a means of dealing with criminal conduct. Administrative hearings have been used for dealing with non-criminal violations. In the latter type of hearing, students have been stripped of all needlessly cumbersome due process rights. In our collective view, the system has proved to be unworkable. Therefore, we have decided that all hearings will be classified as administrative in nature. All rights will be suspended except for cases involving sexual assault and sexual harassment. In such cases, students bringing charges will be granted a right to counsel and a right to full appellate review. Student plaintiffs will be able to appeal adverse rulings. The accused will receive no corresponding benefit. All attempts on behalf of the accused to either a) retain counsel or b) appeal an adverse ruling will be subject to the noise complaint policy. The Dean of Noise Complaints will preside over all such hearings.

4. Our New Government Respect Compact. Our Student Respect Compact was originally designed to preserve the rights of students to work in an environment free from the following: incivility, discomfort, disrespect, unwarranted intellectual challenge, and unwanted solicitation of ideas and opinions.

The policy has been modified to include the protection of administrators from all of the same invasions. For example, student complaints concerning “administrative waste” and control over “private” or “non-academic matters” are often distressing to the administration. The complaints are rarely solicited and often result in administrative discomfort. We now consider them to be uniformly disrespectful and uncivil. Any conflict between Our New Government Respect Compact and state “whistleblower” laws or the “constitution” will be resolved in the favor of Our New Government Respect Compact. Any resistance will be referred to the Dean of Noise Complaints and subject to the aforementioned policies.

The Obama administration has done a lot to move us forward. The Obama Department of Education told us that we must reduce the burden of proof in sexual assault cases to a mere preponderance of evidence. They told us we would receive no federal funds if we did not conform. We based all of our other sexual assault and sexual harassment policies on the model in place at Stanford University. We call them our Cardinal rules of sexual conformity. That great institution believes that the new Obama policies were a mere starting point – a minimum list of expectations. We agree with that philosophy.

When it comes to implementing policies that ensure administrative victory over student dissidents, we want to do more than just the minimum required by Washington. We want to stay one step ahead of the federal authorities. Not everything we do may be “constitutional” as they say. But our constitution is a living, breathing document. We are confident that the federal judiciary will share and affirm our grander vision by the time any disagreements reach that level. You all are a part of that grand vision. For those of you who are new, I welcome you into our community. For those returning, I welcome you back. And I welcome you all to move with us. Forward.

In closing, I would remind you that extremism in the defense of conformity is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of civility is no virtue.

But if Hamas launches rocket at Israeli civilians and Israel retaliates that’s Israel’s fault!
If Hamas uses human shields to launch their rockets at Israeli civilians it’s Israel’s fault for taking them out.
And The press is happy promote this view.
Just like they are happy to promote civility and bi-partisanship, but know they are lying.
Dependency is not only encouraged it is becoming mandatory.
Welcome to Obama-Orwell’s America.

Caring is Sharing…

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

President Barack Obama’s re-election has stiffened Democrats’ spine against cutting popular benefit programs such as Medicare and Social Security. Their new resolve could become as big a hurdle to a deal that would skirt crippling tax increases and spending cuts in January as Republicans’ resistance to raising tax rates on the wealthy.

Just last year, Obama and top Democrats were willing during budget negotiations with Republicans to take politically risky steps such as reducing the annual inflation adjustment to Social Security and raising the eligibility age for Medicare.

Now, with new leverage from Obama’s big election victory and a playing field for negotiations that is more favorable in other ways, too, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrats are taking a harder line.

“I’ve made it very clear. I’ve told anyone that will listen, including everyone in the White House, including the president, that I am not going to be part of having Social Security as part of these talks relating to this deficit,” Reid, D-Nev., told reporters. (townhall)

Translation: “Compromise” is even less likely than it was previously. And “bi-partisan” is still “BY-Partisan” and the Republican will just have to roll over, kiss our collectivist asses and take the blame for it all.

And that’s “compromise” 2012/3.

Now conditions favor Obama.

He decisively won re-election and Republicans seem fearful of being tagged with the blame if an impasse results in the government going over the fiscal cliff. Obama and Democrats already are portraying Republicans as hostage-takers willing let tax rates rise on everyone if the lower Bush-era tax rates are not also extended for the top 2 percent to 3 percent of earners — those with incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for joint filers.

The new balance of power means that Democrats who once would have acquiesced reluctantly to GOP demands for stiff benefit cuts are now balking at ideas such as chained CPI or an increase in the Medicare retirement age, as well as demanding GOP concessions to higher taxes.

“The price for that kind of thing has gone up,” said a senior House Democrat who required anonymity to speak frankly on party strategy. “Negotiations depend on the situation. No one should expect to get the same kind of deal.”

My way or the Highway. Now that’s “bi-partisan” “compromise”. 🙂

Obama II: In the “now they tell us” file, add a vast array of reports that have come out since the election showing just how weak the economy really is. Looks like the president will need a new scapegoat soon.

Here’s just a sampling of what we’ve learned since voters decided to give Obama four more years to “experiment” with the economy.

Earnings falling: The Labor Dept. reported on Thursday that real average hourly earnings dropped again in October for the third month in a row, and are now down 2% from when Obama took office.

Poverty rising: A new Census Bureau report, also released after the election, finds that the number of poor people in America climbed 712,000 in 2011. The “official” report that came out in September had the number dropping by 96,000. So much for Obama’s claim that things are getting better.

Food-stamp enrollment skyrocketing: Another government report conveniently timed after the election found that food stamp enrollment exploded by more than 420,000 in August. The number of people getting food stamps has climbed more than 15 million — or 47% — under Obama. That’s a bigger increase than in all of President Bush’s eight years. Today, almost 15% of the population is collecting food stamps, up from 7% just a decade ago.

Jobless claims jumping: The number of new jobless claims shot up to 439,000 last week, up 78,000 from the week before, due largely, it’s said, to Hurricane Sandy. But the two states with the biggest increases in jobless claims the week before that were Pennsylvania and Ohio, thanks to layoffs in the construction, manufacturing and auto industries.

Inflation creeping up: We also learned that the annual inflation rate climbed to 2.2% in October, according to the BLS, which is the third consecutive monthly increase.

Coal plants closing: A report by the liberal Union of Concerned Scientists, released (naturally) a week after the election, finds that as many as 353 coal-fired plants will close as a result of Obama’s environmental rules.

Small banks disappearing: Fortune reported three days after the election that the “overwhelming conclusion” of industry analysts and consultants was that Dodd-Frank would cause thousands of small banks to disappear. As a side note, one month before the election a Fortune “fact check” (by the same reporter, no less) blasted Romney for saying during one of the presidential debates that Dodd-Frank was “killing regional and small banks.”

Meanwhile, stocks are down about 5% since Election Day as the mainstream press tries to blame it on anything but Obama’s re-election. The latest culprit is supposed to be fears about the fiscal cliff. But even if that were true, it shows how little confidence investors have in Obama’s ability to avoid taking the country over it.

Obama keeps saying that his top priority for his second term is jobs and growth, but the only thing he’s pushed since his re-election is a massive tax hike on the so-called rich.

That’s despite the fact that Obama knows these tax hikes will hurt economic growth. He admitted as much in 2010, when he extended the Bush tax rates, citing the harm a tax hike would cause a weak economy. And now, thanks to an Ernst & Young study, we know that Obama’s tax hikes will kill 710,000 jobs.

Obama got re-elected largely by blaming Bush for everything bad that happened during his first term. So who’s he going to blame now? (IBD)

Well, he’ll just see more government dependent voters for his parties future. After all, isn’t that a good thing? 🙂

And who says he can’t continue to blame “the old ways” (aka Bush)??
If the people are so stupid as to buy it why would he not sell it??

Union intransigence and unrealistic expectations at Hostess Brands have forced the bakery to shut its doors permanently and throw 18,500 people out of work. So much for Big Labor caring about the little guy.

A down economy and two restructurings in three years left Hostess, maker of Twinkies and Sno Balls, in dire fiscal straits. The company warned its workers, union and nonunion, to make concessions or everyone would go down in a liquidation.

Instead, one union, the AFL-CIO-affiliated Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International (BCTGM), imagined the company was bluffing and went on strike.

The decision contrasted with the majority of the workers who didn’t delude themselves. The Teamsters, hardly pushovers, issued this statement:

“Teamster Hostess members and all Hostess employees should know this is not an empty threat or a negotiating tactic, but the certain outcome if members of the BCTGM continue to strike. This is based on conversations with our financial experts, who, because the Teamsters were involved in the legal process, had access to financial information about the company.”

That didn’t matter to the striking union, whose 5,000 members pull in as much as $22 an hour plus medical benefits, get nine weeks of paid leave and a company pension. It ignored the warning and Nov. 15 deadline and now will take 100% losses on salaries and benefits instead of the 8% requested by management. Some union brotherhood — the bakers’ action took their fellow workers down with them.

Yet the sense of unreality was palpable among the bakers and the union leaders who represent them. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka declared that Hostess’ problems were caused by “Bain-style Wall Street vultures” making “themselves rich by making America poor.” It’s a nice analysis while the barn is burning, but the reality is workers losing their jobs and living on blame is even poorer sustenance than living on Twinkies.

When are unions going to start caring about real jobs and real workers? (IBD)
Just like Obama “cares” about the middle class…As government/Union Serfs that’s how.

Photobucket

An Arizona gun store has a simple message for Barack Obama voters: you’re not welcome here.

The Southwest Shooting Authority in Pinetop, Ariz. posted a sign on its door and took out a newspaper ad declaring that if you voted for the president last week, you’re not allowed in.

“If you voted for Obama, please turn around and leave! You have proven that you are not responsible enough to own a firearm!” the sign states.

Owner Cope Reynolds conceded that he can’t really tell who voted for Obama unless they “own up to it” — but if they do, they’re out.

“If they don’t say anything, we’ll never know,” Reynolds said in an email to the Phoenix New Times. “However, if they own up to it, we will not serve them.”

He said in an explanation on AmmoLand that he did it to “demonstrate once again that the bottom line for our business is principle, not money. Yes, it has been damaging at times but our values are intact.”

How long before he becomes a “racist” and “discriminatory” and The ACLU, Al Sharpton, Mary Rose “Buttocks”  is called in?

Hmmm….

Let’s find out shall we…. 🙂

The Twinkie Clue Game

Thomas Purcell: As the fictional Senator Smith once said ‘Well, you all think I’m licked. Well I’m not licked.  I’m going to stay right here and fight for this lost cause, even if this room gets filled with lies like these! When the Taylors and all their armies come marching into this place, somebody’ll listen to me”

That’s right, the conservatives need to hunker down and look themselves in the mirror and start bringing up candidates that can properly defend the American ideal of a smaller government, free markets and a strong defense. They need to bring that argument to the American people again and again and pound it home, and realize that you’ll never do it with candidates like Mitt Romney; you do it with candidates like Ronald Reagan. The American ideal of conservatism can’t be sold and packaged out of a corporate boardroom with slick ads and jingles; it has to explain in simple terms and by giving Americans reasonable explanations and facts.
It’s not about moving to the right or the left, it’s about truth. It means we need to reach out to minorities and not say ‘you are wrong’, it means you say ‘here’s why we are right’. It’s about fighting the good fight with people who believe in the cause of minimal government, not wealthy industrialists who see to increase profits at the expense of ideology.
The Republican Party needs to change; it needs to find itself and the roots of what they believe in. It needs to get off the mantra of appealing to special interests, from the religious right to the boardroom babies. You won’t find that ideology or those persons in the Rockefeller Republicans, it’s got to come from the Goldwater and Reagan crowd. It comes from unifying the party factions from the Federal Bank Paulites to the pro-marijuana Libertarians to the hawkish maverick McCain’s.
Getting back to the roots of conservatism means it hat to start at the bottom, like the liberals did. You have to run for the school boards and local councils before you run for President. Real societal change comes from these places—you can’t hope to win a Republican Presidency if the man in the street has been taught to hate what he stands for. The liberals did not sell their bill of goods with Obama with one election, it was 25 years in the making.
I will fight as I know how best to—with my heart and mind and conviction, on one simple fact and basic message of conservatism: That government that governs least governs best, and that all power eventually corrupts those that wield it.
I’m not going anywhere; I’m going to get louder. I’m going to fight leftism in the schools, the radio, and the papers. I’ll fight them on the beaches, in the mountains and in the halls of state houses. I’ll fight them with blood, bone and sinew. I’ll fight them until the last breath; the last ounce of strength escapes me, until government silences me by smothering me with the pillow of Obamacare. You want to roll over and just die, be my guest. Not me, I’m not quitting. I refuse to accept that people want to live in a leftist police state; not when I know they merely have been fooled into thinking that government is the fountain of all that is good.
I plan to be the iron bar of conservatism, till death do my part, and only until the rest of this strange and wonderful country starts thinking that way, will things ever change for the better.
Smith had it right-  “And in this world today, full of hatred, a man who knows that one rule has a great trust… you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any others. Yes, you even die for them”
So go ahead and make your deals Mr. Boehner. The left can continue to spread its vile lies that government knows best. 
I’m not going anywhere. Neither is conservatism. Eventually, somebody’ll listen. Hopefully it won’t be too late by then.
But I doubt it.
Why?
Simple. Listen to what Richard “I’m not a Psycho” Trumpka of the AFL-CIO had to say about the liquidation of Hostess Brands on Friday…
“What’s happening with Hostess Brands is a microcosm of what’s wrong with America, as Bain-style Wall Street vultures make themselves rich by making America poor,” Trumka said in a public statement. “Crony capitalism and consistently poor management drove Hostess into the ground, but its workers are paying the price.”

He’s either completely dishonest, disillusion or insanely partisan to the point of Orwellian deceit.
And thats the Left for you.
After all, how many Crony capitalist failures in “green” energy have they had? Or Union Bailouts? and no one cares about them at all??
And that’s the din we have to shout against.
I don’t think the Republicans have the balls for it.

Last week, thousands of Hostess union member employees went on strike because of cut wages and benefits, The Associated Press reported Friday.

Hostess has said the company was unprofitable, in part due to union workers’ demands. (The workers who went on strike were members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union.)

Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh fired back at Trumka on his radio program Friday.

“[Obama] gets to blame Romney, Bain Capital and the Republicans for the fact that the company’s failed. And at the same time he gets to blame capitalism, crony capitalism. That’s Trumka’s word here. Crony capitalism, Bain-style, Wall Street vultures,” Limbaugh said, according to a show transcript. “See, you and I, we sit here, we hear that, we say nobody is gonna believe that, until we stop and realize that over half the country already thinks it.”

Limbaugh said that Trumka was rehashing the same old attacks that unions and the left have used against Romney, fitting a story line most of the public is already familiar with.

“Trumka didn’t have to even tell his voters, they already know. He was just confirming it for ‘em. Al-Qaeda’s alive, Twinkies are dead,” Limbaugh said.

The kicker?

“But Osama was killed by Obama, and Hostess was killed by the Republicans,” Limbaugh said. (Politico)

So if the Republicans roll over and kiss Liberal ass they will weaken themselves and if they stay strong, EVERYTHING that the left does to destroy this country will be their fault. (and if they weaken themselves EVERYTHING will still be their fault but they’re will evidence to point to just like the Debt Ceiling Cave-in.)
And ONLY the Republicans will be “partisan” and “divisive” and “obstructionist”.
That’s why this election was the end of America.
Simple as that.
It was a Twinkie in Texas with a Ministry of Truth sledgehammer…
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

In Consequential

Elections have Consequences:

President Obama’s election victory ensured his Affordable Care Act would remain the centerpiece of his first term in power – but that has left some business owners baulking at the extra cost Obamacare will bring.

Florida based restaurant boss John Metz, who runs approximately 40 Denny’s and owns the Hurricane Grill & Wings franchise has decided to offset that by adding a five percent surcharge to customers’ bills and will reduce his employees’ hours.

With Obamacare due to be fully implemented in January 2014, Metz has justified his move by claiming it is ‘the only alternative. I’ve got to pass on the cost to the customer.

The fast-food business owner is set to hold meetings at his restaurants in December where he will tell employees, ‘that because of Obamacare, we are going to be cutting front-of-the-house employees to under 30 hours, effective immediately.’

Obamacare requires businesses or franchises with more than 50 workers must offer an approved insurance plan or pay a penalty of $2,000 for each full-time worker over 30 workers.

The program mandates that only employees working more than 30 hours a week are covered under their employers health insurance plan, chains like Olive Garden and Red Lobster are already considering reduced worker hours. (KFYI)

President Obama and the heads of several labor unions and prominent liberal groups met at the White House on Tuesday at an event that was more pep rally than negotiating session.

“The president has been very clear for quite a while now on the tax cuts on the wealthiest 2 percent — that they need to be eliminated,” said Dennis Van Roekel, the head of the National Education Association (NEA). “Of course, there was no disagreement in that room.”

At the meeting itself and in conversations afterward, activists were keen to stress agreement with the president on the tax issue. 

“It was a great meeting. The president was really standing firm on taxes. Everyone talked about how much they have the president’s back in this fight,” Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress, said afterward.

Attendees said Obama was “very clear” on where he stood on taxes. “He’s not just clear, he didn’t just draw a line in the sand, he spray-painted it,” one participant said.

This is Obama’s “new ideas” and his seeking “compromise” with the Republicans on this issue, by the way. 🙂

Obama told the participants that the “campaign isn’t over,” and asked for their help.

Don’t that just give you the warm fuzzies? 🙂

Hostess Brands CEO warned the company will liquidate unless striking workers returned to the job by the end of the day on Thursday. Now, that four o’clock Central Time deadline has come and gone.

“We simply do not have the financial resources to survive an ongoing national strike,” Gregory Rayburn said in a statement on Wednesday.

Hostess has not made any official announcement beyond the CEO’s statement. Any update on liquidation would come on Friday.

Eyewitness News has learned insurance, health and welfare benefits for striking workers have been cancelled.

Workers are protesting a contract imposed by a bankruptcy court. The contract calls for an 8 percent pay cut in addition to health care and pension changes. The bakers union has called the contract “outrageous.”

A liquidation would result in some 18,000 workers losing their jobs and an uncertain future for American icons Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Wonder Bread.

Win the Strike, Lose your Jobs. Good Going guys!

I guess they’ll have to go on the public dole instead of the union dole and apply for some Obama Money and an Obama Phone.

We’ll see.

Perhaps what all these petulant employees don’t realize is that companies are in business to earn a profit.  If they can’t, there is nothing with which to pay employees (or hire more of them).  So while it may be emotionally satisfying to “stick it to the man” through strikes and protests, perhaps the disgruntled should take a look around, realize that the economy isn’t too great, and keep in mind that they may end up doing serious damage to companies they are counting on to help them feed their families.

Sure, if the companies go out of business, the unemployed will get government benefits.. . for awhile.  But after awhile, if too many businesses go under, who exactly is supposed to provide the tax revenues that subsidize those benefits? (townhall)

Why, THE RICH of course!!

Oh right, the employers are the rich, whoops! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Re-runs,Pimps,and Rice Puppets

Overall, the ranks of America’s poor edged up last year to a high of 49.7 million, based on the new census measure.

So let’s vote for Barack “Santa Claus” Obama who’ll take from the rich and give to the poor. Oh, wait, that’s Robin Hood…

But really, he just wants to take from the rich to give to his rich and make the poor dependent on him so that they will vote for his cronies because it’s in their narcissistic drug addicted interest.

Not Robin Hood. Just a common Pimp.

And it ignores reality. But then again, if you’re an ignorant narcissist who cares about reality. What’s in it for me?

Now for the re-run. Heard this all before? Answer: Yes

“As I’ve said before, I’m open to compromise (bwah hahahahahahahaha) and I’m open to new ideas  (bwah hahahahahahahaha). And I’ve been encouraged over the past week to hear Republican after Republican agree  (with me) for the need for more revenue from the wealthiest Americans as part of our arithmetic if we’re going to be serious about reducing the deficit because when it comes to taxes, there are two pathways available. (yeah, cutting spending to my $$ drug addled moronic masses would be a bad idea).

Option one (aka the only one), if Congress fails to act by the end of this year, everybody’s taxes will automatically go up, including the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $250,000 a year and the 97 percent of small businesses who earn less than $250,000 a year. That doesn’t make sense. Our economy can’t afford that right now. Certainly no middle-class family can afford that right now. (NYT)

And it will be the Republicans fault. Oh, and it’s still Bush’s fault for the spending.

Heard it all before? Yep, for the last 4 years. And what happened. He got bored and did what the hell he wanted to and blamed the Republicans for “obstructing” him.

Why would now be any different?  I wouldn’t.

And now Obama is floating having Benghazi Liar face puppet Susan Rice as Secretary of State.

Now that’s a screw you move.

She famously lied her ass off on Different Sunday Talk Shows about Benghazi 5 days after they already knew the actual truth. So she’s either incompetent ,out of touch with reality, or such a complete Toddie that she a virtual puppet.

None of which makes her qualified for the job in reality. But perfect for Obama.

But it’s not like Obama cares. It’s his crony. She deflected the blame away from him long enough for the ignorant masses, too busy watching “Dancing with the Stars” , to re-elect him that he has to give her her reward.

Obama:“I don’t think there’s any debate in this country that when you have four Americans killed, that’s a problem, and we’ve got to get to the bottom of it and there needs to be accountability (Just not from him and his toddies who lied their asses off). We’ve got to bring those who carried it out to justice. They won’t get any debate from me on that,” Obama said sternly.

“But when they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me.”

“But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous.”

By the time she was on those shows she and the administration knew with absolute certainty that everything she said on those show was complete and absolute bullshit!

Yeah, the whole WE were lying up our asses and doing the bullshit shuffle doesn’t matter. But you pick on my crony and there will be hell to pay!

That reflects badly on ME. And as we all know it is all about HIM!

“My judgment at this time is that four Americans were killed, and the information that our U.N. ambassador conveyed was clearly false,” McCain, R-Ariz., the top GOP senator on the Armed Services Committee, told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference. “There was overwhelming evidence that it was completely false. And she should have known what the situation and circumstances were and not tell the world on all Sunday morning talk shows.”

But that was part of  array of flack that was deployed to obscure Benghazi until Obama got re-elected.

Now they have the Petraeus to distract the ignorant masses with something they see on Reality TV.

Oh, and Israel and Iran and Syria are about to go to war…Enjoy.

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

Orwell Lives

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Well, the election proved that one. Check.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY (to government dependency).

Well, the election proved that one too. Check.

(CLASS) WAR IS PEACE

Well, you’re a racist otherwise. Eat the Rich! 🙂 Check.

And my own FEAR IS HOPE

And boy was there a lot of Fear. Check.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Tell me that’s not the Media we have, I dare you! 🙂

Check.

So the Circle is Now complete. He was but the student (Obama) now he is the Master.

A Master of Evil.

“I Am the Master and YOU WILL OBEY ME!” 🙂

Welcome to Orwell’s…Obama’s New Amerika.

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

If President Obama wants to get a deficit deal done to avoid the fiscal cliff, his biggest challenge won’t be Republicans, but his own hard-core left-wing supporters.

Two days after the election, Obama’s favorite economist, Paul Krugman, set the tone for the intransigent left in a column titled: “Let’s not make a deal.” Boiled down, his advice to Obama was this: Don’t give in to any Republican demands, even if doing so would “inflict damage on a still-shaky economy.” After all, Obama would be better positioned to “weather any blowback from economic troubles.”

The Ministry of Truth can just blame it on the Republicans anyhow (“obstructionists”). And the debt is George Bush’s Fault anyhow! 🙂

Krugman’s advice may be disturbingly cold and calculating, but he has plenty of company on the left.

Robert Kuttner, co-founder of the liberal American Prospect magazine, suggests Obama should just sit it out, let all the Bush tax cuts expire, the automatic spending cuts kick in and expect public pressure to force Republicans to give in entirely.

And they will likely cave in like a wet noodle anyhow. The Debt Ceiling Debate which set this up is the precedent.

That and millions of nasty campaign-style ads paid for by The Democrats and happily run with commentary from the Ministry of Truth.

The left-wing Daily Kos called any kind of “grand bargain” between Obama and the GOP a “Great Betrayal.”

And several Democratic lawmakers have suggested that the correct approach would be to let the country go over the fiscal cliff, since that will only strengthen Obama’s position. “It’s a hand Democrats are looking forward to playing,” according to the liberal Huffington Post “news” site.

And Republicans are supposed to be the ones who refuse to compromise?

What has liberals freaked out is the fact that any deal with Republicans will likely include cuts to their cherished entitlement programs.

Obama had reportedly agreed to make some modest changes to these programs when he and House Speaker John Boehner were working on their “grand bargain” last summer. And the left wants to avoid that from happening again, at all costs.

The Washington Post says unions and other liberal groups “are mobilizing to oppose concessions they fear (Obama) could make on Medicare and Social Security.”

The left’s attempt to sabotage any deficit deal is somewhat understandable. After all, their man won. Why should they now have to swallow any spending cuts?

But the public also kept the GOP in control of Congress, sending a clear message that they want both sides to strike a deal. And Republicans have indicated that they’re willing to give on revenues.

And the simple truth is that getting the nation’s runaway debt under control requires reining in entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and now, thanks to the election, ObamaCare.

The question is whether Obama will decide to work with Republicans on a deal, or side with his take-no-prisoners pals on the left. (IBD)

And I know which that will be. Anyone for some cliff diving without a parachute?
Its coming soon.

Obama Claus is Coming to Town

One week after unenlightened narcissism won the election I present (it won’t rhyme or be in tune, just like America now):

santa-obama

Oh! You better watch out,
You better cry,
You better pout,
I’m telling you why:

Obama Claus is coming Back  to town!

He’s making a list of enemies,
He’s checking it twice,
He’s gonna tell you
who’s naughty (rich people) or nice (socialist progressives)

Obama Claus is coming to town!

He sees you when you’re sleeping (drones, IRS, EPA,FCC,FDA, you know),
He knows when you’re awake (and you better be praying to him sucker! or ELSE…)
He knows when you’ve been bad (if you disagree with him) or good (you worship him!),
So be good for goodness sake! (Politically Correct doubleplusgood)

You racist pig!

So…You better watch out,
You better cry
You better pout,
I’m telling you why.

Obama Claus is coming to town.

Little tin horn Dictator,
Little toy Ministry drummers.
They-toot-toot for him
and rummage for bad things against his enemies and

Cover up anything bad about him.

Obama Claus is coming to town.

Little toy doll voters
that cuddle and coo for their entitlements,
Elephants are evil, boats of illegal cash are good
and Kiddie electric cars too.

Obama Claus is coming to town.

The kids in Minority and Illegal Alien Land
will have a jubilee.
They’re gonna build a Entitlement town
all around the Money tree.

Oh….You better watch out,
You better cry.
You better pout,
I’m telling you why.

Obama Claus is comin’
Obama Claus is comin’
Obama Claus is comin’
BACK To town.

Obama Claus! Bumper Sticker

(from you tube): Oh you better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Obama Clause is coming to town
He’s making a list
It’s really a sinch
Gonna find out
Who’s wealthy and rich
Obama Clause is coming to town
He knows where you are working
He knows how much you make
He knows if your successful
Your money is his to take
Oh you better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Obama Clause is coming to town
Obama Clause is coming to town!

Iowa Republican:

And because he cares and “loves us back,” though somehow always failing to effectively deliver the goods, we will, as Santa Obama promises us, “love [him] even more.”  As Fox New’s Greg Gutfeld noted, the Democrats didn’t take God out of their platform, they just simply changed His name to Barack Obama.

The new religion in American is the god of statism.  Rather than relying on Providence, man turns to the state for his daily bread.  The only sacrifice required is suicide—the exchange of rights for handouts, liberty for domestication, responsibility for nannyism.

But as Senator Durbin recently reminded us, this new god is not a franchise of any particular political party.  Both major parties in America worship at the altar of the state, believing in its saving power for mankind.  Political elections became a religious festival of state worship in which competing gods offer us earthly salvation in return for genuflection.

So long as conservatism merely plays lip service to its principles rather than actually apply them, it can never serve as an effective alternative to statism.  So long as conservatism remains an ad hoc, knee-jerk reaction to the socialist welfare state, it moves from principled opposition to big government to a slow, hypocritical accommodation to it.

Amen. And Merry Christmas from your God, Obama Clause, Santa Barack. The giver of all things and the taker of all Freedom.

But at least the children will be happy. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

The New American Terrorists

It’s Friday morning, and so far today, the Obama administration has posted 165 new regulations and notifications on its reguations.gov website.

In the past 90 days, it has posted 6,125 regulations and notices – an average of 68 a day.

But question that and you’re obviously for “no regulations at all”. Extremism in the defense of socialism/liberalism/progressivism  is no vice. 🙂

A leading Democratic senator has said her party should be willing to go off the fiscal cliff in order secure tax rises on the wealthy, raising the stakes in year-end budget negotiations.

“If the Republicans will not agree with that, we will reach a point at the end of this year where all the tax cuts expire and we’ll start over next year,” said Patty Murray, who was co-chair of last year’s deficit supercommittee, on ABC’s This Week. “And whatever we do will be a tax cut for whatever package we put together. That may be the way to get past this.”

Jump off the Fiscal cliff, blame it on the Republicans and then when you start to do something claim credit for tax “cuts” after the most massive increase in US history which you caused.

So you willingly kill the patient, then when you manage to save the patient from the massive gunshot wound to the head you claim credit for it! The patient will never be the same and maybe impaired for life, but who cares about that. It’s the political advantage and the sound-bites for the ignorant masses that matters.

And gee, I haven’t repeatedly said that they are completely amoral and the ideology matters more than people. 🙂

Political advantage, no matter how small, is all that matters.

Going off the cliff would have the political advantage of letting Congress vote for tax cuts, after they go up automatically at the end of the year, rather than voting for tax rises now.

They hold a gun to your head and say that you have to stop them blowing the American people heads off (which is you agree to their demands and that will do it anyways but you get the blame for it).

The New American Domestic Terrorist: The Democrat Party

But the people would have known that if they were paying attention and now that there was cliff there to begin with!

But likely they don’t and The Ministry of Truth sure as hell wasn’t going to tell them.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

Bill Kristol, the influential editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, said that the party should consider taking the fiscal deal proposed by President Barack Obama.

“I don’t really understand why Republicans don’t take Obama’s offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000, make it $500,000, make it $1m,” said Mr Kristol on Fox News Sunday. “Really? The Republican party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood?”

Cover from conservatives such as Mr Kristol could make it easier for Republicans in Congress to do a deal. “Let’s have a serious debate,” said Mr Kristol. “Don’t scream and yell if one person says ‘You know what? It won’t kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires.’ It really won’t, I don’t think.”

You have to play the Democrats game, or get played by the Ministry of Truth. So it’s worth considering.

The Democrats are all about tactic advantage. Do anything, say anything for advantage.

Truth and logic and reason as useless to them.

So you want to fight Terrorists? You may have to negotiate with these nutjobs.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The New American Dream

There was, however, another closely tracked number which perhaps is far more indicative of the economic “growth” in the past 4 years, which certainly had a delayed release. The number of course is that showing how many Americans are on foodstamps, and usually is released at the end of the month, or the first day or two of the next month. This time the USDA delayed its release nine days past the semi-official deadline, far past the election, and until Friday night to report August foodstamp data. One glance at the number reveals why: at 47.1 million, this was not only a new all time record, but the monthly increase of 420,947 from July was the biggest monthly increase in one year. One can see why a reported surge in foodstamps ahead of the elections is something the USDA, and the administration may not have been too keen on disclosing. (zH)

Well, this was to hide the dependency on the Government drug that Obama has created and thus got re-elected by.

That and the Hatred and fear waves.

That is the new “campaign of ideas”. 🙂

Finally, going back to the start of the official start of the depression in December 2007. In the 57 months from then until August 2012, there have been 4.6 million jobs lost even as Americans on foodstamps and disability have risen by 21.2 million.

Comment on the site that illustrates the disease: NO ONE COMPLAINS ABOUT GIVING TRILLIONS TO THE RICH, BUT YOU GIVE JUST ONE MISERABLE DOLLAR TO A POOR PERSON… There were plenty of people around here saying its not a good idea to bailout the IB’s and don’t throw money at Solyndra, Fisker, A123 etal. Those are all run by the rich.

Being rich and successful in American now is a sign of the devil, of pure unfettered evil.

The New American Dream: Don’t work Hard, expect the government to take care of you, and Eat The Rich!

The Founding Fathers would be proud of you.

Thomas Purcell: What went wrong is that the GOP picked a candidate that simply no one could figure out what he stood for at all. The man that worked to develop Romneycare was saying that Obamacare was bad; the guy who was accepting money in his companies for corporate loopholes was saying loopholes should be closed, the guy that wanted to talk about foreign policy at the debate barely touched upon the DNC failures. Everyone who looked at the situation analytically knew Obama was going to win, everyone that was claiming landslide was looking at Romney with rose colored glasses.

In short, people just shrugged their shoulders and for a large part GOP voters simply stayed at home and rubbed their signed pictures of Ron Paul for good luck.
That’s no way to win election fellas, and now the DNC is walking around like they own the place because the minorities came out in droves to support them. They think the majority want to see capitalism fail; when it’s really because the entitlement crowd came out to vote while we failed to inspire our side of the argument.
As the fictional Senator Smith once said ‘Well, you all think I’m licked. Well I’m not licked.  I’m going to stay right here and fight for this lost cause, even if this room gets filled with lies like these! When the Taylors and all their armies come marching into this place, somebody’ll listen to me”
That’s right, the conservatives need to hunker down and look themselves in the mirror and start bringing up candidates that can properly defend the American ideal of a smaller government, free markets and a strong defense. They need to bring that argument to the American people again and again and pound it home, and realize that you’ll never do it with candidates like Mitt Romney; you do it with candidates like Ronald Reagan. The American ideal of conservatism can’t be sold and packaged out of a corporate boardroom with slick ads and jingles; it has to explain in simple terms and by giving Americans reasonable explanations and facts.
It’s not about moving to the right or the left, it’s about truth. It means we need to reach out to minorities and not say ‘you are wrong’, it means you say ‘here’s why we are right’. It’s about fighting the good fight with people who believe in the cause of minimal government, not wealthy industrialists who see to increase profits at the expense of ideology.
The Republican Party needs to change; it needs to find itself and the roots of what they believe in. It needs to get off the mantra of appealing to special interests, from the religious right to the boardroom babies. You won’t find that ideology or those persons in the Rockefeller Republicans, it’s got to come from the Goldwater and Reagan crowd. It comes from unifying the party factions from the Federal Bank Paulites to the pro-marijuana Libertarians to the hawkish maverick McCain’s.
Getting back to the roots of conservatism means it hat to start at the bottom, like the liberals did. You have to run for the school boards and local councils before you run for President. Real societal change comes from these places—you can’t hope to win a Republican Presidency if the man in the street has been taught to hate what he stands for. The liberals did not sell their bill of goods with Obama with one election, it was 25 years in the making.
As for me I like lost causes. My hero in Casablanca isn’t Rick, its Victor Lazlo, a man who always does the right thing regardless of circumstance or ideology or consequence. I’m not going to go away, I’m going to get louder, and I’m going to fight harder, even if that eventually means I go to camp for re-indoctrination or put on a train to labor camp. 
I will fight as I know how best to—with my heart and mind and conviction, on one simple fact and basic message of conservatism: That government that governs least governs best, and that all power eventually corrupts those that wield it.
I’m not going anywhere; I’m going to get louder. I’m going to fight leftism in the schools, the radio, and the papers. I’ll fight them on the beaches, in the mountains and in the halls of state houses. I’ll fight them with blood, bone and sinew. I’ll fight them until the last breath; the last ounce of strength escapes me, until government silences me by smothering me with the pillow of Obamacare. You want to roll over and just die, be my guest. Not me, I’m not quitting. I refuse to accept that people want to live in a leftist police state; not when I know they merely have been fooled into thinking that government is the fountain of all that is good.
I plan to be the iron bar of conservatism, till death do my part, and only until the rest of this strange and wonderful country starts thinking that way, will things ever change for the better.
Smith had it right-  “And in this world today, full of hatred, a man who knows that one rule has a great trust… you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any others. Yes, you even die for them”
So go ahead and make your deals Mr. Boehner. The left can continue to spread its vile lies that government knows best. 
I’m not going anywhere. Neither is conservatism. Eventually, somebody’ll listen. Hopefully it won’t be too late by then.
AMEN!
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson