Know Nothings

Once upon a time, Democrats were concerned with infringements on civil liberties, when the president abusing power was someone they opposed and when the deaths of Americans bothered them. It was a magical time called the 2000s, but it might as well have been a century ago because that party has since gone the way of the Dodo.

OK, Democrats never truly cared about those things in principle, mind you, but they at least paid lip service to the concept in a fairly convincing way.

To Democrats, when George W. Bush was president, he was personally responsible for the actions of soldiers he’d never met in a prison he’d never visited on the other side of the planet. Every job loss was a pink slip signed by him to enrich his Halliburton masters. Now that Barack Obama is president, the people he appointed to cabinet positions not only aren’t responsible for the actions of their subordinates, they aren’t responsible for their own actions. 

Lost on the media is the irony that the very people who have been trying to dismiss the IRS scandal as the work of “misguided mid-level rogues” would be buying out bullhorn supplies to shout their outrage had the parties been reversed. (Derk Hunter)

After all, the Democrats were the only screaming at the top of their lungs that Valerie Plaime was a big f*cking deal when it wasn’t. But that was then this is now.

And in 2013 it’s still Bush’s fault! FOR EVERYTHING. It’s the Six Degrees of Bush Blame! 🙂

And now the President is blameless for everything and nothing THEY DO is a big F*cking Deal. You complaining about it is the problem. It’s not them, it’s you!

You know the people I’m talking about. The Know-Nothings.

You know the folks who pushed that one law regarding almost 20 percent of the entire economy before they even read the bill? The ones who rushed it into law just to see what was in it? The ones who managed to write a bill, while still not being familiar with what the bill actually did?  

Yeah, those guys? The Know-Nothings.

Well, they know nothing about a lot of other stuff too.

Obama’s one of those guys. So is Eric Holder. So, apparently, is the entire staff at the IRS from the executive offices upward. 

They are kind of an “Axis of See No Evil, Hear No Evil”. (speak only evil of anyone who disagrees with you)

Below is a laundry list from the Huffington Post about Attorney General Eric Holder’s gripping testimony to congress regarding his department’s latest suppression of the First Amendment while seizing phone records from a news organization.

You know, just in case you didn’t know about it, this will clear everything up for you. And just in case you miss the subtlety below, Holder, by the way, knows nothing:

·      “I was not the person involved in that decision,”

·      “I am not familiar with the reasons why the subpoena was constructed in the way that it was because I’m simply not a part of the case.”

·      “I do not know, however, with regard to this particular case, why that was or was not done.”

·      “I simply do not have a factual basis for answering that question.”

·      “Again, Mr. Chairman, I don’t know.”

·      “I assume he was, but I don’t know.”

·      “I don’t know what has happened in this matter.”

·      “This is both an ongoing matter and an ongoing matter about which I know nothing.”

·      Holder also said he did not know “precisely” when he had recused himself from the investigation.

Liberal publications, including the Washington Post, carry similar lists.

However, Holder’s Know-Nothing affiliation shouldn’t surprise us because his boss is a Know-Nothing too.

In fact, he’s the chief Know-Nothing.

When asked about the recent Inspector General’s report on the IRS’s practice of targeting conservative groups, the president said: Hey! I just read about that! 

“I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this,” Obama said in a statement that says nothing, but still reveals much. “I think it was on Friday.”

As a follow-up I wish someone had thought to ask Obama what he had for lunch on Friday. It’d be nice to know if our president knows nothing about that as well.

Obama apparently knew nothing about Boston, about the illegal seizure of Associated Press phone records, the strong-arming of State Department employees, the constitution, the economy, job creation….

In fact, as I wrote at the beginning of the month, Obama, the know-it-all, suddenly seemed to know nothing, even before the IRS-AP fracas:

Still, it’s surprising that the administration that knows more about banking than bankers, more about healthcare than doctors, more about firearms than people who legally possess arms, more about budgets than citizens who have to balance their checkbooks and more about practically everything than anyone else, would admit that on a few things, they really know nothing.

“On most days it’s hard to tell him he’s wrong about anything,” recently confessed one top Democrat about the Commander in Brief.

It’s seems equally hard to TELL him about anything too.

But here it is:

Obama knows nothing about Benghazi.

He knows nothing about Boston’s Tsarnaev brothers.

He knows nothing about Fast and Furious; he knows nothing about green energy loans, either.

Yes, the man who recently proclaimed: I AM IN CHARGE NOW, FINALLY! knows nothing.

This seems strange coming from the administration that leaked every damn detail about how Barack Obama personally hunted down and killed Osama bin Laden, while simultaneously saving Detroit from bankruptcy… saved Detroit at least until after the election in 2012, that is.    

But the Know-Nothing party isn’t just a celebration of individual ignorance, it’s institutional too:

“Republicans seem to be losing patience with [ousted head of the Internal Revenue Service Steven] Miller because his answers don’t change,” reports the Wall Street Journal, “of course, neither have their questions. Miller, in response to rough questioning from [Republican] Dave Reichert, says he doesn’t know who is primarily responsible for initiating these searches of tea-party groups.”

“I don’t have that name, Sir,” Miller said.

Nor does anyone else at the IRS.

But of course the only people who seem surprise by this outbreak of ignorance are those other Know-Nothings, the press.

The rest of us?

We knew that this administration knew nothing a long time ago.  (John Ranson)

And if you know what’s good for you, Citizen, you’ll know nothing, ALWAYS.

And you like it that way.

And Benghazi? Forget about it!

OR ELSE! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Fail Fail Again

If at first you don’t succeed, Try, try again…

Concerned that foreclosed subprime borrowers won’t qualify for another home for years, housing-rights groups want banks to offer them “dignity mortgages.” Here we go again.

This is the left’s latest scheme to make amends for its disastrous experiment to socialize mortgages for people who could not afford homes before the crisis and should never have been approved in the first place.

But it won’t end any better, especially for the inner-city minorities whose credit the left’s already ruined.

Housing activists’ new bright idea is approving home loans for people who have rebuilt their finances since losing their job and their homes during the crisis, but who still have bad credit.

Though required to make a down payment, inner-city housing groups could front them the money.

This new type of loan they’re pitching to bank regulators would come with a higher rate to cover the higher risk.

But it would be capped so that deadbeat borrowers would pay only up to 1.25 percentage points above creditworthy borrowers.

So if, for example, a customer with sterling credit and 20% down payments got a 3.5% fixed rate, the risky applicant would get OK’d for 4.75%.

Reset Clause

But if he made timely payments for five years, the rate would drop to 3.5%, and the extra money paid in interest would be used to reduce the mortgage balance.

Only, the borrower doesn’t always have to pay. If he loses his job or his spouse, a “reset clause” lets him suspend payments temporarily.

But here’s the real kicker: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac eventually would be required to take the loans off banks’ hands.

That’s right, those same failed government wards that epically collapsed and brought down the entire mortgage industry with them after taking on too much subprime risk before the crisis.

The so-called dignity mortgage is the brainchild of Greenlining Institute’s Bob Gnaizda and Operation Hope’s John Bryant, who worry low-income blacks and Latinos are being denied credit in the wake of record subprime defaults.

They cite recent Fed lending data that show just 4% of all home loans were made to African-Americans, who make up 13% of the population, and 6% to Latinos, who represent 16%.

Ignoring credit-score data explaining the shortfalls, they charge that banks are “redlining” minorities again.

Redistributionists At Work

Both groups have redistributionist agendas. Greenlining is a Berkeley, Calif.-based anti-redlining group that before the crisis shook down banks for subprime mortgages for minorities with bad credit.

Recently, it argued for expanding the Community Reinvestment Act — a prime suspect in the lending debacle — to correct racial “inequities” in everything from stock ownership to business contracts to employment.

Bryant, meanwhile, is a major Obama supporter.

As IBD first reported, his inner-city group is a one of the recipients of millions in payola extorted from banks by Attorney General Eric Holder during his witch hunt over “lending discrimination.”

“You get your dignity back,” Bryant told foreclosed borrowers, “a chance to reset your life without being called a bum or your credit ruined.”

Don’t fret, he and Gnaizda tell worried bankers, they’ll make sure this new class of superdeadbeat applicant gets financial counseling.

This time, they promise needy borrowers will pay their bills, and in exchange for their altruism, lenders will get CRA credit from regulators.

Where have we heard this story?

Dignity mortgages are just repackaged subprime loans promoted by the same radical groups that trapped minorities in them the last time.

Thanks, but no thanks. We don’t need a sequel to this financial horror show.

But just like the original, it won’t be there fault in 10 years or so when it all crashes again.
It’s never there fault. They aren’t held accountable. So they will continue bang their head against that wall until they win.
IF they just try hard enough, long enough and have the best of intentions they will succeed! 😦
Thus, they never learn there lesson.
And we pay the price.

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Stop Picking on Me!

“With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans,” Clinton responded, raising her voice at Johnson, who continued to interrupt her. “Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”

Yeah, there’s just this massive lying that went on for weeks and months. Nothing too serious.

Nothing to see here. Stop picking on me!

Gee, when  George W Bush did something similar with “Yellow Cake from Niger” (an “intelligence failure”) the Left spend years trying to “get him” and impeach him and destroy him utterly.

Here, they just want us to leave them alone and stop picking on them. Poor Bastards.

They just lied like a Persian rug. But because they are the superior race that can never be wrong and never ever take responsibility for being wrong it’s just being nasty to call them on the carpet for lying.

She blames Congress (aka Republicans!, after all, doesn’t every liberal politician) for a lack of funding for the embassy. Yet it it was the State Department itself that decided that the security would be pulled.

The “War on Terror” was over. We won! 🙂

“The Only Person That’s In Jail Right Now Is The Filmmaker” Rep. Dana Rohrbacher.

And He didn’t even do it! 🙂

As a reminder:

“I want to take a moment to take moment to address the video circulating on the internet that has led to these protests.

“To us, to me personally, this video is disgusting and reprehensible. It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose: to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage,” Clinton said. “But as I said yesterday there is no justification, none at all, for responding to this video with violence.”

The Obama administration also used $70,000 in taxpayer money to purchase an advertisement apologizing for the video on Pakistani television. The ad included an official message from the President of the United States Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Clinton said, adding that she directed the response to the attack on 9/11, briefed President Obama and stood in the Rose Garden with him when he called it “a terrorist attack” on 9/12.  

And we won’t even get into Ambassador Rice who was dutiful stooge who lied repeatedly on TV for days on end and was obvious promised  a promotion if she did so when she was nominated for his Cabinet not long after. Fortunately, for us she didn’t get her booby prize.

But yet for weeks on end they blamed an Internet trailer and some of the more extreme on the left blame the “Congress” (aka Republicans) for it when that excuse was exposed as utter hogwash.

Today Clinton washed her hands of the situation, saying she did not choose Rice and did not help with talking points for her media appearances.

“People have accused Ambassador Rice and the administration of misleading Americans…nothing could be further than the truth,” Clinton said. “I wasn’t involved in the talking points process.”

Clinton also said that nobody in the administration was or is “stuck on talking points.”

ROTFL!!!!!!

An incumbent president covered up the truth about the murder of a U.S. ambassador and three other American personnel during the climax of his re-election campaign, even puppeteered his United Nations ambassador to echo the lie on five TV shows, all to cover up the incompetence of the Obama administration’s counter-terrorism policies.

Anything that distracted from Obama’s re-election message that “Osama bin Laden is dead” couldn’t be let out if the president’s re-election was to be assured.

Moreover, in Hillary’s afternoon testimony an unrelenting Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., reduced her to floundering that “I may be going beyond my brief here,” and to contradicting sworn testimony by deputy assistant secretary of state Charlene Lamb that the State Department observed what was happening at the U.S. facility in Benghazi in close to real time.

Instead of apologizing to the American people for the lies and her disheveled management of the State Department, Hillary used her testimony to shout at Republicans with a teary eye on 2016.

Exposing deceitfulness and incompetence in government makes a huge difference, Madam Secretary. (IBD)

But she a Liberal and Liberals are supposed to be able to get away with anything, after all because they are the superior life form capable of so much more than you petty little people.
Reps. Dana Rohrabacher, Matt Salmon and Mo Brooks mentioned the anti-Islam film originally blamed for the attack. Clinton danced around the subject by saying the investigation into what happened in Benghazi is ongoing. (townhall)
Aside: I voted for Matt Salmon when he ran against Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano for governor of Arizona. Love that guy.
 “We have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people but what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing is still unknown,” Clinton said.
So if you have no doubt they were terrorist why were you blaming a Los Angeles Internet Filmmaker for WEEKS??
Oh right, there was a re-coronation to complete. 🙂
Then ends justify the means, after all.
This tedious waltz between culpability and blamelessness permeated the entire affair. Mrs. Clinton said she is ultimately responsible for Libya but that none of the particular failures manifested there were her fault. She claimed that heads have rolled at the State Department, but the three individuals who were removed from their posts remain on paid administrative leave. She assured Congress that the State Department was acting on umpteen recommendations of a review board, but maintained, broadly, that the system worked.
We had an Ambassador named Christopher Stevens
He died! he died!
Obama said he was killed by protestors
He lied! he lied!
Why oh why is my Ambassador dead?
Could it have been terrorism  instead?
I had a 3 others named Security
They died…
(apologies to Lisa Simpson) :0

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Food For The Sowell Chapter 2

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

President Obama today issued a stern warning to Republicans in Congress threatening to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip in deficit negotiations, saying “it is not a game that I will play.”

“I want to send a very clear message to people here: We are not going to play that game next year. If Congress in any way suggests that they’re going to tie negotiations to debt ceiling votes and take us to the brink of default once again as part of a budget negotiation, which, by the way, we have never done in our history until we did it last year, I will not play that game,” Obama told some of the nation’s top CEOs at the Business Roundtable in Washington. “We’ve got to break that habit before it starts.” (ABC)

Detroit wants expects a bailout.

City Council member JoAnn Watson said Tuesday the citizens support of Obama in last month’s election was enough reason for the president to bailout the struggling the city.

“Our people in an overwhelming way supported the re-election of this president and there ought to be a quid pro quo and you ought to exercise leadership on that,” said Watson. “Of course, not just that, but why not?”

Oh goodness.

“After the election of Jimmy Carter, the honorable Coleman Alexander Young, he went to Washington, D.C. and came home with some bacon,” said Watson. “That’s what you do.” (WP)

Detroit is $1.6 Trillion in debt. Detroit has always been a liberal haven, it’s ruin by Unions mostly (yes that was a Freudian slip :)). But this is nakedly, unashamed liberal narcissism.

Bribe them, and they will come (to vote for you) now they want their Ton of bacon! And they want it now!!!!

So they can spread it to all the little bacon-nippers they’ve bribed.

The Circle of Liberal life!

Thomas Sowell: One of the big advantages that President Obama has, as he plays “chicken” with the Congressional Republicans along the “fiscal cliff,” is that Obama is a master of the plausible lie, which will never be exposed by the mainstream media– nor, apparently, by the Republicans.

A key lie that has been repeated over and over, largely unanswered, is that President Bush’s “tax cuts for the rich” cost the government so much lost tax revenue that this added to the budget deficit– so that the government cannot afford to allow the cost of letting the Bush tax rates continue for “the rich.”

Joseph Goebbels: If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

And with a  24/7/365 Ministry of Truth it is a LOT easier to do.

It sounds very plausible, and constant repetition without a challenge may well be enough to convince the voting public that, if the Republican-controlled House of Representatives does not go along with Barack Obama’s demands for more spending and higher tax rates on the top 2 percent, it just shows that they care more for “the rich” than for the other 98 percent.

What is remarkable is how easy it is to show how completely false Obama’s argument is. That also makes it completely inexplicable why the Republicans have not done so.

The official statistics which show plainly how wrong Barack Obama is can be found in his own “Economic Report of the President” for 2012, on page 411. You can look it up.

You may be able to find a copy of the “Economic Report of the President” for 2012 at your local public library. Or you can buy a hard copy from the Government Printing Office or download an electronic version from the Internet.

For those who find that “a picture is worth a thousand words,” they need only see the graphs published in the November 30th issue of Investor’s Business Daily.

http://www.nber.org/erp/ERP_2012_Complete.pdf

IBD: Turn to Pages 411-413 of his 2012 Economic Report of the President, published by the Council of Economic Advisers. They show that “the math,” as Obama is wont to say, in fact does add up for tax cuts.

After President Bush in late May 2003 signed the largest tax cut since President Reagan — including dropping the top marginal rate to 35% from 39.6% — government receipts from individual income taxes rose from $793.7 billion to a peak of $1.16 trillion in 2007, when the mortgage crisis began, a 47% jump.

Stronger economic growth expanded the tax base and brought in so much revenue that Bush more than halved the deficit over that period. The budget gap plunged to $160.7 billion from $377.6 billion, according to the president’s report.

Perhaps the most impressive statistic appears on Page 412, one that undercuts Obama’s core argument against continuing the Bush tax cuts.

The post-tax-cut surge in economic growth and tax revenues helped drive down the deficit from 3.5% of gross domestic product in 2004 to 2.6% in 2005, to 1.9% in 2006 and to a manageable 1.2% in 2007.

Based on Bush fiscal policies, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected budget deficits of 0.7% to 1.5% of GDP for the years 2008 through 2011. The CBO even predicted surpluses for the subsequent years through 2018.

What derailed the forecast was the subprime mortgage crisis of 2008.

This financial anomaly threw the economy into a deep recession, beginning in December 2007, and forced a collapse in federal tax revenues.

As a result, the deficit-to-GDP ratio shot up to 10% in 2009 and has remained around that level, thanks to record Obama spending.

(The recession technically ended in June 2009.)

Obama’s economic report shows that the average deficit-to-GDP ratio during the entire Bush administration — 2001 to 2009 — was 2%, which is well below the 50-year average of 3%.

During the Obama years, in contrast, the same deficit ratio has averaged 9.1%.

The Bush tax cuts did not “cost” the Treasury revenues. Nor did they increase income inequality.

When fully implemented, they increased the portion of the income tax burden that fell on the wealthiest Americans.

The top 1% of taxpayers went from paying 38.4% of overall taxes to 39.1%, while the bottom 50% saw their share drop from 3.4% to 3.1%.

And as a percentage of the economy, deficits shrank to historically low levels.

Record red ink flowed much later as the housing market toppled and government spending shot up.

New spending on welfare programs and Obama’s $1.9 trillion national health care entitlement threaten only to compound the budget crisis.

Yet he proposes backloading any promised spending controls while front-loading “revenue increases” from tax hikes. (IBD)

What both the statistical tables in the “Economic Report of the President” and the graphs in Investor’s Business Daily show is that (1) tax revenues went up– not down– after tax rates were cut during the Bush administration, and (2) the budget deficit declined, year after year, after the cut in tax rates that have been blamed by Obama for increasing the deficit.

Indeed, the New York Times reported in 2006: “An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.”

While the New York Times may not have expected this, there is nothing unprecedented about lower tax rates leading to higher tax revenues, despite automatic assumptions by many in the media and elsewhere that tax rates and tax revenues automatically move in the same direction. They do not.

The Congressional Budget Office has been embarrassed repeatedly by making projections based on the assumption that tax revenues and tax rates move in the same direction.

This has happened as recently as the George W. Bush administration and as far back as the Reagan administration. Moreover, tax revenues went up when tax rates went down, as far back as the Coolidge administration, before there was a Congressional Budget Office to make false predictions.

The bottom line is that Barack Obama’s blaming increased budget deficits on the Bush tax cuts is demonstrably false. What caused the decreasing budget deficits after the Bush tax cuts to suddenly reverse and start increasing was the mortgage crisis. The deficit increased in 2008, followed by a huge increase in 2009.

So it is sheer hogwash that “tax cuts for the rich” caused the government to lose tax revenues. The government gained tax revenues, not lost them. Moreover, “the rich” paid a larger amount of taxes, and a larger share of all taxes, after the tax rates were cut.

That is because people change their economic behavior when tax rates are changed, contrary to what the Congressional Budget Office and others seem to assume, and this can stimulate the economy more than a government “stimulus” has done under either Bush or Obama.

Yet there is no need to assume that Barack Obama is mistaken about the way to get the economy out of the doldrums. His top priority has always been increasing the size and scope of government. If that means sacrificing the economy or the truth, that is no deterrent to Obama. That is why he is willing to play chicken with Republicans along the fiscal cliff.

The end justify the means.  It’s only “fair” 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

 

Trolling Around

Never ask a Liberal a logical question. They will just sputter.

Congressional Democrats whine and cry that they can’t get anything accomplished with all these darn obstructionist Republicans.  But there was a time in the not too distant past when the Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress, and had the capacity to have their way and do anything they wanted.  One thing they didn’t do was to raise taxes.  And now they’re blaming the GOP for standing in their way.  Clearly this is a cynical ploy intended to paint the Republicans as trying to help wealthy people and harm the middle class, but what does Harry Reid do when he’s cornered on this

But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid couldn’t explain why he didn’t pass this bill in 2009 or 2010 when Democrats had huge majorities in the House and Senate and could have actually sent it to President Obama to sign into law.

See for yourself . . . (KFYI)

TWS: Leader Reid, when it comes to the Bush tax cuts…why didn’t Senate Democrats push through this bill back when you controlled the Senate, the House, and the presidency?

REID: The tax cuts weren’t about to expire then. So that’s why we’re doing it now.

TWS: You could have foreseen this issue two years ago.

REPORTER: What are you talking about? They expired at the end of 2010.

REID: And that’s why they were extended one year.

TWS: Why didn’t they vote when you could have pushed this bill through and had it signed into law?

REID: Next question.

I guess Harry was “trolled”. The Liberal equivalent in their mind of set-up.

Here’s apparently how this works (as I have been the “troll” before). The situation is set up.

You being the hateful non-liberal disagree with them.

They “correct” you.

You persist in disagreeing with them. So you’re just a hateful “troll” just baiting them and you are just seriously hateful and they don’t want to talk to you anymore because you’re irrational.

Lovely isn’t it. 🙂

So the hateful non-liberal asks why when you had veto proof majorities in the Congress didn’t you pass the legislation to raise taxes (aka get rid of the cuts).

They hem and haw and you press, they blow you off as a hateful troll in their mind and move on.

Urban Dictionary: Trolling is trying to get a rise out of someone. Forcing them to respond to you, either through wise-crackery, posting incorrect information, asking blatantly stupid questions, or other foolishness. However, trolling statements are never true or are ever meant to be construed as such.

And since Liberals are never wrong. If you disagree with them, especially, their “corrections” then you’re just trolling. 🙂

More facts that are “trolling”:

By the end of the third quarter of fiscal 2012, the new debt accumulated in this fiscal year by the federal government had already exceeded $1 trillion, making this fiscal year the fifth straight in which the federal government has increased its debt by more than a trillion dollars, according to official debt numbers published by the U.S. Treasury.

Prior to fiscal 2008, the federal government had never increased its debt by as much as $1 trillion in a single fiscal year. From fiscal 2008 onward, however, the federal government has increased its debt by at least $1 trillion each and every fiscal year. (KFYI)

After all, that’s Bush’s Fault and if you persist in blaming Liberals you’re just a hateful little troll who is irrational and has no clue how reality works (in Liberal land).

Another Troll:

The number of workers taking federal disability insurance payments hit yet another record in July, increasing to 8,753,935 during the month from the previous record set in June, according to newly released data from the Social Security Administration.

The 8,753,935 workers who took federal disability insurance payments in July exceeded the population of 39 of the 50 states. Only 11 states—California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina and New Jersey—had more people in them than the number of workers on the federal disability insurance rolls in July.

Another Troll:

The US poverty rate is on track to reach its highest level since the 1960′s.
According to a report from a year ago, tearly one in six Americans is living in poverty – a thirty year high.

The Associated Press surveyed more than a dozen economists, think tanks and academics, both nonpartisan and those with known liberal or conservative leanings, and found a broad consensus: The official poverty rate will rise from 15.1 percent in 2010, climbing as high as 15.7 percent. Several predicted a more modest gain, but even a 0.1 percentage point increase would put poverty at the highest level since 1965.

Poverty is spreading at record levels across many groups, from underemployed workers and suburban families to the poorest poor. More discouraged workers are giving up on the job market, leaving them vulnerable as unemployment aid begins to run out. Suburbs are seeing increases in poverty, including in such political battlegrounds as Colorado, Florida and Nevada, where voters are coping with a new norm of living hand to mouth.

Say it with me: It’s Bush’s/Congress (aka Republicans only)/Right wingers.The rich Tea Partiers Fault!!

Remember, bringing up facts like this is just trolling because you are doing it with malice in your heart and only want to piss off the liberal with this bait.
Thus, they in the process, can BLOW YOU OFF for bringing it up! 🙂
Fun, how that works, isn’t it.
THOMAS SOWELL
Since so many in the media cannot resist turning every tragedy into a political talking point, it was perhaps inevitable that (1) someone would try to link the shooting rampage at the Batman movie in Colorado to the Tea Party, and that (2) some would try to make it a reason to impose more gun control laws.Too many people in the media cannot seem to tell the difference between reporting the news and creating propaganda.NBC News apparently could not resist doctoring the transcript of the conversation between George Zimmerman and the police after the Trayvon Martin shooting. Now ABC News took the fact that the man arrested for the shooting in Colorado was named James Holmes to broadcast to the world the fact that there is a James Holmes who is a member of the Tea Party in Colorado.The fact has since come out that these are two different men, one in his 20s and the other in his 50s. But corrections never catch up with irresponsible news broadcasts. The James Holmes who belongs to the Tea Party has been deluged with phone calls. I hope he sues ABC News for every dime they have.

This is not the first time that the mainstream media have tried to create a link between conservatives and violence. Years ago, the Oklahoma City bombing was blamed on Rush Limbaugh, despite the absence of any evidence that the bomber was inspired by Rush Limbaugh.

Similar things have happened repeatedly, going all the way back to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which was blamed on a hostile right-wing atmosphere in Dallas, even though the assassin had a long history of being on the far left fringe.

But, where the shoe is on the other foot — as when the Unabomber had a much marked-up copy of an environmentalist book by Al Gore — the media heard no evil, saw no evil and spoke no evil. If people in the media cannot decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda, it is all the more important that the public understand that difference, and choose their news sources accordingly.

As for gun control advocates, I have no hope whatever that any facts whatever will make the slightest dent in their thinking — or lack of thinking. New York’s Mayor Bloomberg and CNN’s Piers Morgan were on the air within hours of the shooting, pushing the case for gun control laws.

You might never know, from what they and other gun control advocates have said, that there is a mountain of evidence that gun control laws not only fail to control guns but are often counterproductive. However, for those other people who still think facts matter, it is worth presenting some of those facts.

Do countries with strong gun control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Britain is a country with stronger gun control laws than the United States, and lower murder rates. But Mexico, Russia and Brazil are also countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States — and their murder rates are much higher than ours. Israel and Switzerland have even higher rates of gun ownership than the United States, and much lower murder rates than ours.

Even the British example does not stand up very well under scrutiny. The murder rate in New York has been several times that in London for more than two centuries — and, for most of that time, neither place had strong gun control laws. New York had strong gun control laws years before London did, but New York still had several times the murder rate of London.

It was in the later decades of the 20th century that the British government clamped down with severe gun control laws, disarming virtually the entire law-abiding citizenry. Gun crimes, including murder, rose as the public was disarmed.

Meanwhile, murder rates in the United States declined during the same years when murder rates in Britain were rising, which were also years when Americans were buying millions more guns per year.

The real problem, both in discussions of mass shootings and in discussions of gun control, is that too many people are too committed to a vision to allow mere facts to interfere with their beliefs, and the sense of superiority that those beliefs give them.

Any discussion of facts is futile when directed at such people. All anyone can do is warn others about the propaganda.

Because you’re just a Troll. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Surprises

Gee, This is a Surprise!  NOT!

The politically aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has quietly created a national network of at least eight community-organizing groups, some of which function alongside the Occupy Wall Street movement, a Daily Caller investigation shows.

Incorporated by the SEIU as local non-profits, the groups are waging concerted local political campaigns to publicly attack conservative political figures, banks, energy companies and other corporations.

Each local group has portrayed itself as an independent community organization not tied to any special interest. But they were founded, incorporated, and led by SEIU personnel.

The individual activist groups use benign-sounding names including This Is Our DC; Good Jobs, Great Houston; Good Jobs, Better Baltimore; Good Jobs Now in Detroit; Fight for Philly; One Pittsburgh; Good Jobs LA; and Minnesotans for a Fair Economy.

In reality, they are creations of the wealthy and influential labor union, amounting to a secret network of new SEIU front groups.

Union Liberals behind the Occupy Wall Street Movement. Gee, I’m shocked! 🙂

If you think the Occupy Movement is just a bunch of smelly hippies playing drums in the park, you’re wrong. The Occupy Movement is an organized group of union leaders, academics and anarchists with one common goal: to destroy capitalism. Don’t believe it?

http://www.breitbart.com/breitbart-tv/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/03/05/occupy_seui_and_academics_working_together_to_destroy_capitalism

GAS PRICES

Now DNC Chair Wasserman-Schultz- Under Bush: She blamed Bush and his cronies in the Oil Industry for the high gas prices (going to $3.22 a gallon by the way).

May 2007: “We are now paying more than double than when President Bush took office”

Now comes the Weasel 4 days ago:“What I was referring to in that speech, as I have for many years, is that focusing on fossil fuels and continuing the ‘drill baby drill’ strategy that President Obama rightly referred to the other day in south Florida as ‘a bumper sticker, not an energy policy,’

Ohhh! Am I surprised with the about face- no!

“We are not going to address gas prices over the long-term because there is — there is no President in the short-term that can really change policy and impact gas prices in a significant way. But what we do need to do is over the short-term and long-term make sure that we are using the ‘all of the above’ strategy that President Obama has employed: more domestic energy production than we’ve had in eight years (Thanks to Bush as she says, it takes time so Obama benefits from THAT time), making sure that we invest for the future in alternative energy like wind and solar and hydroelectric power, so that we can really start to impact our need to depend on…” (Go Algaeman! Solyndra Abroad Solar, etc)

“But A lot of Americans are wondering what’s going to happen now and a lot of those things take time,” Carlson shot back.

“Affecting gas prices takes time,” Schultz acknowledged. “You’re absolutely right,”

Unless it’s Republican President then that is.

President Obama’s election-year prescription to accelerate steeply higher energy prices is to add billions of dollars to the oil companies’ tax bills. Expensive gasoline fits the Obama political template.

‘Every time you fill up the gas tank, they’re making money.” That applause line, delivered Thursday by the president from Nashua, N.H., speaks volumes about the thinking that lies at the root of this presidency.

Resentment against the successful is what Barack Obama wants to cultivate among Americans, dividing the dependents of the government, who pay no income taxes to fund it, against the nation’s private-sector producers, who finance the state’s dependency machine by paying the vast bulk of the income taxes.

Fed up with prices at your local gas station going up, up and away, past the $4 level toward $5 and even higher? The president says you should take out your frustration by telling Congress to end the perfectly reasonable oil-and-gas industry tax deductions on drilling costs and other technical aspects of production.

House Speaker John Boehner was quick to respond that “a freshman-year economics student could tell you that increasing taxes on energy production would make gas prices go up, not down.” But Obama’s crass appeal to baser instincts has nothing to do with economics — or solving problems — and everything to do with politics.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu let the cat out of the bag years ago. “Somehow,” he said in 2008, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

Why would anyone want the government to try to make oil prices skyrocket? Answer: So they can get the public to stop resisting the radical environmentalist agenda, have people accept their fate that they have to drive cars that are little better than golf carts, and ultimately convince them to keep their driving to a bare minimum. Mass transit anyone? Ever try carpooling? (IBD)

Surprise! Class Warfare…who saw that coming…. 🙂

OBAMACARE

Our friend Matt Lewis of The Daily Caller has an amusing and still quite relevant piece this weekend regarding the Supreme Court’s upcoming review of Obamacare in general and the individual mandate in particular. In it, he describes a meeting he had with Karen Harned of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) who are knee deep in the battle. She turns out to be relatively optimistic about the challenge to the law.

It’s crowded at the Caribou Coffee on 17th and L streets in Washington, but over the din of lobbyists and caffeine fiends, I ask her to sketch out the NFIB’s arguments. “What we’ve seen in all the cases,” she explains — “the one question they cannot answer is: ‘Where does it end?’”

Hers is a slippery slope argument, but that doesn’t mean questioning the government’s ability to regulate economic “inactivity” isn’t legitimate. “You could say, ‘Well it’s good for everybody to exercise — so let’s mandate everybody to join the gym.”

I stir my coffee nervously. As if the thought of being forced to (gulp!) exercise isn’t horrifying enough already, Harned continued: “It’s good for everybody to take vitamins … It’s good for people to eat five fruits and vegetables a day! — Why don’t we make all grocers give those foods away for free — and [require] more people buy broccoli?”

At first, the broccoli reference threw me, but it’s actually pertinent. During a previous trial — when appeals court Justice Laurence Silberman asked Deputy Assistant Attorney General Beth Brinkmann if requiring Americans to buy broccoli would be unconstitutional — she answered: “No. It depends.”

This may sound trite at first blush, but in the end it does seem to be the pertinent question which the justices will have to consider. I agree that “slippery slope” argument are frequent, easy targets for critics, and many are little more than straw men. But there are still some cases where they would apply, and this seems to be one of them.

Handing the federal government the power to regulate a lack of economic activity – as opposed to their recognized power to regulate some actual activity for the public good – opens up a door to a hallway which would seem to stretch to infinity. Can the President, in fact, force us to eat our peas as opposed to saying it in a rhetorical fashion?

The government’s argument would seem to be that such a mandate could be construed as being “for the common good” of society, and would save money in the long run. And while that may prove to be true, is it their place to make that determination? This smells suspiciously like the court’s decision in Kelo vs. New London when the phrase “public use” was not very subtly morphed to include “for the public benefit.” And as soon as you let Washington have the final say as to what is in your personal best interest, all bets are off.

Broccoli? I happen to like it.. sometimes. But I don’t want Washington, DC telling me to buy it. Do you? (Hot air)

The other government argument the NFIB intends to eviscerate is the free rider argument — the notion that health care mandates are vital because otherwise people will just “game” the system by refusing to pay for health care coverage while simultaneously using health services.

This, of course, is a conundrum. But the government’s “solution” would also open up a can of constitutional worms.

The government hopes to argue that the health market is unique — that the slope isn’t slippery at all. But cost shifting occurs all the time, everywhere. “We all pay in fees to our credit cards for the people who don’t pay their credit card bills,” Harned says. “We all pay in our mortgage interest for the people who default on their mortgage”…

It all comes back to this: If the government can mandate the purchase of health care insurance, what can’t they mandate?

“They could create a crisis a day if they want to,” Harned warns.

And we all know about “Never Let a Crisis go to Waste ” 🙂

Surprise! 🙂

Pro-ILLEGALS

Lawyers representing Latinos who accuse Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office of racial profiling are asking a federal judge to block Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees from being called to testify by the sheriff’s lawyers at a trial.

Motions filed late Friday in the suit say ICE gave the sheriff’s lawyers permission to depose five ICE employees, but the depositions were never conducted.

Lawyers for the five Latinos who sued say they were therefore unable to counter with their own questions for the ICE workers. They say Arpaio’s lawyers should be barred from calling the employees to the stand.

The plaintiff’s attorneys also wrote that two other ICE agents who did give depositions have no relevant testimony and also should not be called. (AZStarnet)

This is bunk. But the Liberals and Pro-Illegals just want their side and only their side to come out and forget about the other side.
But is it a Surprise? NO!

An Anniversary in Civility

1 year ago a nutcase shot and killed 6 people and wounded a Congresswoman.

The Leftists at The Daily Kos 1/10/11: It’s understandable that the Tea Party is trying its best to deflect any blame for the massacre in Tucson and the attempted assassination of Gabby Giffords. And it is understandable if, in their desperation, they might be driven to ridiculous excuses and spin on the level of Sarah Palin’s “surveyor marks” excuse.

But I guess the heat is getting to the Tea Party, because they are really going off the deep end in their rhetroric. Consider Tea Party Patriots leader Mark Meckler, who had this to say:

Overwhelmed by criticism of the right over the Arizona shooting in recent days, Tea Party Patriots Mark Meckler can barely control his anger.

“To see the left exploit this for political advantage – some people have no conscience,” Meckler said over the phone. “It’s genuinely revolting…I think it sinks to the level of evil.”

Added Meckler: “if these scumbags want to play it politically, let it be on their conscience.”

Yikes. Talk about a “HULK SMASH!” outburst.

Only the Tea Party never had anything to do with it and it’s not like the Left cared. They saw an opportunity for a cheap political stunt, they took it.

The New York Post was able to contact Spencer Giffords as he headed to the hospital, asking him if Ms. Giffords had any enemies. From the Post:

“Yeah,” he told The Post. “The whole tea party.”

He added that politicians constantly faced danger.

“They always get threat[ened],” Gifford cried. “We don’t really have any information. The Police department was supposed to call us but they didn’t.”

Sixty-three-year-old James Eric Fuller, who was shot during last week’s shooting in Arizona and survived, was arrested following a town-hall meeting yesterday for taking a picture of tea party leader Trent Humphries and yelling, “You’re dead!”

Yes, Fuller is also the guy who told reporters after the shooting, “It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target.”

The Leftists at the Slate 1/10/11: There’s something offensive, as well as pointless, about the politically charged inquiry into what might have been swirling inside the head of Jared Loughner. We hear that the accused shooter read The Communist Manifesto and liked flag-burning videos— good news for the right. Wait—he was a devotee of Ayn Rand and favored the gold standard, so he was a right-winger after all. Some assassinations embody an ideology, however twisted. Based on what we know so far, the Tucson killings look like more like politically tinged schizophrenia.

It was the anti-government, pro-gun, xenophobic populism that flourishes in the dry and angry climate of Arizona. Extremist shouters didn’t program Loughner, in some mechanistic way, to shoot Gabrielle Giffords. But the Tea Party movement did make it appreciably more likely that a disturbed person like Loughner would react, would be able to react, and would not be prevented from reacting, in the crazy way he did.

First you rile up psychotics with inflammatory language about tyranny, betrayal, and taking back the country. Then you make easy for them to get guns. But if you really want trouble, you should also make it hard for them to get treatment for mental illness. I don’t know if Loughner had health insurance, but he falls into a pool of people who often go uninsured—not young enough to be covered by parents (until the health-care bill’s coverage of twentysomethings kicked in a few months ago), not old enough for Medicare, not poor enough for Medicaid. If such a person happens to have a history of mental illness, he will be effectively uninsurable. To get treatment, he actually has to commit a crime. If Republicans succeed in repealing the Obama health care bill, that’s how it will remain.

Again, none of this says that Tea Party caused the Tucson tragedy, only that its politics increased the odds of something like it happening.

Jan 12,2011: From President Obama’s “Civility” speech

As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let’s use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy and remind ourselves of all the ways that our hopes and dreams are bound together.

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.

So which of these various statements and pronouncement are Lies or just inherently dishonest?

ALL OF THEM.

And the truth is a tragedy but the real tragedy lost on this for the last year:

Gabe Zimmerman, 30 Outreach Director for Giffords;John Roll, 63, a federal judge; Phyllis Schneck, 79; Dorothy Morris, 76; Dorwan Stoddard, 76; and Christina Taylor-Green, 9.

They are the true victims.

And politics ultimately had nothing to do with it. But after that was clearly apparent did anyone on the left notice?

No , of course not. They were already on to the next attack with absolutely no remorse or recollection.

And that’s the political lesson to be learned.

The rest is just a tragedy to be remembered properly.

Image