ObamaBomb

After the Supreme Court’s 2015 King v. Burwell ruling, an emboldened President Obama reminded people that the Affordable Care Act is “now helping tens of millions of Americans.” Not only that, he said he’s heard that the health law has “changed their lives for the better.”

A new National Public Radio/Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found that only 15 percent say they’ve personally benefitted, however.

They all vote Democrat… 🙂

While 56 percent of Americans said the law hasn’t directly affected them, among those who have been affected by it, more people said it has done greater harm than good.

I was effected by it. But that’s because I pay attention to my increases n Health Care costs.

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
And the Liberal Media is obsessed with Racial Division and other distractions.

Via The Hill:

Twenty-six percent of U.S. adults say they have been personally harmed by the healthcare law since its passage — a fraction that likely reflects those in the poll who said they have noticed rising healthcare costs in the last several years. 

And while the majority of adults said they believed their healthcare costs were “reasonable,” many said those costs were becoming less affordable over time. […]

Twenty-six percent of Americans say the cost of healthcare has been a serious strain on their finances in the last two years. About 40 percent of those facing financial struggles because of their medical bills said they have spent all or most of their savings accounts on large bills. About one in five people said they’ve been forced to forgo prescriptions because they can’t afford them. 

The national poll included 1,002 responses and has a margin of error of 3.8.

But will they blame Obama and The Democrats. I highly doubt it.

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
My sentiments exactly.

Ya Think?

They seem to have reversed course on that issue once they realized that some people would use free speech to disagree with them. Hey, we never said they were perceptive.

  • Nadine Strossen said support for robust free speech is sadly “declining among liberals.”

A former president of the American Civil Liberties Union claims that declining support for free speech on college campuses is the fault of liberal faculties that promote censorship.

Nadine Strossen, a New York School of Law professor who served as president of the ACLU for 17 years, strongly endorsed Purdue University’s commitment to free speech Monday in an interview with The Lafayette Journal & Courier, pointing out that support for the First Amendment has become “controversial” at most other schools.

“Sadly, support for robust free speech is declining among liberals…”

“Sadly, support for robust free speech is declining among liberals as it’s ascending among conservatives,” she noted, adding that “faculties typically are dominated by liberals.”

Strossen shared her insights into the state of free speech on college campuses while at Purdue preparing for a Tuesday night lecture on “Freedom for the Thought that We Hate,” during which she will address the importance of protecting all forms of expression, including those that can be considered offensive.

“I’m going to be talking about the concept of offensive speech, in general, because so many students and others seem to assume that you have a right not to be offended and a right to be shielded from any unwelcome speech,” she told the Journal & Courier. “We see too many campuses catering to students … and shielding them from it. I want to dispel the assumption that that is a good strategy.”

Citing surveys that show “very tepid support and, in some cases opposition, to cardinal free speech principles,” Strossen asserted that the trend “really appalls me … because censorship is the most damaging thing to anybody who lacks political power or espousing a minority position.”

What sets Purdue apart from most campuses, she said, is the “ Commitment to Freedom of Expression” that was adopted last year, which draws largely from the “Chicago Statement” pioneered by the University of Chicago.

“I’m completely supportive of the Chicago principles and applaud Purdue,” Strossen stated, explaining that while “they are not doing anything other than giving concrete details of what their constitutional obligations are under the First Amendment in the context of a public university … the climate on most campuses is such that—somewhat not surprising, though it’s shocking—it’s controversial.”

During her lecture Tuesday night, Strossen noted that she expects to encounter questions concerning a recent challenge to Purdue’s free speech commitment that arose after a pro-life student group posted flyers with statistics on abortion in the African-American community.

The posters generated a backlash against the pro-life students, most notably in the form of comments on social media from dance accompanist Jamie Newman. After referring to the student group as “vile” and “racist” on its Facebook page, Newman proceeded to make statements on a pro-life website in which he discussed raping the female relatives of another commenter.

Purdue declined to take disciplinary action against Newman, saying that while his statements were “reprehensible,” they were also protected by the First Amendment. Nonetheless, the school demanded a full apology from Newman, who not only refused to provide one, but tendered his resignation, as well.

Econ 101

America’s 18- to 34-year-old “millennials” have been tutored in group-think schools that extol socialism. Now they lionize Bernie Sanders, whose class-warfare prescriptions include taxing away all but maybe 1% of the nation’s 0.0001% billionaires’ wealth, then going after Wall Street, Big Business, millionaires and upper middle classes – and giving the “revenue” to those who “need” or “deserve” it more.

The entire process revolves around three central questions. Which ruling class elites get to determine who loses, who wins, by how much? Who grants them the power to do so, and holds them accountable? And what happens when the inevitable discontent over their autocratic decisions boils over?

Interestingly, many of the same generation have flocked to see films that glorify individual liberty and defiance of centralized government control. InThe Hunger Games, a few small gestures of disobedience grew into a revolution against Capital elites who lived well and ruled imperiously, while subjugated masses in the Districts starved in poverty and sent their children to die in televised “hunting games.”

In Divergent, a Faction system preserves a society that primarily benefits the ruling Erudites by stifling individuality. The heroes and heroines refuse to confine their lives and ambitions to only one of the other four factions in which they were placed at age sixteen. Again, the ruling class lives far better than the ruled masses. (Ponder the politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists in counties around Washington, DC.)

Are so many millennials really willing to let ruling classes confiscate wealth, impose penalties, determine appropriate welfare payments, and dole out favors? Has their “education” made them incapable of understanding the blessings of liberty, free enterprise capitalism, reliable and affordable fossil fuel energy, and entrepreneurial opportunities? Have instructors so brilliantly presented socialism through rose-colored glasses that young voters are blissfully unaware of its abject failures and horrid excesses?

Are millennials perhaps a little schizophrenic – loving liberty in theory and celluloid, but content to live reality in the Districts, among the Amity and Abnegation Factions, while enjoying the bread and circuses (welfare payments and show trials for humbled banker and corporate bigwigs) bestowed upon them? Or perhaps they simply assume they will be among the Capital’s Erudite and Candor classes, governing the rest of America, in the name of justice, fairness, diversity and equality?

They clearly view free or low-cost college tuition, child care, healthcare, food and housing – along with “living wages” of $15 per hour for entry-level jobs … and six-figure incomes after college – as “constitutional rights.” But when they “feel the Bern,” have they pondered how this system must necessarily work in the Real World, where they will feel the actual burn?

As the late Southern Baptist pastor and author Adrian Pierce Rogers succinctly explained, the hard reality is that “government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn’t first take from somebody else. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving.”

That is precisely what Senator Sanders’ wealth taxation and redistribution scheme proposes to do. The problem, as former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher astutely observed, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Even in the wealthy United States, “eventually” would come quickly, because socialism destroys the incentive to work, innovate, invest, take risks and create new wealth.

Ultimately, nations are left with a large and growing population of have-nots who demand more – when there is no “more” to be had. That is whatItaly, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela and other socialist, populist, egalitarian paradises are now discovering.

They used to provide all kinds of free stuff. Today they are basket cases – struggling with anemic growth, recession and bankruptcy. Their government bonds have turned to “junk” that no sane investor wants.

Today, 59% of young Greeks are unemployed. Youth unemployment is 56% in Spain, 42% in Italy, 38% in Portugal. In Brazil, electricity rates soared 51% last year, food prices rose 15% and overall inflation stood at 11% – a vast improvement over its 5000% annual inflation rate (!) in the early 1990s but still awful. In all of Latin America, only Argentina at 27% and Venezuela at 200% had worse inflation.

American students are immersed in “sustainability” studies and projects, mostly based on still persistent notions that we are running out of essential resources and destroying Planet Earth. Those ideas are the foundation of policies and regulations that perpetuate what really is unsustainable: unemployment, government spending, anti-growth policies, and the anger and unrest they cause.

It may be, as Winston Churchill once observed, that “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.” However, he continued, “the inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery and scarcity.” Unfortunately, simple, basic truths like this are rarely taught in our schools.

Students today want equality of outcomes, rather than of opportunities that yield positive outcomes by dint of hard work. If millennials applied their socialist principle to grades – with all scores on exams and projects averaged out among smart and less talented, hard-working and deadbeat students – shiftless classmates would be happy to coast along, once ambitious scholars would exert far less effort, and all would soon flounder in a sea of F’s.

Similarly, socialist policies stifle the innovation, economic growth and job creation that young people need if they are to get beyond minimum-wage service jobs, and out of their parents’ basements.

Free tuition? City University of New York had that for awhile, until 1976, when it ran out of money and the city nearly went bankrupt. Even Sanders admits his plan would cost some $750 billion over ten years. But perhaps it would work if half of the administrative positions were eliminated, faculty salaries got a 25 or 35% trimming, and sabbaticals came just once a decade.

Surely the “progressives” who rule our campuses – and try to ban and silence speakers like Ben Shapiro – would support this “pro-free-stuff” approach. Surely, the next generation of Erudite and Candor classes in The Capital would be content with salaries that are no higher than those of the masses they govern.

Moreover, the bills must eventually be paid. Millennials may get free stuff today. But they and their children and grandchildren will pay for their freebies many times over, through higher taxes, increasing control over their lives, higher inflation, fewer jobs at reduced salaries, and lower living standards.

Then there is the matter of accountability. Government is very good at fining and jailing citizens and businessmen for violating any of the thousands of regulations that carry criminal sanctions, even if the “perpetrator” did not intend to violate the rule or had no clue that such a rule could possibly exist. But government expects and demands that its own incompetent or criminal actions be ignored.

Thus a rancher is prosecuted for “terrorism” for accidentally burning 139 acres of national forests, but government officials get off scot free when they torch 160,000 acres a couple miles away. Citizens go to prison for inadvertently “impacting” a wetland, but EPA bureaucrats receive “get out of jail free” cards when they deliberately open an abandoned mine and unleash 3,000,000 gallons of toxic sludge. IRS directors simply “take the Fifth” after targeting conservative groups, an OPM director resigns rather than testify before Congress about her screw-ups, and VA incompetence is ignored – while private citizens are hounded and threatened until they cave in or run out of money to defend themselves.

The more government control and socialist wealth redistribution we get, the worse these abuses become. Will the Bernie Sanders voters demand accountability? Or do they simply not care when ruling elites and fellow socialists violate laws and abuse their public trust, to advance agendas or protect themselves?

All these questions would make for very interesting discussions with socialist candidates and voters. (Townhall)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Dear Dumbasses

I keep forgetting that I’m doing my blogs after work… 🙂

 

Dear Whiners who want the government to have more power so you feel “safer,”

Idiots like you who simply fall for whatever line you’ve been fed are jeopardizing our freedoms. All of our freedoms. Because you’re wimps. Allow me to explain.

 

Today I was looking at a HuffPo article about the Apple vs. FBI debacle. The article tries desperately to pass itself off as reasonable. Problem is it’s HuffPo, so I wasn’t fooled. The article opens with this:

Apple’s decision to challenge a federal court order to help the FBI “hack” into a shooting suspect’s iPhone 5C is drawing into focus a battle which has been brewing for the past several years.

The way this debate has been shaped thus far is, as follows: which do we value more, privacy or security?

Firstly, let’s talk some facts about the incident in question. The government FUBARed what happened in San Bernardino. We’ve already documented a lot of it, so lemme break it down here: terrorists were allowed into the country. They killed 14 people. The local authorities got access to the iPhone belonging to Farook. They effed it up by trying to access it, thereby resetting the phone. Now the FBI is demanding Apple write software which will undermine the security of all iPhones to get into “that specific phone.” And if you believe the FBI will only use that new software to access that one phone, you were born in a land before toilet paper.

Before you nuclear turd bombs say “But, but, the FBI needs access for US TO BE SAFE…”

 

ManCryingwithMascarra

Don’t. Spare me your spineless, weak, desperate attempts to sound intelligent. You’re a wimp. If you’re a man and you are siding with the government over this iPhone debacle, you’re without testicles. Which is convenient for your skinny jean-wearing ways. If you’re a woman, you’re probably a feminist. There’s no hope for either of you. I’m merely writing this post to expose just how pathetic you are. Trigger-warning: comparisons to bodily functions abound.

Here’s the deal: Yes, the government has a responsibility to keep the nation safe. But when it comes to the FBI vs. Apple, we’re well past safety. The government did not keep us safe. Proof? The terrorists were let into the country in the first place and they killed people. Also, our borders are as effective as a strainer is at holding water. If you think gaining access to all iPhones is the best solution to keep the country safe…

Here’s where all of you butt wiping-ninnies are missing the point: You think it’s about a phone. Wrong.

This is about a much bigger issue that begins with privacy and ends with freedom, the phone is just the vehicle. Let me try to illustrate my point. Your phone is an extension of you. Yes, this might sound silly, but bear with me for a second. Your smart phone has more than your photos. It has your financial information. It may have an app for your bank. It contains personal conversations with your friends, family, co-workers. It is a map giving you directions. It knows where you have been and where you are going. It can track your health, it reminds you of your tasks, it contains a schedule of your life. It knows who you call, who you have called, who you plan on calling. Your phone is an extension of you.

What the FBI wants is the ability to access that phone, which Apple built to be secure. If you’re dumb enough to say “well don’t keep anything on your phone you don’t want shared with the world…”

Maybe, but I'm not that far off.

I volunteer you as tribute. Why stop at just the phone? Just let them into your house. If you don’t want the world seeing embarrassing things, don’t keep them in your house. You never know, one day the FBI might need to come in without a warrant. Your freedom, your privacy, is subject to the safety of the collective…as deemed by you.

That’s the real, bigger issue here. Safety vs. Freedom. It’s sadly a point that is lost on many who focus on a problem that isn’t the actual problem.

Are you seeing the bigger picture or you trying to figure out if the trees are poplars or pine?

You see, having freedom doesn’t always mean having safety. Yes, sometimes the world is a scary place. Sometimes when the government fails at what it’s required to do, like keep the nation safe from other nations or, in this case, terrorists who seek to do us harm, it’s easy to give up your rights in hopes you can sleep safely at night. But that’s how we lose our freedom. It’s been done countless times before, just ask any ten year old who’s been patted down by the TSA.

Balls

Having freedom, having privacy, requires personal responsibility. Sometimes that means you protect yourself. That’s why we at LwC love our Second Amendment rights. Which, incidentally, plenty of liberals also say we need to give up for the “safety of the collective.”

Sometimes you are not only responsible for your own finances, but your own safety. The government, after all, is just a collection of elected officials who employ other people and talk to the public with the use of a teleprompter. The government is people like a corporation is people. Except the government people take from the corporate people to finance their crap. Sorry, going down a bunny trail there…

They’re not better at life than you are. Surrendering a little bit of your freedom to these elected officials for a little more safety is insane. Also, “safety” is rarely defined. Put that in your pipe and smoke it before a liberal demands to stop smoking it because it affects them.

Here’s a mental exercise for you to bear in mind if you’re cheering on the FBI vs. Apple: Where’s the line? At what point do you say the government does not have a right to sacrifice your freedom for safety? Today it’s an iPhone, but what will it be tomorrow? Where is your personal line? If you think it’s okay for the government to have a backdoor entrance to iPhones, for terrorists or for you, you must have a personal line in the sand. So what is it? Think about it. For by the time the government has crossed the iPhone line, they’ll queue up to cross your personal line. If you’re willing to let go of freedom now for security later, you’ve already bought into the scam.

I’ll close with this quotation from our Founding Father Benjamin Franklin (often misatributed to Thomas Jefferson): “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

ClappingGroup GIF

~Written by Courtney Kirchoff.

bernie the pied Piper

Freedom is Slavery

Brown University. You know, the place where students are whining that they are failing their classes because they are protesting so much…

Fall 2015: “The right to free speech is a protection against the abuse of power, not a guarantee of a platform for all ideas,” a group of students wrote in an op-ed for the Brown Daily Herald.

We are taught to extol the virtues of free speech. White people in particular are taught that our voices are always worth being heard. When we believe in free speech, we do so because it works in our favor. The problem is that freedom of speech is not a universal reality. Free speech assumes a level playing field among speakers that does not exist. Power always affects interactions and what people can and do say in the context of a given relationship, institution or society. In this case, at an elite, predominantly white university, race and class are inseparable from any social interaction, let alone the curation of content in an established campus publication.

These arguments for free speech are often deployed to silence voices of color. Colonial histories of civility aside, calling for “civil discourse” implies that expressions of pain and anger by people of color are not civil and have no place in the conversation.

Censorship is the exercise of power to suppress challenges to the status quo. People of color calling attention to racism does not constitute an overbearing power structure that will limit free speech. The oppressed by definition cannot censor their oppressor. (Brown U)

This is your future. Idiocy as “sensitive” “moral” “standards”. Ignorance as Strength.

Isn’t it just grand. 🙂

Far more pernicious is the self-censorship that is promoted at many campuses that may fear ending up in the media spotlight should students protest. For instance, after Brown University students prevented former New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly from speaking, many other campuses may simply decide that it is not worth the trouble to bring a speaker to campus who is associated with controversial police practices (in Kelly’s case, “stop and frisk”). This silent fear is potentially crippling free speech.

“Free expression for me but not for you” is simple hypocrisy. However, deeper forces are also at work. (USA Today)

Last fall, the student groups held an outdoor event displaying posters with examples of expression that had been censored on campuses across the country. Three other students filed formal complaints, claiming that some of the posters were “offensive” and “triggering.” In response, USC served Abbott with a “Notice of Charge” letter and launched an investigation for “discrimination,” threatening him with punishment up to and including expulsion for his protected speech.

Abbott and the campus chapters of YAL and the College Libertarians are now suing USC for violating their free speech rights.

The University of South Carolina is so intolerant of free speech that students can’t even talk about free speech,” said Catherine Sevcenko, FIRE’s director of litigation. “Ironically, the university’s current marketing campaign features the slogan ‘No Limits.’ But as Ross and his fellow students learned, that does not extend to their free speech rights.”.

The Futures so Bright I have to wear a muzzle. 🙂

The Zombie Apocolypse

4 years ago I did a blog on Democrats as Zombie and I think it’s time to revisit it.

For all you Republicans and Independents who say “I will never vote for____” because they aren’t pure enough for you consider the alternative.

The Zombie Apocalypse.

The mindless, brainless, all devouring Democrats who will eat your brain and your soul to satisfy their appetite for power in the name of “equality”, “fairness” and “diversity”.

And surely you can’t be against that now can you? 🙂

And they will keep coming like a Zombie Hoard.

Even if someone other than Hillary or Bernie wins The Hoard (including the Media) will keep coming. They will keep pressing. All the evils of the world will be laid at the feet of the Republican. They will take NO responsibility for anything. NOTHING. EVER.

It was all YOUR fault, and always was and always will be. In 2016 it’s still Bush’s fault that Obama (and the RINOs) spent $9 Trillion+ in debt. Though Obama recently blaming it on not passing Universal Government Run Healthcare just shows you how much a Zombie Hoard they are.

They waited 90 years for ObamaCare. They will never let it go. Even if the Republican nullifies it, they will bring it up again at any and ever chance.

They don’t care what you think. They only care what they think. They only care about making you do or think what they want.

Period.

The Zombie Hoard doesn’t care. It wants what it wants when it want and because it wants. End of Story.

And 4 years from now if they lose this year expect to see even more hyperbole about how bad things are no matter how they are. If the Democrats are not in total control of everything and everyone it’s “bad” by universally agreed Zombie groupthink. Reality is not a concept they understand or care about. Perception is reality.

They’ve been at this for decades. They were trying to destroy Reagan when the economy was booming because they got no benefit from that.

It’s all about them.

That’s why they are a Zombie Hoard.

Single-minded to the point of a zombie obsession.

They want Brains. Your Brains. They want them all. And Forever.

There is no reasoning with a Zombie.

Do you think if Hillary gets indicted that the Hillary Zombies will care for even 1/10000000000000th of a second?

Nope.

It’s all a Republican “witch hunt”.

There is compromising with a Zombie. You just get eaten more slowly.

You get a RINO Virus that devours you from the insider. 🙂

They have to be beaten. Then 2 years from now they have to beaten again. And 2 years after that, and 2 years after that, ad infinitum.

Freedom from the Zombie Hoard is eternal vigilance.

And you can’t do that if you let pettiness or pride get in the way. They will just eat you alive.

Pride goeth before a fall.

Look at all the poor schmucks who refused to vote for McCain (who was a lousy candidate and a Major RINO to boot) and thought they’d “teach” the Republican Establishment a lesson or two and we’d get a better candidate in 2012.

We Got Obama, Boehner, and Mitt Romney instead.

The virus was eating you alive.

Then you came back for 2nds in 2012. Mitt wasn’t good enough so you stayed home and Obama won again because the Zombie Media Hoard covered for him.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?

Did the Republican Establishment??

As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2016 will they go away?

HELL NO!

They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days, and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

Now you face the real prospect that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee.

I’m not a fan of Trump. But compared to the other two Socialists I will bet on that risky horse over the evil I do know.

So be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

So you’re either with The Hoard, or Not. There is no in-between. No squish. No compromise.

The fate of The Supreme Court rests on this election. The next 40 years of The Constitution rests on defeating the Zombie Hoard.

The Zombie Hoard certainly will give you NO quarter. They are relentless. They are ruthless. They are unrelenting. And Forever.

Previous Blog : https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/the-zombie-hoard/

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”–Rush Limbaugh (2012)

Choose Wisely.

 

 

 

RINO Rubio

The Establishment Candidate, Marco Rubio. Their Last Great Hope for NO Change.

John Hawkins: Marco Rubio may not be a squish on most issues, but it doesn’t change the fact that his Gang-of-8 Amnesty Bill is unforgivable. 

I know I haven’t forgiven him for it. Or forgotten.

You want a Minority and Conservative, Ted Cruz is your guy. Not this Pseudo-When-I-Need-to-Get-Elected one.

Nobody would be campaigning harder against Marco Rubio today than Marco Rubio back in 2010 when he desperately needed to convince Tea Partiers he was tough on immigration to get elected. You could write a whole article on how bad Rubio’s bill was (In fact, I did), but let me cut to the chase for you.

A)Rubio’s sell-out on immigration was the biggest betrayal of conservatives since George Bush’s dad said, “Read my lips, no new taxes” and then raised taxes. How do you trust Rubio on any issue after he so blatantly lied on immigration? Rubio running for President today is like Benedict Arnold running for President in 1788.

California has 605,000 Illegal Voters!! Just in California. They are Illegal because the Liberals gave them Driver’s Licenses. And what do you need to Vote? And gee, weho are they going to vote for??

Now spread that Nationwide!

You get what I’ve been saying for years about Illegal Immigration.

B) The Gang-of-8 Bill was little more than a Democrat wish list with a couple of bells and whistles slapped on to give cover for squishy Republicans to support it as well. The bill legalized illegals before adding in any kind of security and despite Rubio’s dishonest hype, it would have done little to secure the border. Between giving citizenship to illegal aliens and massive increases in legal immigration, Rubio’s bill would have demographically marginalized conservatism in America.

If Rubio becomes President and implements something like his Gang-of-8 Bill, then liberals will be destined to win in the future on every issue that matters. I’m not someone who believes you win in politics by losing, but it’s entirely possible that 4-8 years of Hillary Clinton decimating the country and stacking the Supreme Court would do far less damage to the country than the immigration plan Marco Rubio would likely implement if he becomes President.

C) Rubio’s excuses for his betrayal are ridiculous. Oh, we have ISIS now; so we have to secure the border. Well, we had Al-Qaeda then. Stopping that terrorist organization from getting across the border wasn’t important? Rubio also claims that he gave the Democrats almost everything they wanted in hopes that the House would improve the bill. In other words, Rubio was willing to turn the Senate bill into little more than Barack Obama’s wish list in hopes that John Boehner of all people would negotiate a tough conservative plan? You’d have to be dumber than Meghan McCain to believe that the same guy who caved every time he went up against Obama was going to come up with a great bill after Rubio made him negotiate from a position of weakness. In actuality, Rubio was hoping the pro-amnesty leadership of the House would ignore the Hastert rule and would push an immigration bill through with a few moderate Republicans and all the Democrats helping out. When a guy shoves a knife in your back that deeply and won’t even come clean about it, how do you trust him?

D) Even today, Rubio fully admits that he wants to give citizenship to illegal aliens – and that’s during a Presidential race. You really think that sounds like someone who is going to get tough on illegal immigration or build a wall if he gets elected? Keep in mind that if Rubio becomes President and is perfect in every other way, but is lying on illegal immigration again, it means the end of the conservative movement in America. Choosing him as our nominee would be like playing Russian Roulette with 5 bullets in the chamber.

Of course, the Republicans in the establishment are happy to play that game and have decided that “Lil Jeb” is their chosen candidate.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
So it’s onto Marco.
MARCO!
RINO!
MARCO!
RINO!

In large part, that’s because they expect him to betray conservatives on amnesty again, but it’s also because they don’t believe Rubio will shake things up too much.

He won’t. He’ll be passive aggressive with the Democrats and give them alot of what they want because he doesn’t want to rock the boat too much, like most RINOs.

They don’t think he’ll roll back Obamacare, they don’t think he’ll kick any connected consultants off the gravy train, they don’t believe he’ll listen to those “wackobirds” that John McCain hates so much. After the most radical President in American history has stomped all over the Constitution for 8 years to drag the country to the Left, is it worth risking the country on someone backed by the establishment Republicans because they believe he’s a go-along-to-get-along status quo candidate?

 HELL NO!

Oh, but the establishment Republicans say Rubio is the most electable candidate. Of course, that’s what they always say about whoever their golden boy happens to be. It’s what they said about Dole, McCain and Romney. They were wrong about them and they’re wrong about Rubio, too.

“electable” is code word for acceptable loss.

Don’t get the wrong idea. Rubio could certainly win, but he probably wouldn’t be as electable as Cruz or God help us all, even Kasich despite his solid head-to-head numbers against Hillary.

Or even Trump.

Why?

Keep in mind that Rubio can’t win a general election unless he gets the support of the 30-35% of GOP voters that currently support Donald Trump. Do you really think that after supporting Trump for months, those voters are going to fall in line behind an establishment candidate who is best known for betraying the people who supported him to push amnesty and open borders?

The Establishment thinks so.

Moreover, consider the fact that 60% of GOP voters have consistently been going for the outsider candidates (Trump, Cruz and Carson). Do you really think all those people are going to shrug off this entire crazy primary season and eat the same old crap sandwich from the establishment again?

Nope. But that’s an acceptable loss if The Establishment keeps it’s power.

Beyond that, although Rubio is generally a solid debater, he turned in one of the worst debate performances anyone has seen with his “Robot Rubio” performance. What if it happens again in a general election debate? He’s also generally very scripted, inauthentic and his pathetic non-response to every genuine attack on his record is , “That’s a lie.” Furthermore, maybe we should consider the fact that a candidate who wants the NSA to snoop on our phone records, showed terrible judgment in supporting the overthrow of Libya and who comes off like he can’t wait to get in another ground war in the Middle East isn’t going to be wildly popular with the American electorate in 2016.

It has been an unpredictable election season and we still don’t know who the GOP nominee will be. However, if it turns out to be a guy who did the same thing to conservatives on immigration that Jane Fonda did to the troops during Vietnam, the Republican Party will richly deserve to lose.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Launching 2.0

Well, I here to re-launch/Re-boot my 6 1/2 year old Blog.

New & Improved (does that make the old one “Old and Inferior”? I used to ask as a kid to the commercials) with Si Winston Churchill in the banner. One of my personal heroes. Been to his War Museum in London twice.

So let head off to College. You remember those days of Working hard to get good grades and studying like a made fool?

Well, apparently the New Millenials don’t, and don’t want to.

Student activists at Brown University are complaining of emotional stress and poor grades after months of protesting, and blame the school for insisting that they complete their coursework.

Undergraduate tuition for academic year 2015-16: $48,272. Room, board, and required fees: $12,700. Total cost: $62,046. Mommy & Daddy are not making $15/hr… 🙂

“There are people breaking down, dropping out of classes, and failing classes because of the activism work they are taking on,” an undergraduate student going by the pseudonym “David” told The Brown Daily Herald Thursday. “My grades dropped dramatically. My health completely changed. I lost weight. I’m on antidepressants and anti-anxiety pills right now. Counselors called me. I had deans calling me to make sure I was okay.”

“My grades dropped dramatically. My health completely changed. I lost weight. I’m on antidepressants and anti-anxiety pills right now.”   

Other students reported similar problems, describing maladies ranging from emotional distraction to panic attacks that they say caused them to skip assignments, miss class, and generally lose focus on keeping their grades up.

David and other students began demonstrating on campus in October to protest two opinion columns published in the Daily Herald that some students deemed racist because they defended the celebration of Columbus Day. Black and Asian student groups reacted by demanding that the paper not only retract and apologize for the op-eds, but also develop a plan for increasing the diversity of its staff, subject to approval by the activists.

Following an almost-immediate capitulation by the newspaper’s editorial board, and incensed by University President Christina Paxson’s attempt to stake out a middle ground on the matter, the protesters proceeded to direct their unspent energies on the university as a whole, issuing an ultimatum in November calling for affirmative action hiring policies, mandatory diversity training, and apologies for Brown’s historical ties to the slave trade.

Paxson released a draft of a new Diversity Action and Inclusion Plan 10 days later, only to find herself besieged in her own office by student protesters complaining that the plan was “illegitimate and insufficient” and demanding an end to “open dialogues and forums” on the matter.

David, who spent many hours helping to organize the demonstrations, claims he reached out to both Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) and his academic deans for support, but told the Daily Herald that the therapy and deans’ notes requesting extended deadlines on his assignments were little more than “bandages” for the stress of balancing his activism with existing obligations to school, work, and friends.

Other students expressed similar frustration with the university’s expectation that they keep up with their schoolwork during the protests, saying that some professors refused to grant extensions on homework and tests.

Justice Gaines, an undergraduate student who uses the pronouns xe, xem and xyr, even recounted suffering from what xe describes as “a panic attack” related to xyr emotions over the Daily Herald op-eds, adding that xe “couldn’t go to class for several days” following the episode.

Liliana Sampedro, one of the students who compiled the diversity ultimatum, argued that refusal to grant such accommodations “has systemic effects on students of color,” who she said may sometimes feel obligated to prioritize their activist work over their studies.

“I remember emailing the professor and begging her to put things off another week … I hadn’t eaten. I hadn’t slept. I was exhausted, physically and emotionally,” Sampedro recalled. The professor nonetheless insisted that she submit a previously-assigned research presentation on time, which she claims forced her to stay up late to finish the project after having already spent hours working on the list of demands.

Assistant Dean of Student Support Services Ashley Ferranti, however, told the Daily Herald that over 90 percent of such requests are routinely accepted, and that the university strives to maintain its academic standards without discouraging students from becoming politically involved.

Don’t you just feel sorry for the little cherubs. 🙂

Life’s so rough on the poor darlings.

I just worried about passing my classes. They want a freebie for that too…

That or they’ll be like Bernie Sanders, a professional protester who’s never had a real job.

bernie-free-college-750

Short Retirement

With a retirement shorter than Brett Favre’s I will continue. But I haven made several life choices going forward.

  1. This blog will be done in the afternoon after work so that a) I can exercise in the morning and b) not be rushed by doing it before work.
  2. I had a very good talk with my Brother about a lot of things last night.
  3. Some friends said not to retire.

So look for it this afternoon and every afternoon going forward.

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

The Stupid Have Inherited The Earth

After 2,323 Blogs that started on August 31st, 2009 I am quitting. I may pick it back up some day.

I just don’t have any passion for this anymore. No one is listening. No One Cares. There is no “dialog” or “debate” anymore.

There’s just your way or the highway.

In 1995 someone ask me to sum my view of America. I said, “Unenlightened Narcissism”.

Now, a whole generation later, its more true now than it was before.

Millenials Love Socialism. They don’t even understand it. But at least it’s not Capitalism. 😦

What has undermined faith in our economic system and the very values needed to sustain it?

Much of the blame goes to crony capitalism, which is when government provides special favors to some people or businesses, and picks winners and losers in the marketplace. Cronyism certainly predates capitalism itself, as past rulers rewarded family and friends for eons. But it’s unfortunate that cronyism remains alive and well in a democratic society that trumpets the values of the free market. From tax breaks to no-bid contracts, crony deals wreak havoc on markets and capitalism both ethically and economically. Crony capitalism creates an uneven playing field and benefits the few over the many. (CNBC)

Both Parties are to blame for that. Its how the game has evolved. But it won’t change under Socialism one bit. You’ll trade your “free” security for freedom. And Millenials don’t seem bothered by that at all. Mostly because they don’t know any better. The Socialist in charge of Education for the last several generations were not generous with their “diversity” of knowledge and history.

My cynicism wins.

THE LAND OF THE IGNORANT AND THE HOME OF THE SLAVE.

We’ll either have a Republican Braggart (Crony Capitalist) or a Corrupt Socialist/Communist for the next President and no one seems to care anymore.

So I’m going to use the time for this blog in the morning for more productive uses.

 

bernie-free-college-750envy-churchill

But it seems that most people want it, not even knowing what it is.

The Constitution is dead.

So I am outta here!

 

Why You Should Vote Democrat

demWhat you are about to read is the best political comment I have EVER read on a website. It was written by someone who uses the moniker, “The Fall of America.”

The comment was posted on Wednesday morning, March 19, in response to a piece in The Hill.  If you are unfamiliar, this is a Washington “insider’s site” covering the nitty-gritty of what goes on within the hallowed halls of Capitol Hill.

The title of the piece was “O-Care premiums to skyrocket,” although this comment could have been in response to any topic in Washington today.

So thank-you, “The Fall of America,” whoever you are, for writing such brilliant truth and I hope that the re-posting of your comment here on RedState finds its way back to you after it goes viral. (Hint-hint to our readers.)

Why I vote Democrat    
(comment by TheFallofAmerica on March 19, 2014) 

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if our federal government borrows $85 Billion every single month.

And has taken in more in Taxes in the last 18 months than anytime in American History.

When in Debt, SPEND EVEN MORE!

I vote Democrat because I care about the children … but saddling them with trillions of dollars of debt to pay for my bloated leftist government is okay.

That is if the survive Planned Parenthood.

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s better to pay billions of dollars to people who hate us rather than drill for our own oil, because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

I vote Democrat because I believe it is okay if liberal activist judges rewrite the Constitution to suit some fringe kooks, who would otherwise never get their agenda past the voters.

skip

I vote Democrat because I believe that corporate America should not be allowed to make profits for themselves or their shareholders. They need to break even and give the rest to the federal government for redistribution.

I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted, so long as we keep all of the murderers on death row alive.

And news of Fetal baby parts selling out of the news.

I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if my Nobel Peace Prize winning President uses drones to assassinate people, as long as we don’t use torture.

And “Muslim Terrorists” don’t exist, you islamophobe!

I vote Democrat because I believe people, who can’t accurately tell us if it will rain on Friday, can predict the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Chevy Volt.

And do everything they tell us regardless of how much it costs. Who cares if it “works”. It make me “feel good” about “doing something”.

I vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is not as important as preventing people from being offended.

Gotta have my “safe space”. Those people who disagree with me are morons anyways… 🙂

I vote Democrat because I believe the oil companies’ profit of 3% on a gallon of gas is obscene, but the federal government taxing that same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t obscene.

And Obama is responsible for the lowering of Gas Prices in 2016 but it’s the Republicans fault for the $4 Gas.

I vote Democrat because I believe a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority ….. but sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are all values-neutral.

And Showing R-Rated Michael Moore Films is good “education”.

I vote Democrat because I agonize over threats to the natural environment from CO2, acid rain and toxic waste ….. but I am totally oblivious of the threats to our social environment from pornography, promiscuity and family dissolution.

I vote Democrat because I believe lazy, uneducated stoners should have just as big a say in running our country as entrepreneurs who risk everything and work 70 hours per week.

And those stoners should make $15/hr if they bother to work at all.

I vote Democrat because I don’t like guns ….. so no one else should be allowed to own one.

Especially not Cops, they just kill minorities. But when someone breaks into my house I call the..whoops…

I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy.

fish1

I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between judicial leniency and surging crime rates.

Nor “Strict Gun laws” and rising crime.

I vote Democrat because I believe you don’t need an ID to vote but you do to buy beer.

California alone created 605,000 Illegal Immigrant Voters!

I vote Democrat because I believe marriage is obsolete, except for homosexuals.

I vote Democrat because I think “fairness” is far more important than freedom.

I vote Democrat because I think an “equal outcome” is far more important than equal opportunity.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

I vote democrat because I would rather hide in a class room while others fight for my freedom.

And don’t even think of challenging my beliefs, I need my “safe space”.

I vote democrat because I’m not smart enough to own a gun and I need someone else to protect me.

But Cops are evil and they kill people wantonly and the Military is just a bunch of PTSD Psychos.

I vote democrat because I would rather have free stuff than freedom.

And lastly, I vote Democrat because I’m convinced that government programs are the solution to the human condition, NOT freedom.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

bernie-free-college-750

THE LAND OF THE IGNORANT AND THE HOME OF THE SLAVE.

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Same old Story

Fiscal Policy: Stop us if you’ve heard this one: Republicans propose pro-growth tax reform to boost the economy, and liberals indignantly shout out: “tax cut for the rich.”

Everyone knows the current tax code is a millstone around the neck of our economy. Almost all the Republicans running for president have admirable tax plans, and one of the best is the flat tax proposed by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz that would lower business taxes to 16% on net business income and 10% on personal income — wages, salaries, capital gains and dividends.

The Tax Foundation says it would boost wages, output and net income about 10% over the next decade — which is an extra $2.5 trillion in GDP and millions of new jobs.

Right on cue, the leftwing Tax Policy Center has trashed the plan, calling it a tax cut for the rich and an $8.6 trillion increase in the debt over 10 years. And the lapdogs of the liberal media ate it up.

The TPC has about zero credibility on these issues. Its tax models predicted the Reagan tax cuts would lead to massive revenue losses and that the Clinton-era capital gains cut would blow a hole in the deficit. In both cases revenues didn’t shrink — they swelled. And the share of taxes paid by the rich soared in each case.

But the TPC’s shattered crystal ball doesn’t let history get in the way of a good story — especially if the theme is class warfare.

The center relies on what is called “static analysis.”  It assumes the economy will not grow much if tax rates are lowered and savings and investment are encouraged through a less-punitive tax code. But if the tax rate on working and investing is lowered, then expect more work and more investment. History bears this out again and again.

TPC says high-income taxpayers would get an average tax cut in 2017 of about $6,100, while the poor would save only $46. But most of the poor in the bottom one-third pay almost no income tax at all. How do you cut income taxes for people who don’t pay income taxes?

Nothing could be less fair than our current wreckage of a tax code. The people at the bottom of the income ladder don’t have jobs, don’t have paychecks and don’t have income outside of welfare benefits. The TPC can never seem to figure out what Ted Cruz said when he introduced his flat tax: “The best way to help the poor is with a job — not a government handout.” (IBD)

sowell- liberal caresowell-complain

The Lure

Thomas Sowell:

Many people of mature years are amazed at how many young people have voted for Senator Bernie Sanders, and are enthusiastic about the socialism he preaches.

Many of those older people have lived long enough to have seen socialism fail, time and again, in countries around the world. Venezuela, with all its rich oil resources, is currently on the verge of economic collapse, after its heady fling with socialism.

But, most of the young have missed all that, and their dumbed-down education is far more likely to present the inspiring rhetoric of socialism than to present its dismal track record.

Socialism is in fact a wonderful vision — a world of the imagination far better than any place anywhere in the real world, at any time over the thousands of years of recorded history. Even many conservatives would probably prefer to live in such a world, if they thought it was possible.

Who would not want to live in a world where college was free, along with many other things, and where government protected us from the shocks of life and guaranteed our happiness? It would be Disneyland for adults!

Free college of course has an appeal to the young, especially those who have never studied economics. But college cannot possibly be free. It would not be free even if there was no such thing as money.

Consider the costs of just one professor teaching just one course. He or she has probably spent more than 20 years being educated, from kindergarten to the Ph.D., before ending up standing in front of a class and trying to convey some of the knowledge picked up in all those years. That means being fed, clothed and housed all those years, along with other expenses.

All the people who grew the food, manufactured the clothing and built the housing used by this one professor, for at least two decades, had to be compensated for their efforts, or those efforts would not continue. And of course someone has to produce food, clothing and shelter for all the students in this one course, as well as books, computers and other requirements or amenities.

Add up all these costs — and multiply by a hundred or so — and you have a rough idea of what going to college costs. Whether these costs are paid by using money in a capitalist economy or by some other mechanism in a feudal economy, a socialist economy, or whatever, there are heavy costs to pay.

Moreover, under any economic system, those costs are either going to be paid or there are not going to be any colleges. Money is just an artificial device for getting real things done.

Those young people who understand this, whether clearly or vaguely, are not likely to be deterred from wanting socialism. Because what they really want is for somebody else to pay for their decision to go to college.

A market economy is one in which whoever makes a decision is the one who pays for that decision. It forces people to be sure that what they want to do is really worth what it is going to cost.

Even the existing subsidies of college have led many people to go to college who have very little interest in, or benefit from, going to college, except for enjoying the social scene while postponing adult responsibilities for a few years.

Whether judging by test results, by number of hours per week devoted to studying or by on-campus interviews, it is clear that today’s college students learn a lot less than college students once did. If college becomes “free,” even more people can attend college without bothering to become educated and without acquiring re any economically meaningful skills.

More fundamentally, making all sorts of other things “free” means more of those things being wasted as well. Even worse, it means putting more and more of the decisions that shape our lives into the hands of politicians and bureaucrats who control the purse strings.

Obamacare has given us a foretaste of what that means in reality, despite how wonderful it may sound in political rhetoric.

Worst of all, government giveaways polarize society into segments, each trying to get what it wants at somebody else’s expense, creating mutual bitterness that can tear a society apart. Some seem to blithely assume that “the rich” can be taxed to pay for what they want — as if “the rich” don’t see what is coming and take their wealth elsewhere.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Borked

The Liberals are all up in arms and livid about The Senate Republicans saying their will be no Confirmation hearings for a new SCOTUS in an election year.

They are ranting about “obstuctionism” yet again. This of course means THEY are being obstructed. When they do it to you, that’s not “obstuctionism”. 🙂

borked

So expect King Obama to make a recess appointment, if he can, of Loretta Lynch just because he’s the King.

Obama emphasized he will nominate someone supremely qualified for the job while still lamenting how he’s grown “accustomed to how obstructionist the Senate’s become.”

“The fact that we’re even discussing this,” he said, “is a measure of how, unfortunately, the venom and rancor in Washington has prevented us from getting basic work done.”

One reporter confronted the president about him filibustering Samuel Alito, one of George Bush‘s nominees, while he was a senator. Obama admitted that the obstruction is “not the fault of any single party.”

But it’s only mentioned when it happens to Democrats and they get “outraged” by it.

The bigger question is, does Mitch “The Ditch” McConnell have the balls to sit on this for 9 months with the Liberal Media firebombing him 24/7?

Liberals do not believe in objective truth, as writer/comedian Evan Sayet writes in the opening paragraph of his book, “The Kindergarden of Eden”. If there is no objective truth, and words don’t mean what they say, and can be interpreted to mean something other than what they say, then the Constitution suddenly becomes a “living document”.

And suddenly, everything our nation was founded on goes out the window. It’s not like the Founding Fathers just spit-balled around a table and threw everything into the Constitution. It was written by the greatest minds in a tortured and highly political process.

Yes, the Constitution is open to some degree of interpretation because of the deliberate ambiguity in some portions of the text. Yet the point of originalism is to avoid drawing inferences from a statute and rely on the text itself. Scalia said, “the Constitution, or any text, should be interpreted [n]either strictly [n]or sloppily; it should be interpreted reasonably”. (Lawrence Myers)

But reason and Logic is as far from a Liberal as the light of the Big Bang is from us.

for thee - schumer

And because of Doublethink, they can’t even conceive of the problem, let alone the solution.

social contracteuphemism

The Land of the Ignorant and Home of The Slave.

 

Reality Check

“The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both.” — Milton Friedman

“If there is ever a fascist takeover in America, it will come not in the form of storm troopers kicking down doors but with lawyers and social workers saying, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” – Jonah Goldberg

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH (Orwell)

In a time where consumers have almost unlimited choices of music, movies, websites and every product you can imagine in the supermarket, socialism is an outdated economic system that no longer fits with the world we live in. Socialism requires the intervention and control of the marketplace by an overwhelmingly powerful centralized government. It penalizes high achievers, rewards laziness and stifles choice.

Socialism is a government regulation that stops you from creating a successful business. It’s the Bureau of Land Management or the EPA making arbitrary decisions about what you can do with your own land. It’s the IRS taking the money you busted your butt to earn and giving it to people who didn’t work as hard as you did.

Almost every socialist policy requires taking resources from someone who’s earned them and giving them to someone who hasn’t. Even programs that are supposed to be self-funding rarely are because the juice is never quite worth the squeeze. The real reason we’re so deeply in debt is because if the middle class was forced to choose between paying for what our government is spending or dramatically cutting back, our government would already be much smaller than it is – and no wonder.

What does our government do well anymore? Do you trust the IRS? FEMA? Are our borders secure? How does the customer service of the post office or DMV compare to, let’s say Apple or Amazon? Who wants to live in government housing? Who wants a minimum wage job? Who wants to answer to bureaucrats, jump through their hoops and do as he’s told by people who see him as a nameless, faceless slob dependent upon them for his livelihood?

This is what socialism offers.

This is the Democrats.

Socialism will take something from someone else who earned it and give it to you and in return, you will do what socialists want you to do. If you’re irresponsible, lazy, have a habit of making poor decisions or just need a master, this can seem like a good deal. You can work a menial job and get paid more than you’re worth! You can go to college and you don’t have to pay for it! Someone else will give you a place to live, food stamps, welfare and health care! In return, you just have to give up on your pride, your dreams and control of your own life.

People who can take care of themselves don’t need socialism and most of those who have difficulty taking care of themselves would still be better off under a more capitalistic system. The more capitalistic an economy is, the faster it grows. The faster an economy grows, the more jobs and wealth are created.

Eighty percent of humanity lives on less than $10 a day. Meanwhile, 96% of the poor in America have televisions, 93% have microwaves and 81% have cell phones. Ultimately, it’s the economic growth produced by capitalistic policies that has allowed America’s poor to do so well compared to the poor in more socialistic nations. Paradoxically, the more we move towards socialism in the name of “helping” the poor, the less poor Americans will ultimately have. That’s because the more regulations, the more taxes and the more GOVERNMENT a country has, the slower its economy grows.

Socialism requires a gargantuan government so it can confiscate property, control behavior and manage an always growing list of programs to achieve “fairness.” Unfortunately, “fairness” is a will-o’-the-wisp that can never be caught because human beings have different levels of talent, skill and effort.

The factory worker who spent 30 years working his way through the ranks to become regional sales manager should make more than the new guy who just started yesterday. The man who spent 10 years building his own successful business should make more money than his employees. The man who invested every extra dime he had and does well should make more money than the fellow who used all his extra money to buy a bigger car and nicer furniture for his house. Socialists say, “Not so fast. Maybe those guys should make more money, but they’re making too much money. We should control how much they make. We should decide how much of their money they get to keep. We should control how much of their money is given away and to whom.”

 

On the other hand, capitalism is freedom. Capitalism says you should do what you want to do with your own time and either suffer the consequences or reap the rewards. Sure, we might all cooperate to create a military and a police force along with building sewage systems, roads, street lights and stop signs and a few other necessities, but beyond that, let everyone rise and fall as he deserves.

If you want to get a four year degree in women’s studies at an Ivy League university? Great, pay for it yourself. You want to live cheaply and work a second job so you can save up money? You should be able to do that and someone else shouldn’t get the benefits from your hard work. If you want to spend your twenties as a beach bum, surfing all day and sleeping in a tent at night, you can do that, but no one else should be asked to help pay for your lifestyle.

Having real freedom means you get to make real choices and when that happens, some of those choices will work out better than others. The only way to change that is to build a massive government apparatus that makes everyone poorer in return for reducing the amount of natural inequality that will happen when people are allowed to pursue their wildly differing hopes and dreams.

Capitalism is not perfect, but it won’t bankrupt the country, it doesn’t reward failure and it can’t control you like socialism. To the contrary, in a capitalist system, businesses benefit from voluntary transactions. Do you want to get rich in a capitalist system? Find a way to give people what they want. If you’re just okay at it, you can make a decent salary. If you’re as good at it as Henry Ford or Bill Gates, you can become rich beyond imagination.

Do you want to get rich in a socialist system? Be well connected. Make friends or just pay off people who can give you government contracts. Make contributions to politicians so they’ll change the laws to help you and hurt your competitors. Get the government to take money from other people and give it to you as part of a bailout.

Which sounds more admirable? Which sounds healthier for our country? When you give the government unlimited power to create “equality,” you also give it the power to tilt the playing field towards corrupt businesses that have every incentive to try to take advantage of it.

At the end of the day, socialism is for slaves who are willing to give up their freedom for promises that they’ll be given some minimal level of support no matter what. On the other hand, capitalism is for people who want the freedom to rise or fall based on their own effort. If you know which type of person you are, then you know whether you should be a capitalist or a socialist.

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

The Death Trolls

The Liberals had quite a party this weekend. The Death Trolls were partying like it was 1922 and the Communist Revolution.

scalia

Said no Liberal Ever.

So has Obama appointed Loretta Lynch yet? She properly Black -Not an evil Uncle Tom Conservative (Doubleplusgood), She’s a Woman, and a Left Ideologue who will stay the Partisan course no matter what the nasty, old, white guy Constitution says…

Retirement is one thing. Death is quite another. Antonin Scalia leaves behind a wife, children, grand children, friends, and other family. Life is something we should all be respectful of, even when we disagree with the politics of the person.

But plenty of people who politicize everything disagree. It is the measure of how miserable a person’s life is that they would politicize the death of someone who served his country with distinction because they disagree with him.

Not everything is political. Death will come to us all. Therefore, we should work hard to not make death a political issue, even if it is the death of one we disagree with. We then only incentivize others dancing on our own graves when that day comes. We will not all become Supreme Court justices. We will not all become someone of note. We will not all merit even a Wikipedia entry. But we all will die. So show some class.

 

“I feel bad for his family” and “That guy was a homophobic, racist jerk” are not mutually exclusive sentiments. — Brooklyn Spoke (@BrooklynSpoke)

Scalia was a retrograde bigot who, just this week, voted with his colleagues to kill climate regs and the planet. I don’t care how he rests.— Bae Talese

Scalia *gleefully* shat on minorities of all stripes while he was alive. No one owes him respect and decorum now that he’s dead.— Bae Talese

Wow, Scalia died. it’s not cool to speak ill of the dead, so RIP to one of the BEST racist, fascist enemies of democracy & humanity.— dave ciaccio

Wow, TWO Supreme Court openings! (I assume Thomas will be buried alive with Scalia)

— Drew Magary

The party of “compassion”, “sensitivity” and “tolerance” strikes again. 🙂

Ann Coulter: [The Republicans know] “if they screw us over one more time, on something as big as this, Trump gets another ten million voters right there.”

But how likely are they to stand on principle? Really…

 

 

The End

Well, it is the end and The moment has been Prepared for.

My Prediction: Supreme Court Justice Eric Holder today helped the Left disband The Constitution of The US to be replaced by the Orwellian Diversity, Fairness, and Inclusion Contract on America.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died, the San Antonio Express-News reported on Saturday afternoon. He was 79.

Scalia passed away in his sleep while on a hunting trip in Marfa, Texas. Foul play is not suspected.

But the Foul stench of Sith Lord Obama is going to smell up the place for generations.

But Paul Ryan and The Republican will stop him….Really? If that’s our only hope then we need help, serious help.

No, it’s campaign season, and Hillary Clinton is fired up. Unfortunately, she’s fired up about who should nominate a judge to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Harry Reid and his coalition, which very likely includes the president himself, are urging President Obama to put up a nominee as soon as possible, while Mitch McConnell and crew maintain that the next president should make the decision.

Clinton has weighed in, and, as usual, the “progressive who gets things done” takes a shot at conservatives.

Mind you, she NOTHING BUT PARTISAN Herself.

Talk about NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!!  I’m surprised they haven’t got a nominee already (hence the Holder allusion at the beginning of this blog) for entirely partisan reasons.

And we all know how much the Left respects The Constitution. 🙂

It’s certainly no surprise that the No. 1 trending topic in the United States tonight is #Scalia, but why is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas trending just a couple of steps behind?

The Liberals are on Death Watch. They are praying as hard as their non-secular hearts can go for all the Conservatives to just DIE!

Leftists, ever tolerant, loving assholes that they are, want him to die this weekend too.

— Amy Curtis (@moderncomments)

They have your best interests and the interests of The Founding Fathers and the Constitution at their core. 🙂

Their care and compassion overflow this Valentine’s Day with Love. 🙂

The love of Death to your enemies.

This is going to sound cold, but one down, one to go. Uncle Ruckkus (Clarence Thomas) needs to go next. Then our country can start healing.

— George freeman (@Numbers28)

Spread the Love. Here Comes Big Brother to give you Bear Hug. After all, The Constitution and Conservatives are the evil that must be exterminated for real compassion, caring and sensitivity to take over.:)

Now we just need the Grim Reaper to take out Clarence Thomas and Mitch McConnell and there’ll be #DancingInTheStreets! 😃👍

— Rosetta_GhoSTONED ;D (@RedRoseQueen1)

So a moment of silence for the end. She was a grand country, but the rot is nearly complete.

Conservatives will be hunted down and “re-educated”.

The End is nigh.

(if you’re expecting the Establish Republicans or Paul Ryan to save you…Why?)

Covet thy Neighbor’s Stuff

Envy is defined by Dictionary.com as “a feeling of discontent or covetousness with regard to another’s advantages, success, possessions, etc.” That perfectly characterizes the entire political philosophy of the Democratic progressive left.

That and their holier-than-thou superiority. Their absolute contempt for anyone’s opinion that may differ from theirs.

“Stephen Colbert was so good he made Republicans think he was a Republican” was heard last night by me.

Sorry, he’s a comedian. I never took him or Jon Stewart seriously. It’s like taking Rachael Maddow seriously. As if… 🙂

Listening to presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, I often hear the principles I grew up with and practiced being disregarded, even denounced.

Well, they have trained several generations well in the ay of The Dark Side.

To them we, the Conservative/Non-Liberal ARE The Dark Side. 🙂

In his victory speech following his New Hampshire primary win, Sanders said America was founded on the principle of fairness.

No, actually, it was founded on FREEDOM. Not the same concept. But they have trained their young padawans to think Fairness is Freedom, when in fact it is not. The government that gets to decided what is fair and what is not is not Free.

No it wasn’t. You don’t find the word “fairness” in the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution. The word you do find is “liberty.” The Founders wanted Americans to be liberated from oppressive, intrusive, dictatorial government and to be free to pursue happiness, according to their definition of the word.

To be free of The Bernie Sanders, Obamas, Pelosis, Sharptons,Clintons of the Day.

Sanders and Clinton aren’t channeling the Founders, they’re channeling Robin Hood.

Or least a version of it. But the Sheriff of Nottingham and his loyalists as “Robin Hood” is the perfect Orwellian take on it though. 🙂

They want to take from people who have sacrificed, invested, risked and worked hard and give the fruits of their labors to others who have not embraced those noble practices.

Listening to some of the younger people who are enthralled by Sanders’ philosophy suggests that they have been brainwashed by their public school teachers and college professors. Maybe we should increase the voting age to 30 when they might be expected to have achieved some modicum of success and will resent having their paychecks gutted by dysfunctional government.

You assume that they will understand. But since Logic and reason are not hallmarks of Liberals…

The late football coach Vince Lombardi once said, “The price of success is hard work, dedication to the job at hand, and the determination that whether we win or lose, we have applied the best of ourselves to the task at hand.”

But that’s so unfair! Not to mention White Privilege. 🙂

Do you hear anything like that coming from the mouths of Sanders or Clinton? Where is the rhetoric I heard as a child such as “you can do this,” “apply yourself,” “persistence ensures success”?

Gone like a fart wind.

Today, it is all about envying what others have. In biblical terms it is covetousness, a violation of the Tenth Commandment. Covetousness is destructive, not to the person who is its object, but to the person doing the coveting.

But they vote for Democrats, so The Democrats love it. 🙂

Does someone who envies, or covets, improve his station in life?

No. But they “feel” better about it. It’s someone elses fault other than theirs. It’s “the other guy”.

Why won’t Sanders and Clinton speak of the virtues of hard work and making the right decisions so people can fend for themselves and their families?

Because then they wouldn’t be dependent on THEM. It’s all about dependency, slavery and lack of freedom with Democrats all rapped in  an envious, hate-filled, but Holier than thou, “feeling”. Logic and reason are on permanent holiday.

Instead we get speeches attacking millionaires and billionaires, as if they have cornered the market on wealth, leaving none behind for anyone else.

That’s the Meme. Of course, it’s being delivered by Millionaires. 🙂

What a CEO or Wall Street banker earns has nothing to do with what I make, or could make, if I choose the right path. The right path means staying in school, getting married before having children and taking reasonable risks to improve one’s life, such as moving from a town where it is difficult to get a job or advance in one, to a place where there are better prospects.

But that’s so UNFAIR. You mean I have to work for it. I have to fail. No, I don’t wanna! 🙂

Bernie Sanders is now trying to attract African-American voters by promising them more jobs, more government programs, more stuff.

So nothing has changed their in 50 years.

He’s also courting civil rights power broker Rev. Al Sharpton in hopes that he can help steer minority voters his way in exchange for access to the White House, but consider this quote from one of the great African-American leaders of the past, Booker T. Washington: “Nothing ever comes to one, that is worth having, except as a result of hard work.”

The Problem is that he’s running against one of the Most corrupt people in history, Hillary Rodham Clinton. How else does he destroy her New Hampshire but she gets more Primary Delegates than he does.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

That such noble sentiments have largely disappeared from our culture and been replaced by envy, greed and entitlement, explains why our national debt soars, why so many find themselves in financial difficulty, or think they do, because that’s what the left has told them.

And when the bill comes due, it will be someone elses fault. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

If our forebears could rise from their graves, would they not rebuke us for the mess we have made of the nation they birthed and bequeathed to us?

Hell Yeah.

At the founding of America, self-interest was often secondary to the public good. Today, self-interest is supreme and the public good is largely forgotten. No wonder we are in trouble on all levels, as liberal-progressives double down on failure to promote their own political self-interest. (Cal Thomas)

Self-Interest is Queen to, Queen Hillary The First.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

 

Top Diversity Gear

The BBC announced today that Eddie Jordan, Sabine Schmitz, Rory Reid and Chris Harris will join Matt LeBlanc and Chris Evans (Not Capt. America Chris Evans, Billie Piper’s Ex-) on the new version of the eagerly anticipated series.

Following the announcement, Katie took to Twitter to share a snap of the new team, alongside the caption: “Token-tastic. Where’s the disabled one?”

They even have a token American!

Katie-Hopkins-462704
They forgot the Asian, The Homosexual, and The Transgendered!! Horrors!
Katie then replied: “Is being ginger (Red Head) officially a disability?”

Another person said: “Are you suggesting you should be part of the line up?” to which she hit back: “No. Although I am classified as disabled…..no joke…..imagine X”

While a different person shared: “@KTHopkins Why do you think the Stig always wears a helmet?”

BBC Release: It read: “The new team will cover the entire automotive spectrum and bring with them their own unique and very individual love of cars that will resonate with every type of Top Gear viewer from the family who enjoy the entertainment values of the show, to aspirational car lovers and fanatical petrolheads.”

Despite Chris Evans saying he’s “delighted” with the line-up though, fans of the show don’t seem overly impressed.

One person posted: “Top Gear line up is shockingly poor,” while another said: “Top Gear what are you doing? Eddie Jordon and Chris Evans? Are you trying to commit suicide? #TopGear #bbc #ratingsdownbeforeitstarts” (UK EXpress)

The Difference

mindset

Via John Hawkins at Townhall:

10) Conservatives believe that individual Americans have a right to defend themselves and their families with guns and that right cannot be taken away by any method short of a Constitutional Amendment, which conservatives would oppose. Liberals believe by taking arms away from law abiding citizens, they can prevent criminals, who aren’t going to abide by gun control laws, from using guns in the commission of crimes.

9) Conservatives believe that we should live in a color blind society where every individual is judged on the content of his character and the merits of his actions. On the other hand, liberals believe that it’s ok to discriminate based on race as long as it primarily benefits minority groups.

8) Conservatives are capitalists and believe that entrepreneurs who amass great wealth through their own efforts are good for the country and shouldn’t be punished for being successful. Liberals are socialists who view successful business owners as people who cheated the system somehow or got lucky. That’s why they don’t respect high achievers and see them as little more than piggy banks for their programs.
7) Conservatives believe that abortion ends the life of an innocent child and since we believe that infanticide is wrong, we oppose abortion. Most liberals, despite what they’ll tell you, believe that abortion ends the life of an innocent child, but they prefer killing the baby to inconveniencing the mother.6) Conservatives believe in confronting and defeating enemies of the United States before they can harm American citizens. Liberals believe in using law enforcement measures to deal with terrorism, which means that they feel we should allow terrorists to train, plan, and actually attempt to kill Americans before we try to arrest them — as if you can just send the police around to pick up a terrorist mastermind hiding in Iran or the wilds of Pakistan.

5) Conservatives, but not necessarily Republicans (which is unfortunate), believe it’s vitally important to the future of the country to reduce the size of government, keep taxes low, balance the budget, and get this country out of debt. Liberals, and Democrats for that matter, believe in big government, high taxes, and they have never met a new spending program they didn’t like, whether we will have to go into debt to pay for it or not.

4) Conservatives believe that government, by its very nature, tends to be inefficient, incompetent, wasteful, and power hungry. That’s why we believe that the government that governs least, governs best. Liberals think that the solution to every problem is another government program. Even when those new programs create new problems, often worse than the ones that were being fixed in the first place, the solution is always….you guessed it, another government program.
3) Conservatives are patriotic, believe that America is a great nation, and are primarily interested in looking out for the good of the country. That’s why we believe in “American exceptionalism” and “America first.” Liberals are internationalists who are more concerned about what Europeans think of us and staying in the good graces of the corrupt bureaucrats who control the UN than looking out for the best interests of this nation.2) Conservatives, most of them anyway, believe in God and think that the Constitution has been twisted by liberal judges to illegitimately try to purge Christianity from the public square. We also believe, most of us anyway, that this country has been successful in large part because it is a good, Christian nation and if our country ever turns away from the Lord, it will cease to prosper. Liberals, most of them anyway, are hostile to Christianity. That’s why, whether you’re talking about a school play at Christmas time, a judge putting the Ten Commandments on the wall of his court, or a store employee saying “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays,” liberals are dedicated to driving reminders of Christianity from polite society.

1) Conservatives believe in pursuing policies because they’re pragmatic and because they work. Liberals believe in pursuing policies because they’re “nice” and make them feel good. Whether the policies they’re advocating actually work or not is of secondary importance to them.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
abolished slavery-hate
%d bloggers like this: