Hard Truth

Matt Walsh:

We all know that American universities have become places of intense psychological indoctrination. We also know that kids often go into college malleable, immature, and oversensitive, and come out even more malleable, immature, and oversensitive. We all read the stories about college kids constantly having conniption fits whenever confronted with words, opinions, and ideas that upset them. Indeed, only on a modern American college campus could you find actual adults unironically demanding “safe spaces” and the like.

I still find self-imposed segregation hilarious though.

But I think there’s a deeper reason for the epidemic of wimpiness in our universities and in my generation as a whole. I think it stems from the idea that we as individuals are supreme, and as the supreme beings in the universe, our feelings and thoughts should be the primary concern of everyone else. In this view of things — the progressive view — I am the greatest, most important, most special creature in all of creation, and everyone and everything else is secondary. It stands to reason that, as a god among mortals, my emotions ought to be the top priority in the world.

Homo Superior Liberalis.

I wrote this to help dispel that notion. There are three hard truths — all centered around this faulty belief — that I attempt to very delicately and diplomatically explain here. But the first and most important is that your feelings aren’t nearly as important as you think. Of all the things a young adult should learn, that might be the most crucial lesson of all:

And I would add when your a Senior Citizen and you’ve “earned it” by still being here after decades that your feelings are STILL not the most important thing on Earth.

Some Liberals never grow up.

As Michael Brandon once said in character on the British Tv show (imagine an American on a British Tv show) Dempsey and Makepeace – “Life is hard, and then you die.”

I’m assured that, on occasion, learning still happens on college campuses.

But the Diversity and Inclusion Police are working overtime to make sure this stops as soon as possible.

I have not detected any evidence of this, but I accept it as a matter of faith. People I trust have assured me that universities are not just bastions of cultish indoctrination — there’s a lot of sex and beer pong, too. But sometimes, I’m informed, a rebellious student might endeavor to adsorb an actual fact or piece of knowledge. Again, I cannot independently confirm this shocking claim.

It would be extraordinary. 🙂

These rogue learners aside, it’s obvious that college is often a place where students go to erase from their minds any trace of truth or common sense. Supplanted in its place is a dreamscape of “white privilege” and “systematic racism” and “non-binary gender” and “patriarchy” and “transgenderism” and leprechauns and climate change and other fictional phenomena. Central to this fantasy world is always me. Not me, specifically, but the Great Me, the Mighty Me, the Universal Me.

Not this Me.

The Almighty Me. Where I am the Center of The Universe and the Universe shall bow down before ME and do what I want them to do.

The primary lesson kids learn in college and in our culture is that they, personally, individually, are primary. Their thoughts, ideas, and (especially) feelings are the most important things in existence, and all of existence ought to bend to their whim. If they feel sad, the world must make them happy. If they say something, the world must listen. If they believe something to be true, the world must play along.

That’s the ticket. Narcissism 101.

We could spend all day talking about the lies kids are taught in college and in society at large, but this, the primacy of their own emotions and beliefs, is the most damaging. I thought, then, it might be a good idea to run down a list of three basic, uncomfortable, common sense truths, for the benefit of these college students (and everyone else). One day I hope to put these in a speech and deliver them at a college graduation ceremony, but I haven’t been invited to do that, so for now I’ll just leave them here:

1. Nobody Cares About Your Feelings

Now, there are some exceptions to this rule. Hopefully your mom cares about your feelings. Maybe your grandmother too, and your therapist as long as you’re paying him. But, despite what you’ve been told, the general population of Earth is not overly concerned with your emotional state.

Shutterstock

That’s not to say everyone is cruel and heartless – although many people are, and sometimes they end up as your landlord or your boss — but nobody considers protecting your feelings to be a terribly important project. Nobody wakes up in the morning determined to make sure you feel happy and satisfied. Everyone has a list of priorities in their life, and your feelings are not at the top of anyone’s list. They’re not even at the top of your mother’s list, and if she’s a really good mother she already made that clear to you when you were a child.

Personally, I don’t want you to feel bad and sad and depressed and forlorn, but it is not my job or my priority to prevent you from feeling that way. And if reality, facts, and truth give you a tummy ache, then I will purposefully hurt your feelings, not for the sake of hurting them, but for the sake of forcing the bitter, scary, beautiful, glorious pill of truth down your throat. It will be for your own good. If I could chop the truth up and feed it to you in your applesauce like I do with my kids when they’re sick, I would. But you can’t take a dose of truth that way. When you mix applesauce with truth, you end up with a diluted truth, and a diluted truth is no truth at all.

This is an important point because we live in a society where everyone seems to think their feelings should be the prerogative of everyone they meet. This is especially true on college campuses, where students often insist they be let off the hook from assignments and responsibilities because their academic duties make them feel anxious. College students are not afraid to announce their hurt feelings to the world, as if that fact is somehow relevant to any of us. Of course, your delusion in this regard is understandable, considering how universities have turned hurt feelings into a criminal matter.

It has been proven scientifically that emotions can override reason and logic, so the best way for Liberals to be and to want to make more of themselves is to make you obsessed with your “feelings” and to make everything emotional. It works. Look at the Democrats.

That sort of coddling and pampering leads to stories… where a millennial employee at Yelp posted an open letter to her CEO demanding a raise. She complained about her difficult life as an entry level worker, and said she can’t improve her position because she feels too stressed. This, she was quite sure, should be the concern of her employer. Well, her employer disagreed and fired her instead.

As I learn everyday at work, your boss and their boss, and their boss, etc don’t give a shit what you think. No matter what they say in platitude, they really don’t care. It’s their buisiness and they are going to do it their way, and so are you. Period. End of Discussion.

That’s kind of hilarious to most of us, but terrifying to people who’ve gotten used to getting their way when they cry loudly enough. Children learn this strategy from the moment of birth and many find it successful all the way into their 20s. Eventually, though, the gravy train must come to a halt.

Which is Liberals always sound like whiny 2 year olds. 🙂

These days, we think our feelings entitle us to an infinite smorgasbord of perks and privileges. We think our feelings ought to be the primary driving force of not only our own lives, but the lives of everyone around us. And we think wrong. Indeed, nobody cares about your feelings nearly as much as you do, and you shouldn’t really care about them all that much either. Feelings follow action, so go out and do things, and keep doing them, and over time you’ll discover that your feelings don’t have a stranglehold on your life. Once you figure that out, you’ll stop expecting them to have a stranglehold on everyone else.

But you’ll be a lousy Liberal. 🙂

2. Nobody Has To Take Your Opinions Seriously

Again with the aforementioned exceptions of your mom, your grandmother, and maybe your friends. But probably not all of your friends because most of your friends aren’t actually friends, especially if your friendship has been thus far predicated on a common enthusiasm for not being sober. You may have two or three friends who truly, intimately care about you and your thoughts. Hardly anybody has more real friends than that, and most have fewer or none at all.

As for the rest of us, we don’t care what you think until you give us a reason to care, and even then we don’t care that much. It’s fine if you have opinions, but you can’t expect everyone to stop what they’re doing and take your opinion into account just because you voiced it.

Unless you’re a Democrat or a Liberal,especially one with any power at all. Then you think you’re King Obama or Queen-To-Be Hillary.

Shutterstock

This is a really important point because we’re living in a culture where everyone walks around constantly declaring “I have a right to an opinion.” And you do have a right to an opinion, but the problem with that statement is that it doesn’t mean anything. You could be a peasant living in a North Korean slum and you’d still have the right to an opinion, in the sense that nobody could stop you from formulating one (although they might execute you with an anti-aircraft missile if you say it out loud).

You see, when most people say they have a “right to an opinion” what they really mean, in context, is they have a right to have their opinions listened to and respected. But you have no such right, and the unfortunate reality is that, out of the 60 or 70 trillion opinions voiced in America every day, about 99 percent of them are not remotely worthy of attention, much less respect.

It’s that whole “consensus” thing that Liberal groupthink throws around.

If you want your thoughts to be regarded just because they’re your thoughts, talk to your mom, or get married and talk to your spouse. If you want your thoughts to be regarded by total strangers in the general population, you have to develop a reputation as a thoughtful, intelligent person who possesses insight and wisdom. Nobody considers you insightful and wise just because you graduated college. In fact, they probably assume the opposite.

Nowadays, when you tell someone you went to college, they preemptively roll their eyes because they assume you’re about to say something idiotic that will probably include the term ”cisgender” or “heteronormative” or “cultural appropriation” or whatever. There used to be a certain prestige attached to college. Now people look at you like you just escaped a doomsday commune, which isn’t very far from the truth.

You’re going to have to prove that your thoughts are relevant and valuable. Nobody will give you the benefit of the doubt on that front, I’m afraid.

3. It’s Your Fault If You’re Offended

Think of the phrase: “I take offense.” Take. That’s a verb. An action. You have taken offense. You weren’t given it or subjected to it or forced into it, you took it. You sifted through whatever was said, whatever idea or concept you were exposed to, and took offense from it. You didn’t have to. You chose it.

You could have reached into the comment and taken something else: insight, humor, cookies. Well, probably not cookies, but if you dig deeper you might find something other than a reason to be so indignant and insufferable all the time.

But it make YOU feel so good and so Superior. 🙂

Somewhere along the line we started operating under the assumption that it’s the job of the speaker to control the way in which the hearer receives his words. We decided that if the hearer receives them negatively – even if they were not meant negatively, even if it’s merely the hearer’s opinion that the message is negative or insulting — it’s the fault of the speaker. The speaker must now apologize for how you interpreted or processed what he said.

That would be Political Correctness. The Victim is always right. 🙂

Shutterstock

Think, for example, of the controversy surrounding the Redskins. Everyone knows that nobody currently associated with the Redskins organization actually intends the name to be some kind of racist jab at Indians. It’s just a name. It’s a word that, in modern times, means only “the name of the professional football team in Washington, D.C.” Nobody uses it in any other context. The intent behind the word is entirely harmless and innocent. But a few people have declared that they find it offensive, and that’s supposed to carry weight with the rest of us. The answer for these offended folks — and for anyone else who takes offense at things that aren’t supposed to be offensive — is simply to stop being offended.

It’s like I have a pet peeve about people eating cream cheese bagels around me. It’s the weirdest thing. I just get annoyed about how people eat bagels. I can’t quite explain it. Maybe I suffered some kind of bagel related trauma as a child, I don’t know. The point is, it’s not your problem that I get annoyed when you eat a bagel in my presence.  It’s a perfectly innocent thing to do. I don’t get to make rules about the food you consume in my vicinity just because I’m a disturbed and insane person. So you go on eating your bagels, and I’ll just have to deal with it. In similar fashion, people will go on using words you might not like, and you’ll just have to deal with it. Your linguistic aversions are not their problem.

Now, obviously there are times when a person intends to offend, but still in those cases it is your decision if you allow the person’s words to cause you grief. People say awful things to me all the time but I choose not to be offended, usually. Here and there I do choose to be offended, especially when some sniveling, anonymous troll responds to my opinions by attacking my children or my wife (which happens approximately 87 times a day, because people are awful, which is another lesson you should learn in a hurry), but I can’t really do anything with the offense I’ve taken.

I just stew in it for a while and then I’m forced to move on with my day. Taking offense accomplished nothing. I’m left just standing there holding it with nowhere to put it. I can try to take my offense to a pawn shop and trade it for a pair of rollerblades, or deposit it in the bank so it can accrue interest over time, but I’ll find that my offense is even more worthless to other people that it is to me. My only choice is to drop it and continue living my life.

I think dropping it and living your life is generally a profitable skill, and not one they teach in college. Then again, they don’t really teach any skills, so that’s not surprising.

There are other hard truths, but we don’t have the space to explain them here. A honorable mentions list would include:

4. Nobody will take you seriously if you try to lecture them about their “privilege.”

5. Nobody will take you seriously if you call yourself a feminist.

6. Nobody will take you seriously if you ever unironically use the phrase “safe space.”

7. Nobody will take you seriously if you ever admit in public that you took a class on “gender theory.”

And I could go on, but I don’t want to overwhelm you. Let’s start with the first three and work from there.

Yes, these are hard truths, but the truth is rarely easy. And that’s probably the hardest and most important truth of all.

You are not the Center of The Universe. You are Not the most important being that is a alive or has ever been alive. Your views on life are not the paramount importance of the Universe and God’s Sake if I hear, “But that not what I want…” I will gladly tell you I don’t care.

Suck it up, Buttercup. No one really cares.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder/basics/definition/con-20025568

 

The Dependent Life

Americans have now elected twice a man who said he wanted to spread the wealth around. So how ugly is it going to get? The Senate Budget Committee says welfare spending will nearly double in 10 years.This would be the Senate Budget Committee that refused to pass a budget for the 4th time in a row despite it being a requirement of both the Congress and The President. 🙂

Using data from the Congressional Research Service and Congressional Budget Office, the Budget Committee’s Republican staff has added up what’s spent on cash aid, health assistance, housing assistance, and social and family services.

All told, welfare spending will rocket from roughly $800 billion in the current fiscal year to about $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2022 — a nearly 80% jump.

All told, overall welfare spending for the decade will be $11 trillion — “roughly one-quarter of cumulative federal spending,” the Budget Committee reports.

And that doesn’t even include state spending on welfare, which, when added to federal benefits, was more than $1 trillion in fiscal 2011. That’s enough, the Budget Committee tells us, “to mail every household in poverty a check for $60,000 each year.”

How did we get here? In Obama-esque fashion, of course. The committee says the unimaginable spending is in part “driven by a series of controversial recruitment methods that include aggressive outreach to those who say they do not need financial assistance.”

Recruitment. Come be poor on the government’s dime. It’s free, it’s easy and you can be lazy. And all you have to do to maintain it is vote for me because the other guy’s an asshole who wants to take your candy away.

“Recruitment workers are even instructed on how to ‘overcome the word “no”‘ when individuals resist enrollment,” says committee research. “The USDA and Department of Homeland Security also have promotions to increase the number of immigrants on welfare despite legal prohibitions on welfare use among those seeking admittance into the United States.”

We want you to buy this poverty that you don’t need and you get a Free Obama Phone as free gift, and if you act now we’ll throw in free internet also!

So where’s my Ginzu Knife? 🙂

The best welfare program is not a government plan.

It is a strong, expanding economy, which is, in fact, the only path for overcoming poverty.

But poverty and the class warfare to go with it works much better for Democrats. A Permanent underclass is preferred. And then you add in 12 million illegal aliens and you have a voting block to win elections regardless of how bad things get for everyone else. What could be better than that? 🙂

Science fiction writer Robert Heinlein noted that “throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man.” It is only through free enterprise, which is fed by open trade, unfettered capitalism and liberalized markets, that humans have emerged from their natural state in which life was nasty, brutish and short.

To paraphrase the great Milton Friedman, man’s great achievements have not been the product of a government program, a redistributionary scheme or bustling bureaucracy. They are due to the simple profit motive at work in political systems that let people be fittingly compensated for their innovations and efforts.

No system has lifted man’s standard of living as free enterprise has. As Friedman also once said, the masses that suffer the most from grinding poverty are those trapped in societies that depart from free enterprise.

But Free enterprise is evil. Just as a Democrat.

“The record of history is absolutely crystal clear,” he said. “There is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.”

Washington’s focus should be on removing the restraints it has placed on free enterprise rather than busying itself with building a nation of dependents, as it has for the last eight decades.

But then it wouldn’t all be about them and what they want. We can’t have that!!

A growing welfare state helps no one — aside from politicians who traffic in addiction to government — but a burgeoning economy improves everyone’s well being.

But the addiction to government IS what government wants. The more the merrier.

Having people struggle and fail and struggle and succeed is far worse than people just sitting back and letting government do everything for them and then voting to continue to give them more and more of less and less and less.

It’s not what’s good for the people that matters. Its what’s good for the government that matters. After all, government is both Mother and God all rolled into one. Government can solve anything, can take care of anyone, better than any force on earth, right?

The best policy? Doubling not welfare spending over the next decade, but the size of the economy. (IBD)

But then you have a bunch ungrateful rich and independent people who want to do what’s best for THEM, and not you the government and we can’t allow that to happen now can we.
And don’t bother talking to people about inflation. The Democrats have bred their cattle dumb and with an unhealthy uninformed narcissism just like they like them.

If you put $1,000 in your piggy bank in 1960 and took it out to spend in 2000, you would discover that your money had, over time, lost 80 percent of its value.

Despite all the political rhetoric today about how nobody’s taxes will be raised, except for “the rich,” inflation transfers a percentage of everybody’s wealth to a government that expands the money supply. Moreover, inflation takes the same percentage from the poorest person in the country as it does from the richest.

That’s not all. Income taxes only transfer money from your current income to the government, but it does not touch whatever money you may have saved over the years. With inflation, the government takes the same cut out of both. (thomas sowell)

But “soak the rich” is the battle cry to get the addicted to rise up against their “oppressor” and vote to stick it to them!!!
The sheep then get sheered and don’t even know they got fleeced.
Always the best strategy for a thief, to make sure the mark never knows (or know way too late) that they’ve been robbed.
The use The Ministry of Truth to cover it up and rile up the addicts and you have the making a of a perpetual E-motion machine that will do your bidding almost mindlessly.
What could be better.

The biggest and most deadly “tax” rate on the poor comes from a loss of various welfare state benefits– food stamps, housing subsidies and the like– if their income goes up.

Someone who is trying to climb out of poverty by working their way up can easily reach a point where a $10,000 increase in pay can cost them $15,000 in lost benefits that they no longer qualify for. That amounts to a marginal tax rate of 150 percent– far more than millionaires pay. Some government policies help some people at the expense of other people. But some policies can hurt welfare recipients, the taxpayers and others, all at the same time, even though in different ways.

Why? Because we are too easily impressed by lofty political rhetoric and too little interested in the reality behind the words. (Thomas Sowell)

Dependency is Life. Life is dependency.
Government is your GOD.God will provide (hence cutting spending is also an evil that must be destroyed).
Life isn’t fair, but Government will make it fair! For you! All you have to is sell your soul to the Government store!
Join the faith!!!…. You will be Assimilated!…. or else!
Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Your Lord and Master

Click to visit the original post

One of the things that gauls me the most about Liberals is their sanctimony.
There absolute conviction that they are the superior moral being and your just a dumb greedy mindless chimp.
A guy on the radio was spewing his sanctimony about “equality” and “fairness” where rich people needed to have their money taken from them because he was more concerned about  the poor and starving and giving them a “fair shot” and an “opportunity”.

Because after all, they have no shot now. And they are incompetent to begin with so government must step in and save the day!
When asked if he was concerned about giving the government the ability to just take a persons money just because they have millions of dollars the sanctimonious liberal just comes back repeated about rich people have different morals and he was concerned with the poor and the starving and refused to answer the question and just want to pontificate about how superior his “morality” was compared to evil non-liberals.
That’s what makes him “feel” good.
All emotion no logic.
All sanctimony.
Paraphrase: “when two babies are born I see one that will work at McDonalds and the other has a trust fund”
The sanctimonious liberal wants to piously pontificate about opportunity for the poor.

The way to do that is take from the rich and give it to the poor but that’s not “redistribution of wealth” because the Liberal puffed himself up and said with due pride “I’m not a socialist I’m just concerned about the poor”.

Yikes! Orwell would be proud of you my son.
That way they have an equal opportunity to work hard and be successful.
Notice anything wrong with that logic??
And then there’s the problem of when does the person who was poor and worked their ass off to make themselves rich cross the line into Evil, rich greed, immoral bastard worthy of having their success stripped from them in the name of the Liberal holy sanctimony??
And what incentive does that give to the person to become rich anyhow?
None.
Hey, if the Liberals are always going to give you everyone’s fish because it’s “fair” and they will “feel” good doing it then why do you need to learn to fish for yourself.

If Master Liberal is always going to promise you that they will deliver the booty why then do you need to “struggle”??

The only struggle you need is to elect Democrats so they can take the money from someone else and give it to you.

From Media Matters- The Propaganda Arm of The Obama Administration (as proven by Fast & Furious): In a report released April 9, researchers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimated that food stamps “reduced the poverty rate by nearly 8 percent in 2009.” That year, USDA researchers concluded, food stamps reduced the depth of child poverty by 20.9 percent.

As MSNBC’s Al Sharpton explained, “facts matter” in the debate over anti-poverty programs.

Valerie Jarrett: according to her, unemployment checks — in some round about way — are actually “good for” and “stimulate” the economy. “People Who Receive That Unemployment Check Go Out And Spend It And Help Stimulate The Economy.”

Nancy Pelosi: “It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck,” she said.

Dean Baker: Unemployment Insurance “Stimulates The Economy” By “Put[ting] Money In … [The] Pockets” Of People Who Are “Very Likely To Spend” It. In an August 30, 2011, email to Media Matters, Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research

Moody’s Economist Sophia Koropeckyj: They’ve likely depleted their savings, and this is really all the income that they have. And they have kids to feed, they have rent to pay, and there’s a very, very high probability they’re going to spend that entire amount that they get.

<LYNN> NEARY (NPR Host): And where do they spend it? In stores.

KOROPECKYJ: That initial infusion into the economy of the unemployment insurance benefits then reverberates through the economy, flows through the economy in a variety of ways, and so that, you know, $1 of benefits is magnified. [NPR, All Things Considered, 7/11/10]

Then Media Matters goes on to cites the CBO.

But when the CBO came out with ObamaCare was going to cost twice as much and would cause lots of people to lose their own insurance they ignored it.

Funny how that worked out.

The fact that they only give you the scraps and make you “feel” good about and gin up Class Warfare to cover up it’s deficiencies and fakery and keep most of it for THEIR cronies is immaterial because you are told you are entitled to it so when the government hands out its meager portions to you the peasants you are so grateful to your Lord and Master for their protection, wisdom, guidance and love.

If this is starting to sound like a Medieval King-Lord-Royalty-Peasant relationship you are catching my drift.

The Elites and The “grateful” peasants.

Also sounds a bit like Communism.

Funny how that worked out. 🙂

OBAMACARE

Call it President Obama’s Committee for the Re-Election of the President — a political slush fund at the Health and Human Services Department.

Only this isn’t some little fund from shadowy private sources; this is taxpayer money, redirected to help Obama win another term. A massive amount of it, too — $8.3 billion. Yes, that’s billion, with a B.

Here is how it works.

The most oppressive aspects of the ObamaCare law don’t kick in until after the 2012 election, when the president will no longer be answerable to voters. More “flexibility,” he recently explained to the Russians.

But certain voters would surely notice one highly painful part of the law before then — namely, the way it guts the popular Medicare Advantage program.

For years, 12 million seniors have relied on these policies, a more market-oriented alternative to traditional Medicare, without the aggravating gaps in coverage.

But as part of its hundreds of billions in Medicare cuts, the Obama one-size-fits-all plan slashes reimbursement rates for Medicare Advantage starting next year — herding many seniors back into the government-run program.

The cuts were 1/2 of what was supposed to be the offest of the cost of the original price of ObamaCare. Which is now a 1/4 because the costs of ObamaCare have gone up even before this happens.

But funny how it was all set for after the election… 🙂

Under federal “open-enrollment” guidelines, seniors must pick their Medicare coverage program for next year by the end of this year — which means they should be finding out before Election Day.

Nothing is more politically volatile than monkeying with the health insurance of seniors, who aren’t too keen on confusing upheavals in their health care and are the most diligent voters in the land. This could make the Tea Party look like a tea party.

Making matters even more politically dangerous for Obama is that open enrollment begins Oct. 15, less than three weeks before voters go to the polls.

It’s hard to imagine a bigger electoral disaster for a president than seniors in crucial states like Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio discovering that he’s taken away their beloved Medicare Advantage just weeks before an election.

This political ticking time bomb could become the biggest “October Surprise” in US political history.

But the administration’s devised a way to postpone the pain one more year, getting Obama past his last election; it plans to spend $8 billion to temporarily restore Medicare Advantage funds so that seniors in key markets don’t lose their trusted insurance program in the middle of Obama’s re-election bid.

The money is to come from funds that Health and Human Services is allowed to use for “demonstration projects.” But to make it legal, HHS has to pretend that it’s doing an “experiment” to study the effect of this money on the insurance market.

That is, to “study” what happens when the government doesn’t change anything but merely continues a program that’s been going on for years.

Obama can temporarily prop up Medicare Advantage long enough to get re-elected by exploiting an obscure bit of federal law. Under a 1967 statute, the HHS secretary can spend money without specific approval by Congress on “experiments” directly aimed at “increasing the efficiency and economy of health services.”

Past demonstration projects have studied new medical techniques or strategies aimed at improving care or reducing costs. The point is to find ways to lower the costs of Medicare by allowing medical technocrats to make efficient decisions without interference from vested interests.

Now Obama means to turn it on its head — diverting the money to a blatantly nonexperimental purpose to serve his political needs.

A Government Accounting Office report released this morning shows, quite starkly, that there simply is no experiment being conducted, just money being spent. Understandably, the GAO recommends that HHS cancel the project.

Congress should immediately launch an investigation into this unprecedented misuse of taxpayer money and violation of the public trust, which certainly presses the boundaries of legality and very well may breach them.

If he’s not stopped, Obama will spend $8 billion in taxpayer funds for a scheme to mask the debilitating effects on seniors of his signature piece of legislation just long enough to get himself re-elected.

Now that is some serious audacity. (NY Post)

And AARP’s stake in MediGap, the “alternative” to Medicare Advantage (which was a program that has worked better than most) has nothing to do with their support of ObamaCare.

If you opted for a Medicare Advantage health plan (aka Part C), you cannot also buy a Medigap policy. (from AARP’s Website).

So if you have the government gut your competition silently as part of the cost cutting of “waste,fraud and abuse” so much the better for you.

Which is why AARP is not a seniors advocacy group, it’s an insurance company! and it’s looking out for it’s bottom line, the greedy capitalist bastards! 🙂

And so, if you have a slush fund for “Medicare” costs that technically  don’t exist yet, and it just happens to find it’s way into your pockets because, after all, this election is all about YOU and YOU are so superior to everyone else and you can’t allow the peasant to revolt against their Lord and Masters now can you!- That’s ok.

Liberals are so superior to you peasants in their minds that how “stupid” and “racist” are you to want to get rid of them.

So, for your own good they must lie,cheat and steal the election to preserve the proper and “fair” relationship of the government and it’s people–The Lords and Masters to the peasants.

“The Peasants are Revolting!”

“Yeah, they stink on ice.” — Mel Brooks History of the World Part 1

Monty Python & The Holy Grail

King Arthur: I am your king.
Peasant Woman: Well, I didn’t vote for you.
King Arthur: You don’t vote for kings.
Peasant Woman: Well, how’d you become king, then?
[Angelic music plays… ]
King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.
Dennis the Peasant: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Arthur: Be quiet!
Dennis the Peasant: You can’t expect to wield supreme power just ’cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Arthur: [grabs Dennis] Shut up! Will you shut up?!
Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Arthur: [shakes Dennis] Shut up!
Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I’m being repressed!
Arthur: Bloody Peasant!
Dennis: Ooh, what a giveaway!
#2: WARNING- Foul Language

Can We Get along?

I couldn’t agree more.

I had an epiphany yesterday in regards to the childish back and forth I have had for the last 5 years with many a leftist. It’s ultimately very rude, disrespectful and childish.

I have had enough.

Can we maintain any sense of civility, decorum and respect as we debate the extremely emotional social issues that demand our attention and involvement?

I think not.

But will this change this blog. Probably slightly, but I’m still opposed to what this administration is doing on just about every level. But I’m also very unhappy with the Republicans lack of balls.

So I am still Tea Party.

But I have had enough of adolescent bickering.

Is there any common ground left?

Are we capable as a people of Compromise?

Are politicians so into their own selves that politics is more important in the end?

The answers to questions like these will determine if we have a country to leave to our children or even to ourselves.

It’s difficult if not impossible to control emotions. Emotions are simply a physiological response to physical and psychological stimuli. What we can do is learn to control our response to those emotions. Self-control is a valuable tool for effective communication and respectful debate. Name calling is childish- any two year old can pitch a fit and uninformed accusations display ignorance. If you want to make your point credible, exercise restraint.

In right versus wrong issues it’s fairly simple, if not always easy to simply step up and present the facts. In most cases, a clear statement of reason will win the argument. When both sides have a legitimate claim to the right side of an argument, it’s extremely important to understand the oppositional perspective whether you agree or not.

Our most contentious issues are right versus right.

I’m all for open, passionate and even heated debate. We can express ourselves passionately without denigrating our opponent, using inflammatory language and insulting labels. To do so requires a high level of respect, self-control and strength. It requires strength, confidence and courage to acknowledge the right of another person to his or her opinion- even when they’re wrong and you’re right! (thinklikeablackbelt.com)

Liberals and Democrats will still piss me off. But there has to be a better way.

I Hope.

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Left Wanting

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stop Me Before I Lie Again!

A Democrat advocacy group that was essential to the passage of ObamaCare has come out with a new Powerpoint presentation on how to sell ObamaCare, aka sell a 5-gallon jug of water to a drowning man.

And the most interesting revelation: They Lied!

Shocking though that may seem, it seems that in this presentation on the last page of “don’t”s they don’t wanna anyone to talk about the cost savings, deficit reduction, and the lower premiums that was there mantra for 15 months as they crammed it down everyone’s throat in the most partisan vote in memory.

It seems, they might have ‘misspoke’ 🙂

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed. “Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy,” says one slide.

When you see this first panel, think Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals, Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people. The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

It’s hard to overstate how important the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)—which makes the official judgments on how much bills cost and save—is in Washington. “I consider CBO God around here,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking Republican on the Finance Committee, recently said during the Health Care Debate.(Newsweek– our “islamophobic” fear mongers)

I wonder if he feels the same way after yesterday’s report that showed what the deficit spending has done to the economy? 🙂

“We think the numbers are now pretty well set from CBO,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said. “We think it will post the largest deficit reduction of any bill that we’ve adopted in the Congress since 1993.”

CBO told lawmakers that the health package would cost $940 billion over the next decade, reducing the deficit by $130 billion. It will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion in the second decade of the plan’s implementation, according to those who have seen the score.

“We are absolutely giddy” about the score, Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said during an interview on Fox News on Thursday. About the deficit-reduction figures, he added, “This is great news for the American people.”(The Hill)

So without further adieu…

Key White House allies are dramatically shifting their attempts to defend health care legislation, abandoning claims that it will reduce costs and deficit and instead stressing a promise to “improve it.”

The messaging shift was circulated this afternoon on a conference call and PowerPoint presentation organized by Families USA — one of the central groups in the push for the initial legislation. The call was led by a staffer for the Herndon Alliance, which includes leading labor groups and other health care allies. It was based on polling from three top Democratic pollsters: John Anzalone, Celinda Lake and Stan Greenberg.

The confidential presentation, available in full here and provided to POLITICO by a source on the call, suggests that Democrats are acknowledging the failure of their predictions that the health care legislation would grow more popular after its passage, as its benefits became clear and rhetoric cooled. Instead, the presentation is designed to win over a skeptical public, and to defend the legislation — and in particular the individual mandate — from a push for repeal.

The presentation concedes that groups typically supportive of Democratic causes — people under 40, non-college-educated women and Hispanic voters — have not been won over by the plan. Indeed, it stresses repeatedly that many are unaware that the legislation has passed, an astonishing shortcoming in the White House’s all-out communications effort.

“Straightforward ‘policy’ defenses fail to [move] voters’ opinions about the law,” says one slide.  “Women in particular are concerned that health care law will mean less provider availability — scarcity [is] an issue.”

The presentation also concedes that the fiscal and economic arguments that were the White House’s first and most aggressive sales pitch have essentially failed.

“Many don’t believe health care reform will help the economy,” says one slide.

The presentation’s final page of “Don’ts” counsels against claiming “the law will reduce costs and deficit.”

The presentation advises, instead, sales pitches that play on personal narratives and promises to change the legislation.

“People can be moved from initial skepticism and support for repeal of the law to favorable feelings and resisting repeal,” it says.  “Use personal stories — coupled with clear, simple descriptions of how the law benefits people at the individual level — to convey critical benefits of reform.”

In other words, get ready for more grandma has to use someone else’s dentures stories!  Get out the hankies, it’s America’s Most Outrageous Sob Stories Season 2!.

Appeals to emotions, not logic.

Hmmm, the exact opposite of the Ground Zero Mosque where the supporters are totally devoid and deaf to emotions. Curiouser and Curiouser.. 🙂

Could it be manipulative?  Nahh…. 🙂

The presentation also counsels against the kind of grand claims of change that accompanied the legislation’s passage.

“Keep claims small and credible; don’t overpromise or ‘spin’ what the law delivers,” it says, suggesting supporters say, “The law is not perfect, but it does good things and helps many people. Now we’ll work [to] improve it.”

The “free” Miracle Cure is just snake oil after all. But don’t tell the customer who had it force down their throat that. 🙂

The Herndon Alliance, which presented the research, is a low-profile group that coordinated liberal messaging in favor of the public option in health care. Its “partners” include health care legislation’s heavyweight supporters: AARP, AFL-CIO, SEIU, Health Care for America Now, MoveOn and the National Council of La Raza, among many others.

Let’s see, A Seniors advocacy group that has it’s own Health Insurance arm, Government Unions who have been getting most of the bailouts, Liberal advocacy group funded by a Billionaire Socialist, “The Race” (La Raza) a racist hatemongers group of Latinos who believe in (amongst other things) giving parts of Arizona and New Mexico back to Mexico and are as Open Borders as it gets.

Interesting grouping… 🙂

The presentation cites three private research projects by top Democratic pollsters: eight focus groups by Lake; Anzalone’s 1,000-person national survey; and an online survey of 2,000 people by Greenberg’s firm.

“If we are to preserve the gains made by the law and build on this foundation, the American public must understand what the law means for them,” says Herndon’s website. “We must overcome fear and mistrust, and we must once again use our collective voice to connect with the public on the values we share as Americans.” (Ben Smith-Politico)

Water anyone? 🙂

“We thought the best thing to do now was to remind people why they personally wanted reform in the first place.”–Spokesman for Families USA.

Wanted it? It was running at 66% against when it was passed and that hasn’t improved one  bit since.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% of U.S. Likely Voters favor repeal of the health care bill. That’s down from 59% a week ago, but support for repeal has ranged from 52% to 60%since the law was passed by Congress in March.

I guess follows my new rule that if 60+% of the people are against it, the Democrats are for it and you should be too! 🙂  (Health Care, Ground Zero Mosque, Deficit Spending, Continued Bailouts…et al)

A recent Government Accountability Report (GAO), finding that each job ‘created’ by the stimulus bill costs an average of $194,213.

But, fear not! The Government is here to save you…money! 🙂

Just over 70 days. I can see November from my house… 🙂

Fitna: A Poke in Both Eyes is Worth Two in The Bush

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Mischief in Manhattan: We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation
By Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah

Last week, a journalist who writes for the North Country Times, a small newspaper in Southern California, sent us an e-mail titled “Help.” He couldn’t understand why an Islamic Centre in an area where Adam Gadahn, Osama bin Laden’s American spokesman came from, and that was home to three of the 911 terrorists, was looking to expand.

The man has a very valid point, which leads to the ongoing debate about building a Mosque at Ground Zero in New York. When we try to understand the reasoning behind building a mosque at the epicentre of the worst-ever attack on the U.S., we wonder why its proponents don’t build a monument to those who died in the attack.

New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” — i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna” (that is, “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden by the Koran).


So what gives Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the “Cordoba Initiative” and his cohorts the misplaced idea that they will increase tolerance for Muslims by brazenly displaying their own intolerance in this case?

Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?

There are many questions that we would like to ask. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

If Rauf is serious about building bridges, then he could have dedicated space in this so-called community centre to a church and synagogue, but he did not. We passed on this message to him through a mutual Saudi friend, but received no answer. He could have proposed a memorial to the 9/11 dead with a denouncement of the doctrine of armed jihad, but he chose not to.

It’s a repugnant thought that $100 million would be brought into the United States rather than be directed at dying and needy Muslims in Darfur or Pakistan.

Let’s not forget that a mosque is an exclusive place of worship for Muslims and not an inviting community centre. Most Americans are wary of mosques due to the hard core rhetoric that is used in pulpits. And rightly so. As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.

The Koran implores Muslims to speak the truth, even if it hurts the one who utters the truth. Today we speak the truth, knowing very well Muslims have forgotten this crucial injunction from Allah.

If this mosque does get built, it will forever be a lightning rod for those who have little room for Muslims or Islam in the U.S. We simply cannot understand why on Earth the traditional leadership of America’s Muslims would not realize their folly and back out in an act of goodwill.

As for those teary-eyed, bleeding-heart liberals such as New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and much of the media, who are blind to the Islamist agenda in North America, we understand their goodwill.

Unfortunately for us, their stand is based on ignorance and guilt, and they will never in their lives have to face the tyranny of Islamism that targets, kills and maims Muslims worldwide, and is using liberalism itself to destroy liberal secular democratic societies from within.

Raheel Raza is author of Their Jihad … Not my Jihad, and Tarek Fatah is author of The Jew is Not My Enemy (McClelland & Stewart), to be launched in October. Both sit on the board of the Muslim Canadian Congress.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

I guess the piece’s authors are just “traumatized” Anti-Muslim bigots like the rest of us, huh? 🙂

“We have been able to deliver the most progressive legislative agenda — one that helps working families — not just in one generation, maybe two, maybe three,” Obama said.”This is exactly when you want to be president,” Obama said. “This is why I ran, because we have the opportunity to shape history for the better.”–in Hollywood very recently.

“The truth is that we’re a party of principle,”-Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the House’s only Muslim member.

The fact is, they have the legal right to build it, but that’s not the issue. But it is, for the fitna-Democrats and the guilt-laden “fairness” Democrats that they appear to be “tolerant”.

And anyone who disagrees with them is a bigot and religiously intolerant.

Sound familiar?

The issue is, just because you can, should you?

The answer is no.

But the Democrats and the liberals and the Mainstream media all want to argue legality because in this instance if they argue their usual emotion over logic they lose big time. So they’ve all turned into unemotional lawyers because if they don’t, they lose. And they know it.

You wanna know how bankrupt these people can be?

Let’s take Gettysburg. The site of the most famous, most important battle of the Civil War, one of the most hallowed places in all of America.

Some developers want to build a casino there!

“Preservation does not exist in a vacuum. Our local preservation work cannot thrive absent a local economy that helps induce and support it,” writes Brendan Synnamon, Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Association. president.

A %&$%&%## Casino!!

I guess they’ll call the chips, Pickett’s Charge! 😦

“The GBPA’s reference to this debate as a ‘local issue’ is tragically out of step with the way most Americans view the Gettysburg battlefield.” — Opponent said.

Sound familiar??

Casino supporters say the resort’s location one-half mile from Gettysburg National Military Park presents no threat to the historical significance of the field where 172,000 Union and Confederate troops fought and nearly 8,000 died.

And building a Islamic Mosque (“community Center”) 2 blocks (which in New York is 1/5 of a mile) from Ground Zero where the very building they want to tear down was hit by debris from the South Tower is  a “show of tolerance” and a way to bring the community together.

Now that’s Fitna! 😦