The 1%

The Sith Lords of The Left (except when they are Democrats or Socialists like George Soros then they are ok). 🙂

Debunking the Myth of the “1%.” Who’s Really “The Rich?”

Rich bastards! It’s time to spread the wealth around! If you’re part of the 1%, you’re part of the problem!

Or… is it?

Perhaps the greatest economic misconception of the 21st Century is the idea that 1% of the world’s population are greedy jerks who keep the other 99% of the earth living in poor houses made of mud and tears.

Think the top 1% are billionaires? Nope. Millionaires? Nada. Well, they’re at least cracking $750K, right? Wrong again. In fact, YOU are probably far more affulent than you realize. And you disgust me for it. Let’s look at the numbers, American style:

If you make more than $100,000, you’re in the top 20%.

If you make more than $149,000, you’re in the top 10%.

If you make more than $522,000, BINGO, you’re a 1%’er. You’re probably a greedy jerk too, so screw you.

This is just a guess, but even if you don’t fall into one of these categories, chances are, you at least know somebody who does fall into any of the above categories. Which makes you a second-hand 1 percenter. That’s like a second-hand smoker only more vile. You probably don’t even think of those friends as being rich, but they are compared to the rest of the world. And these are the people leftists tell us are causing all the world’s problems, including the diminishing bee population (not really, but maybe one day), who need to do more for the country by paying their “fair share.” Except, that top 1% of earners already pays more in taxes than the bottom 90% (that’d be EVERYONE making less than $149K) COMBINED. Behold, graphs:

who are the wealthy

Oh, and by the way? If you’re under 31 and make over $300,000 – you’re in the top 0.1%. For realzies. Check out this chart from The Atlantic:

wealthy

But let’s take things a step further. If we expand the comparison globally, you become waaaaay wealthier than imagined. Like Scrooge McDuck from Ducktales, swimming in a vault of coin.

The average yearly income on a global scale? $1,225.

Yeah. You’re rich. Bastard. How does it feel to cause global warming? Even if “your” money is sent to you on a bi-weekly basis from the US treasury… you’re rich. And kind of a succubus, but that’s for another article.

If you make more than a whopping $34,000 a year? You are in the top 1% of the world’s wealthy.

Over half of the world’s 1%’ers (those making $34K+), live in the United States.

the wealthy

Maybe you’re not so bad off after all, Mr. college hipster making $15 serving coffee, huh? Maybe life isn’t so bad climbing the corporate ladder for “just” $75K a year, is it? Also, a nutless monkey could do your job. You mad? Please leave room for cream.

Saying the wealthy need to pay more (paging Bernie Sanders), is really saying we all need to pay more.  Because really, you’re rich. If you’re an American, you’re rich. Like, super, ridiculously rich. Period. Also, you have running water, a flushing toilet, probably a phone of some kind, a flat screen, and maybe a Netflix subscription. So please, stop the whining. It’s getting old.

SO, how rich are YOU?

Here’s a fun tool created by Giving What we Can: you punch in your income and household size, they tell you how rich you are compared to the rest of the world. You’ll probably be shocked. And that’s a good thing. Seriously. Go try it. Like, right now, money-bags.

Go ahead, I Dare you! 🙂

Lesson? If you’re living in the USA, you’re a greedy one-percenter and a bastard for it. Screw you with your flushing toilet and your five figure annual income. All this comes down to dollars, common sense, and perspective. The United States is a bastion of wealth, even for the “poor” Americans binge watching Orange is the New Black. Our top income earners aren’t paying their “fair share,” they’re paying YOUR share too. So get the numbers, memorize them, and every time you hear a gender-studies hipster talk to you about the one percent and shares and fairness and the latest iPhone, tell them about the real facts. If they’ll listen. (Steve Crowder)

But we all know that Liberals do not respond maturely to facts. 🙂

And if Democrats didn’t have the Envy Card, The Hate Card they would be just a husk of nothing floating on the winds. 🙂

But I want us to be super careful when we use the language “hard worker,” because I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall, because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like. So, I feel you that he’s a hard worker. I do. But in the context of relative privilege…”- MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

And remember in  the FY 2015 the government took in more tax money than anytime in it’s history and still ran a deficit!

elect me d5c6f-democrats6

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The Inequity of it All

Today is my Birthday.

What I want for my birthday is for Liberals to stop thinking with their emotions and be rational, logical adults who aren’t narcissistic, greedy, power mad, 2 years old at heart.

Not going to Happen.

Neither is getting Establishment Republicans and RINOs to stop being narcissists and thinking only of their own agenda and thinking about The American People for a change.

I might as well wish for World Peace at the same time, it’s just as likely.

Strike up a conversation with any taxi cab driver or any fry cook at a roadside diner and the word “inequality” is unlikely to ever come up. That’s not on the list of top concerns for middle class America. It’s also not on the list of concerns for the world’s poor. Millions of people are willing to risk life and limb just to come here and start out at the bottom of the income ladder.

(Don’t the immigrants realize how unequal things are? Yes, they want to live in a country where a poor immigrant can become a billionaire.)

So why is anyone claiming that inequality is our most important problem? Because the chattering class has decided that stoking envy is the only way to energize the Democratic Party. Think about the problems we really do have: runaway entitlement spending, poor public schools, welfare dependency, an overly burdensome tax system and anemic economic growth. In every case the solutions we are debating come from the right: Privatization, school vouchers, tough love, a flat tax and lower taxes on capital.

The left has no solutions, or at least none that anyone takes seriously. So, over the years of the Obama presidency the topic of inequality has emerged front and center. Democratic candidates could rail against the super rich and imply that their high incomes are the cause of everyone else’s stagnating income, without ever saying what exactly they would do about it.

Until Bernie Sanders came along. Sanders actually has a few concrete proposals – including the idea that we should become like Denmark, a high tax welfare state. Once the discussion turns from pure demagoguery to serious conversation, inevitably we are forced to look at what economists have to say. (Warning: it’s not good for Democrats.)

In other words, you can’t solve the problem by taxing the rich. If taxation is your only tool, you have to break again one of Barack Obama’s frequently broken promises and raise taxes on the middle class.

In a Brookings Institution study, Peter Orszag (former chief economist for President Obama) and his colleagues discovered that if you raised the top tax rate from 40 percent to 50 percent and redistributed that money to people at the bottom, the top 1 percent’s share of income would only decline from 16.4 to 15.6 percent. The Gini coefficient (the numerical measure of inequality) would change so little you would have to squint to see it.

Then there is the question of why we have increasing inequality in the first place. Another study by Orszag and current Obama chief economist Jason Furman found that a primary source of inequality among people is inequality among firms. Take a look at the chart below. If you happened to be working for one of the top 10 percent of most successful companies over the past two decades your salary, bonuses and other compensation probably soared. If you have been working for the median firm, your income has probably risen modestly. If your employer is in the bottom half of the distribution, your income has probably been stagnant.

So what can be done about that? The idea of arresting the growth of highly successful companies is silly. But that isn’t necessarily a deal breaker for the left. The problem for Democrats is that Silicon Valley is heavily Democratic. It’s one of the places Democrats go to get mega gifts. My bet is that you won’t hear a peep about inequality among firms in the coming election.

orszag chart

 

SOURCE: KOLLER ET AL. (2015); MCKINSEY & COMPANY

That leaves Denmark. People on the left are fond of citing the Nordic states — Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland — as examples of countries with higher taxes and less inequality. It’s easy to see why. As Matt Yglesias writes

Danish mothers enjoy 18 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave at 100 percent of their ordinary pay. Danish students leave college free of debt. Everyone is covered by a national health insurance system and can take advantage of subsidized child care; plus, thanks to a generous welfare system, Denmark’s child poverty rate is about a quarter of America’s.

So how do the Danes afford all that? With high taxes. As Yglesias makes clear, it’s not just taxes on the rich. The top tax rate in Denmark is 57 percent, about the same as it is in California. If California wanted to become like Denmark, it would basically leave the rich alone. But it would have to sock it to the middle class with effective tax rates averaging from 35 to 48 percent. Then the state would need to pile on with 25 percent value added tax — which is basically a form of sales tax and every bit as regressive. Car addicted Californians would also experience a huge spike in the price of gasoline and a 180 percent tax on the price of a new car!

So how does Denmark keep from looking like Greece? Answer: They believe in privatization, deregulation and free enterprise. Denmark is rated as one of the best places in the world to do business. It scores higher on the Heritage Economic Freedom ranking than the United States does. Unlike the US, public sector unions in Denmark don’t control public services and push up costs with job protecting regulations. For example, a private, for-profit company is currently in charge of 65 percent of municipal fire departments and 85 percent of ambulance services in the country. According to Yglesias:

In Copenhagen … the metro is driverless, the suburban rail network features one-man train crews, and many urban bus lines are run by private companies. These are all kinds of measures that US labor unions would normally oppose….

Øresund Bridge from Copenhagen to Malmö was constructed at a drastically lower price than the United States is prepared to spend to replace the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York even though the Nordic bridge is substantially longer and includes a major train component along with the roadway.

The Danish model is awfully hard to emulate if public sector unions are the backbone of your party.

Finally, there is Yale law professor Stephen Carter’s observation that the word “inequality” was used eight times by the candidates and once by the moderator in the Democratic debate the other night. In every instance the focus was on taxing the rich, not on helping the poor. In fact, the word “poverty” was used hardly at all. Apparently, envy sells better than charity when communicating with Democratic voters.

Yet Carter, himself a bona fide liberal, notes that we don’t really have an inequality problem. We have a poverty problem.

That Democrats ignore it is hardly surprising. When is the last time you heard a Democratic candidate for president talk about the poor in any respect? The last one I can remember was John Edwards and that was eons ago. (Townhall)

And look what happened to him… 🙂

Oh, the inequity of it all.

 

The Angry Left

Bernie Sanders is angry. Who is he angry at? Rich people. Why rich people? That’s not clear.

But has been the mantra of The Left for a generation at least. A generation brought up on this garbage. Garbage in, garbage out.

At Liberty University, Sanders complained about a small number of people who have “huge yachts, and jet planes and tens of billions” while others “are struggling to feed their families.” In Madison Wisconsin, Sanders called for a “political revolution against greed.”

So what’s the connection between people who have “tens of billions” and people who are “struggling to feed their families”? For the most part it’s a positive one. In a capitalist system, people get rich by meeting other people’s needs. Because some people are rich, other people find it easier to feed their families.

Take the world’s richest man, Bill Gates. When I was a student at Columbia in the 1970s, I remember a friend showing me a fantastic hand held device. It could add, subtract, divide and multiply. And it only cost $400. Today, I can sit in bed with my lap top, which in 1970 dollars cost less than $400. I can buy and sell goods on eBay, conduct personal banking, purchase airline tickets, book hotel rooms and even work the New York Times crossword puzzle – in large part because of Bill Gates.

Take the world’s richest woman, JK Rowling. When she wrote the last Harry Potter book or helped on the last Harry Potter movie was she making anyone worse off? Was she taking food out of the mouths of babes? Or was she bringing entertainment and pleasure to millions of people?

Is Bill Gates greedy? There’s no evidence of that. He is giving all his money away in ways that are curing diseases that kill children all over the world. More generally, I have never met a truly creative person who was motivated by greed. But even if greed were the motivation, we need more of it – as long as it’s meeting our needs.

So what’s Sander’s complaint? Here are his own words:

“99 percent of all new income today (is) going to the top 1 percent.”

In 2007, “the top 1 percent of all income earners in the United States made 23.5 percent of all income,” which is “more than the entire bottom 50 percent.”

“Today the Walton family of Walmart own more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America.”

When Sam Walton was alive, he was one of the world’s richest men. Yet he wore blue jeans and drove a pickup truck. No one in Bentonville, Arkansas even knew he was rich until they read about it in Forbes. Is Walmart making it harder or easier for people to feed their families? You be the judge.

As has been said many times, The Left is only interested in the Narrative, not the truth.

Muslim kid brings homemade electronic device to school and the School system freaked out because of all the school violence.

The Left doesn’t give a crap about that. It’s all about the fact that he’s a Muslim.

Then it came out that it was all a setup by a Muslim “activist” father who set up the whole thing.

The Left doesn’t care. It’s all about “racism” to them because that fits their Narrative and what THEY want to be true.

bomb

Behind the rhetoric on the left, there is one persistent theme, always implicit, never explicit. Leftist rhetoric is designed to encourage people to believe that the reason they are poor are because other people are rich. And this kind of rhetoric is not confined to politicians who know nothing of basic economics. Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Jeffrey Sachs and other well-known economists are just as guilty. They invariably imply that “all property is theft,” a staple of barn yard Marxism. Yet, on rigorous examination, this idea is silly. Most of the people on the Forbes 400 list are self-made or next generation of self-made billionaires.

But the truth doesn’t matter, to The Left.

Writing in the Dallas Morning News, Cullen Godfrey asks: why do we demonize billionaires?

And usually, not Democrat Million and Billionaires. Nor, say, NFL player millionaires, just the owners.

They didn’t steal our money. They earned our money by providing us with the things that we want and that make our lives better. The Forbes 400 list includes names such as Oprah Winfrey, filmmakers Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Phil Knight (Nike), Elon Musk (Tesla), Charles Schwab, Ralph Lauren and Michael Ilitch (Domino’s Pizza). Of course, there are those with inherited wealth, but the vast majority on the list are first-generation, self-made billionaires, and those with inherited wealth have, as a rule, been excellent stewards of their good fortune.

Like Jeremy Corbyn, the new Labour Party leader in Britain, Bernie Sanders is appealing to our worst instincts. His is not the message of compassion and love. His is the message of resentment, jealousy and hate.

The hallmarks of the Left.

What would he do? Tax capital. He hasn’t given us a figure, but if he goes along with the 90 percent income tax rate favored by Paul Krugman or the 80 percent rate proposed by Thomas Piketty, Bill Gates may never have been able to start Microsoft. Sam Walton may never have given us Sam’s Club.

I’m not sure The Left would care about that.

As I wrote at Forbes earlier this week, the left is intellectually bankrupt. While appealing to our basest emotions, they have no real solutions to any real problems. In fact, their “solutions” would almost certainly make the poor more poor.

But they make them “feel” empowered. Perception is not reality, but it works for them.

There is, however, a proposal from the right of the political spectrum: tax consumption rather than saving, investment and capital accumulation. As I wrote previously:

[W]hen Warren Buffett is consuming, he’s benefiting himself. When he’s saving and investing, he’s benefiting you and me. Every time Buffett forgoes personal consumption (a pricey dinner, a larger house, a huge yacht) and puts his money in the capital market instead, he’s doing an enormous favor for everyone else. A larger capital stock means higher productivity and that means everyone can have more income for the same amount of work. So it’s in our self-interest to have very low taxes on Buffett’s capital. In fact, capital taxes should be zero. That means no capital gains tax, no tax on dividends and profits — so long as the income is recycled back into the capital market. We should instead tax Buffett’s consumption. Tax him on what he takes out of the system, not what he puts into it. Tax him when he is benefiting himself, not when he is benefiting you and me.

But the Left Politicians are only interested in Taxes that benefit THEM.

406 A.D.

More proof of The Agenda is the Agenda no matter what. NOTHING matters more than the agenda. Not even money.

That much lying for that long was very expensive. “Vote for me, the Other guy is an asshole” does not come cheap.

Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) says Democrats are “in the red” because they spent more than “everything we had” to get Barack Obama and others elected last November.

In an e-mail to supporters, the DNC chair says:

“We spent everything we had to spend in 2012 to win the White House, add seats in the Senate, and pick up seats in the House — our job was to do everything we could to elect President Obama and other Democrats across the country.”

“We spent every last penny” – and more – Wasserman Schultz says:

“The cardinal sin in campaigns is to sit on money — which is why we spent every last penny we had in 2012 (and then some) to make sure the election went our way.”

As a result, she says “Democrats are in the White House – but we are also in the red.”

The consequences of not indulging in deficit spending would’ve been the election of people like Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, and Todd Akin, she warns:

“If we had done things differently in 2012, we’d be looking at President Mitt Romney, Vice President Paul Ryan, Senator Todd Akin, and Rep. Allen West. But because we left it all out on the field, we’ve got President Obama, Vice President Biden, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Patrick Murphy, Sen. Claire McCaskill, and dozens of amazing Democrats in office across the country.” (CNS)

So do you think they’ll cut spending now with 2014 and the wanted “final” destruction of the Republican Party on the Agenda?? 🙂

Nope.

But you will be expected to pay more money and dig deep into your coffers to help them achieve their goals whether you want to or not.

Expect pushes for more jobs for public sector employees because they are the life blood of the Democrat party.

After all, it’s for the Greater Good that is THEM. They are the superior human beings and they can’t be allowed to be  defeated by the neandertals in the Republican Party now can they!

Democrats spend too much money and Republicans are unwilling to compromise: A new Gallup poll asked Americans to name “one or two specific things you dislike” about the Republican Party and the Democrat Party, and those attributes topped the list of negatives.

The poll found that Democrats are far less critical of their own party than Republicans are of theirs.

Well, I’m Shocked… 🙂

Gallup also asked Americans to name “one or two specific things you like” about each party.

Sixty percent of Democrats and 36% of independents say there is nothing they like about the Republican Party. Likewise, 61 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of independents said they like “nothing” about the Democratic Party.

“Compromise” anyone?

Basically, the class warfare media war has been very effective. Republicans are seen as uncompromising (because compromising with a progressive liberal means they get 100% of what they want and you get nothing) and the Democrats care about the middle class (cough cough…choke choke).

Charlie Daniels:

The seizing of power is not always accomplished by military coup or even at the ballot box. As the old saying goes, there’s more than one way to skin a cat, some being so subtle and gradual, flying below the radar and stealthily creeping piecemeal into society in the guise of benefiting the “greater good” that by the time a slumbering society is awakened to the danger, it is firmly entrenched and extremely powerful.

Frog…water…boil..anyone?

The early stages of such takeovers seldom affect the whole of society at any one time.  It’s accomplished by fostering confusion, class envy and the feeling that somebody is not paying their “fair share,” that there are people who don’t want the masses to have a level playing field, don’t want poor people to have health care or adequate food and housing and the problems of the underclass are all their fault.

A public which is mostly convinced that the system needs changing and don’t really mind the painful ones as long as it’s “them” not us that it happens to, not realizing that the pain will eventually fall on them, also.

They will eventually get around to you, when they’ve run out of them.

So congratulations. We are the Roman Empire and it 406 A.D…

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 

If Wishes Were Horses…

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Little noticed in President Obama’s “fiscal cliff” plan is a demand for a huge new stimulus package. Wait! Wasn’t he and everyone in the press telling us just before the election how the economy was gathering steam?

You mean He lied? And the Ministry of Truth went along with it? Nah, perish the thought… 🙂

In addition to the $1.6 trillion in new taxes on “the rich” that Obama demands, he’s also pushing for upward of $255 billion in new stimulus spending for next year — including $50 billion for roads, $30 billion in extended unemployment benefits and various short-term tax breaks.

In other words, more the same things that have failed over the last 4 years but fit in with his ideology.

So, he is certifiably insane. By the definition of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

If we just wish really hard, and we just keep doing it it will eventually work!! 🙂

According to the New York Times, the administration’s argument is that “the sluggish economy requires a shot in the arm.”And, indeed, the Times paints a rather grim picture of the current economic situation.

But don’t worry, it was Bush’s Fault!

Data show “the recovery once again sputtering,” it reported Tuesday, adding that the “underlying rate of growth (is) too slow to bring down the unemployment rate by much.” Manufacturing and exports are lagging, it noted, while consumers and businesses are “holding back” and “wage growth is weak.”

But lying as means to an end : re-election is ok. Because the “right” emperor was re-elected to do exactly same as he had done before.

That’s what the morons voted for.

What’s more, the Times says, economic data have “come in surprisingly weak,” and forecasters have “slashed their estimates of growth in the fourth quarter.” Macroeconomic Advisers thinks annualized GDP growth will be just 0.8% this quarter.

Now they tell us. In the crucial last few weeks before the election, the mainstream media were falling over themselves painting a rosy economic picture. Every upbeat bit of data made it to the front page; any bad news got buried.

Well, that’s the Ministry of Truth job, to lie for the sake of preserving their Big Brother. Besides, he was up against an Evil Rich White Guy! And he couldn’t be allowed to lose to the like of that!

In fact, one month before the election, the Times ran a story touting all the “signs of growing economic strength” and boasting how the country was in the midst of a “steadier recovery than previously thought.”

That same day, a USA Today story prominently quoted a source as saying “the economy is finally beginning to build some momentum.”

In mid-October, AP reported that new retail sales figures showed that “consumers were shaking off high unemployment” and this “would help the economy emerge from the malaise that clouded the spring.”

Then, just days before the election, the press paraded a consumer confidence survey that showed a strong uptick in the index. AP claimed it was a sign the economy was beginning “to make steady improvement.”

They were just doing their Ministerial duties. And when we go off the cliff, it will be the Republicans and the Rich who are to blame. And the “failing” economy will not be their fault anyhow.

Generally, the press agreed that growth would accelerate after the election, regardless of who won. Two days before Election Day, BusinessWeek proclaimed that “the economy is on course to enjoy faster growth in the next four years as the head winds that have held it back turn into tail winds.”  It added that “consumers are spending more and saving less,” while “home prices are rebounding” and “banks are increasing lending.” It predicted, “The die is cast for a much stronger recovery.”

Now that Obama has won re-election on the claim that the economy is improving, it’s apparently safe for the press to admit what it should have been reporting all along — that after four years of Obamanomics, we’re still in trouble. (IBD)

Surprise…Surprise…Surprise! 🙂
It’s good to be the King!!!

As you know, John F. Kennedy invented the Peace Corps. But did you know (or care), for instance, that Obama issued an actual proclamation on the Corps’ 50th anniversary? The vision and leadership in that news release is astounding!

Maybe you knew Calvin Coolidge was the first presidential voice carried on radio. But did you know (or virtually care) that Obama was the first to speak at a virtual townhall?

Then there was that strange day when the former state senator talked of all “those soldiers or airmen or Marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf.” When so many of us had long thought of the U.S. military as fighting for all Americans.

And then the night Obama admitted to New York donors that he was the most interesting man in the world:

“It is very rare that I come to an event that I am like the fifth or sixth most interesting person. Usually the folks want to take a picture with me, sit next to me, talk with me.

stay jobless

Now comes a fresh sample of the man with a hat size surely at least 11.

It was the anniversary of that day in Montgomery, Alabama when an NAACP worker, a black woman named Rosa Parks, refused a city bus driver’s orders to give up her seat in the colored section to a white.

Last Saturday was the 57th anniversary of the woman’s catalytic act of defiance aboard Montgomery public transportation.

To honor the historic memory of civil rights leader Rosa Parks, Obama’s White House website posted a photo — not of Rosa Parks, but of Barack Obama.

It’s an eerie photo. Obama was four years old and far away when that seminal civil rights event occurred.

But there he is in the staged photo inserting himself into history via a Michigan museum, sitting alone in the Parks bus forlornly looking out the window as if waiting for his stop.

White House blog  (Barack Obama was no civil rights activist in the American South. But he played one in this photo op)
After all, it’s all about HIM!
He is the Most interesting and most important Man in the world!!
And he wishes he was the Emperor of the World and everyone adored and worshipped him like a God.
Maybe he’s looking for his leadership skills…or Maybe he’s wonder why not every human being on the planet doesn’t fall down and worship almighty, all-knowing, all-compassionate, all-fair, all-encompassing, all around super-being that is HIM!
🙂
“If wishes were horses, beggars would ride” is an English proverb which is usually used to suggest that it is useless to wish and that better results will be achieved through action.
But even his actions are insane.
But that’s what the morons voted for, more of the same.
Congrats, you got it!

The Frog and The Scorpion

Quote of the Day:

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

Yes, Herr Obama, I’m sure you do. 🙂

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not relevant to the Ministry of Truth.

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

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

Because that doesn’t fit the Meme.

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

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

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

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

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

But it is very curious.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How has the New York Times reported this?

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

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

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

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

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

Same presentation: two scorpions fighting in a bottle.

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

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

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

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

Examples are endless. Here is one more:

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

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

How did the New York Times report the events?

“Fiery Zealotry Leaves Nigeria in Ashes Again.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

De-Ploy! De-Ploy!

Obama cautioned supporters that Republicans will “spend more money than we have ever seen in the history of the Republic” on political ads “telling you that the economy is bad, it’s all my fault, and I can’t fix it because government is always the answer, according to me.”

Truth hurts dude. But since when did a Liberal every care about the truth…

“Or because I didn’t make a lot of money in the private sector, or because I’m in over my head, or because I think everybody is doing just fine,” the president said, eliciting laughter from the crowd.

“And that may be their plan to win an election, but it’s sure not a plan to create jobs,” he said. (UPI) (The unemployment rate over 8% for 3 1/2 years is a sterling example of how well he has done, right?)

Well, neither is “Vote for Me! or you’re a racist”, class warfare, division, fear, and envy. Oh, and Mormon-bashing.
But don’t expect anyone on the Left to notice.
Republicans, including presumptive presidential nominee Mitt Romney, “believe that we should go back to the top-down economics of the last decade.”

He’s been President for nearly 4 of those year in this last Decade. But the left’s “decade” ended with the beginning of 2009. So he’s throwing the last few years of Clinton under the bus then. 🙂
Vote For me, The other guy’s an asshole! A Rich, White, Mormon wierdo asshole!
And Homeless poor people create jobs.
It’s Tiresome. But we have 4 more months of this.
Oh then there’s this…

Obama Asks People Getting Married To Forgo Gifts, Ask Their Guests To Donate To His Campaign Instead…

You can even register your wedding on his campaign website. Could he be any more pompous?

So, on your wedding day, give everything to him so he can take it again from you in higher taxes and more regulations and fewer jobs. But it’ll make you feel good!

Next thing you know it’s going to be instead of giving your kids candy give it to Obama. (taking candy from a baby…get it?) 🙂

When in doubt, give him all your money. Got any loose change in the sofa, give it to Obama!

Documents released June 15 said the amnesty would exclude people who had been formally found guilty of committing a felony or a “significant misdemeanor.”

Administration officials told immigration lawyers in a subsequent telephone conference that a drunk-driving conviction would disqualify applicants, but did not explain what they meant by “significant misdemeanor.”

“Significant misdemeanor” is not a legal term; it has no statutory definition,” said a statement from the Federation for American Immigration Reform. “It is simply a term that has been made up by the administration… [which] could change its mind at any time and make the term more or less inclusive.” (DC)

But if it suckers Hispanics into voting for him then it’s done it’s job. It was and is a ploy anyhow. Obama attacks Romney on it, then he evades explaining what this Orwellian BS means. That’s why its a ploy. It’s not heart felt it’s just a ploy.

“What if an individual committed crimes in another country? Or was booked or convicted under a different name? Or an alien comes forward and applies for deferred action under a different name,” said an immigration activist.

“It’s not as if the alien will be producing a birth certificate from a U.S. hospital. They are illegal; that’s the whole point. They may have used multiple names, aliases, SSNs, etc. They may have used multiple fake documents.”

The administration provided vague details about the documents that would be deemed sufficient to prove an individual met the government’s rules. “Documentation sufficient for an individual to demonstrate that he or she came to the United States before the age of 16 includes, but is not limited to: financial records, medical records, school records, employment records, and military records.”

But after the 1986 amnesty, federal officials accepted many fraudulent documents, boosting the number of immigrants way above the forecasted numbers.

“I would assume, given the mood of the government, and the precedents, that various bits of evidence… would be considered and unless grossly phony would be accepted,” North said.

The likely acceptance of fraud could allow many people older than 31 to get work permits, he said. “I worry, particularly, at the older end of the spectrum, of highly questionable foreign birth certificates dated the last half of 1982 and 1983,” said North.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association declined to respond to TheDC’s request for information. The association’s members stand to gain from the new policy, which creates many new legal clients.

“The overarching point I would make is that this policy for granting deferred action, is … policy and not statutory language,” said one immigration activist. The government “could change the [rules and details] at any time.”

“This is a classic political strategy: set forth what appears to be a solid rule, and then undermine it with tons of exceptions,” said the activist. “Politicians know that neither the media nor the average American will have the time or patience to sort through it all.” (DC)

But it sounds good. It sounds “compassionate” , you’re a “racist” and heartless if you oppose it. And more importantly it gets him votes. The details really don’t matter.
Obama wants to win with the people he has put out of work, illegals, minorities, and the poor who want everyone else to pay for them.
Now that’s the American Dream!
And the Executive Orders he has made in his Presidency show that HE wants to be the final arbiter of what is and what is lawful based on what HE wants.
Now that’s America for you.
Then There’s  Crazy Obsessed Nancy. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that House Republicans attempting to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress are part of a “nationwide scheme to suppress the vote.”

“What we have seen is a shameful display of abuse of power by the Republicans in the House of Representatives. Instead of bringing job-creating legislation to the floor, the transportation bill, they are holding the attorney general of the United States in contempt of Congress for doing his job. It’s really important to note how this is connected with some of their other decisions. It is no accident. It is no coincidence that the attorney general of the United States is the person responsible for making sure that voter suppression does not happen in our country, that issues that relate to the civil liberties of the American people are upheld,” Pelosi told reporters at the Capitol during her weekly press briefing.

“These very same people who are holding him in contempt are part of a nationwide scheme to suppress the vote. They are closely allied with those who are suffocating the system with unlimited special-interest secret money, and they are poisoning the debate. They are poisoning the debate with that money.”

So the fact that she was saying earlier in the week that she personally had the power to arrest Karl Rove (which she did not and when the Contempt order came to the floor when she was Speaker and it was ignored is not relevant! The whole Valerie Plaime Farce is also not relevant!) and the fact the Senate hasn’t passed a Budget since April 2009 and the bills that Nancy is decrying were passed by the Republicans in the House but ignored in The Senate doesn’t matter either.
It’s all about them! It’s what THEY WANT that matters.
“Don’t forget: They’re going after Eric Holder because he is supporting measures to overturn these voter suppression initiatives in the states. This is no accident. It is no coincidence. It is a plan on the part of the Republicans.”(DC)
People like Agent Brian Terry Dying are irrelevant. Protecting Illegal Aliens so they can fraudulently vote is. Pandering is far more important because after all, the end justifies the means and the end is winning (Charlie Sheen style).

Speaker Boehner, however, said the American people “deserve the truth” about Operation Fast and Furious.

Just like Obama said of Bush repeatedly. But you aren’t supposed to remember that. The Left lives in only what is good for me at this nanosecond in time.

“Congress also has a responsibility to the American people to learn the truth about what happened in Fast and Furious. On February the 4th, 2011, the Department of Justice denied allegations that it allowed guns to be smuggled into Mexico. Ten months later, the Justice Department formally withdrew its denial and acknowledged that it made false claims to Congress about this reckless operation,” Boehner said Thursday.

“The Obama administration stonewalled Congress’ legitimate oversight responsibilities to find out how and why it made these false claims. Remember, we’re talking about a program that gave Mexican drug dealers guns, and those guns killed an American border agent.”

Boehner called on the Obama administration to turn over the “relevant documents right now.” He claimed that Obama’s “decision to invoke executive privilege is an admission that White House officials were involved in decisions that misled the Congress and have covered up the truth.”

“So what is the Obama administration hiding in Fast and Furious?” he asked.

Juan WILLIAMS (On FBN): What do you think the government shouldn’t have any secret? You can’t have a private conversation in the White House now about politics?Eric BOLLING: We gotta go – NO, not when someone’s dead Juan! Not when three hundred Mexicans…

WILLIAMS: We know how the guy died!

BOLLING: …are dead at the hands of the same guns.

WILLIAMS: Hey people die in war! People died…

BOLLING: Don’t you care about the three hundred Mexicans that died from the guns the guns that were traced back to Fast and Furious?

WILLIAMS: I care about human life. But I’m telling you people die. And you know what? We know the facts of Fast and Furious. We know how he died!

He’s Dead. The rest is irrelevant unless it serve us politically.
Juan Williams: “The hardball political fact is that attacking the court will help the president’s campaign and it will damage the court for years to come…A 5-4 defeat of the healthcare law will erode trust in the justice system.”
“the court may do irreparable harm to its reputation with another highly political split between justices appointed by Democrats and justices appointed by Republicans…It will be another example of how polarization has poisoned our politics during the past decade. Team Obama is right to conclude there is fertile political ground to be plowed in lashing out against the right-wing activism of the Roberts Court.”
So what we need is even more liberal partisans on the court to sort this out!! 🙂
And judicial activism BY liberals are to be ignored.
And the appointment of people Like Elena Kagan who worked on ObamaCare and was posted to the Supreme Court specifically to be a Liberal activist is to be ignored.
It’s all a conspiracy by the Right and this isn’t a political ploy by the Left.
Where’s my barf bag…

Are you a Pig??

Give a Man a Fish, you feed him for a day. Teach him to fish he can feed himself for a lifetime.

Raise him to believe That that guy’s fish over there is your fish but he’s too greedy to share it with you (besides he has plenty) and government can take it and give it to you for free because you deserves it he becomes a Democrat.

Catching Pigs

THIS IS TRULY THOUGHT PROVOKING.

There was a chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class.

One day while the class was in the lab, the professor noticed one young man, an exchange student, who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt. The professor asked the young man what was the matter.

The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country’s government and install a new communist regime.

In the midst of his story, he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked: “Do you know how to catch wild pigs?”

The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line.

The young man said that it was no joke. “You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground.”

The pigs find it and begin to come every day to eat the free corn.”

“When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming.”

“When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence.”

“They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in the last side.”

“The pigs, which are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat that free corn again.”

“You then slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd. Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom.”

“They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn.”

“They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.”

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening in America .

The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tax exemptions, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc.

While we continually lose our freedoms, just a little at a time.

One should always remember two truths:

There is no such thing as a free lunch and you can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.

If you see that all of this wonderful government ‘help’ is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America , you might want to send this on to your friends.

If you think the free ride is essential to your way of life, then you will probably delete this email.

But God help you when the gate slams shut!

But you’ll be safe from evil Big Gulps! Here, have some weed instead… 🙂

In a democracy it’s your vote that counts. In feudalism it’s your count that votes.

Speaking of being slowly caged in:

The Doctor Patient Medical Association has released a new survey of about 700 doctors, and the results are bleak. Scary bleak. Among other dismal figures, Doctors’ Attitudes on the Future of Medicine: What’s Wrong, Who’s to Blame, and What Will Fix It found that 83% of respondents are contemplating leaving the industry if Obamacare is fully implemented, owing to its disastrous projected consequences. Indeed, they openly blame the healthcare law for their industry’s woes:

KEY FINDINGS

  • 90% say the medical system is on the WRONG TRACK
  • 83% say they are thinking about QUITTING
  • 61% say the system challenges their ETHICS
  • 85% say the patient-physician relationship is in a TAILSPIN
  • 65% say GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT is most to blame for current problems
  • 72% say individual insurance mandate will NOT result in improved access care
  • 49% say they will STOP accepting Medicaid patients
  • 74% say they will STOP ACCEPTING Medicare patients, or leave Medicare completely
  • 52% say they would rather treat some Medicaid/Medicare patient for FREE
  • 57% give the AMA a FAILING GRADE representing them
  • 1 out of 3 doctors is HESITANT to voice their opinion
  • 2 out of 3 say they are JUST SQUEAKING BY OR IN THE RED financially
  • 95% say private practice is losing out to CORPORATE MEDICINE
  • 80% say DOCTORS/MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS are most likely to help solve things
  • 70% say REDUCING GOVERNMENT would be single best fix.

If this isn’t an airtight argument for the repeal of Obamacare, nothing is. (Townhall)

Former Speaker Pelosi said “we’re ironclad on the constitutionality” of ObamaCare.

But don’t worry, it’s all Bush’s Fault anyways (Fence) and Mormons are wierd people (Fence) and Rich People (except the ones giving Obama $40,000 a plate) are evil (Fence) and here are the all the freebies (Caught you). 🙂

Congrats, you are now a feudal slave to the government. Enjoy.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

False Choices

“The more the American people see of Mitt Romney, the less they like him and the less they trust him,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a statement issued shortly after Santorum suspended his campaign.

The same can be said of you Mr. President (but the Liberal Media is still trying to hide it as much as they can). But I NEVER liked what I saw to begin with.

Arrogant, condescending Socialist who wanted to run everyone’s life for them and who has a virtual Messiah Complex.

Everything I’ve ever wanted! 😦

“What drags our entire economy down is when the benefits of economic growth and productivity go only to the few,” Obama said.

“The gap between those at the very, very top and everybody else keeps growing wider and wider and wider and wider,” Obama said.

The president argued that government-led investments in the future economy were not a “socialist dream” as some of his conservative opponents would have it, but were essential to future prosperity.

“Let me you ask you: what’s the better way to make our economy stronger? Do we give another $150,000 tax break to every millionaire and billionaire in the country?” the president said.

“Or should we make investments in education and research and health care and our veterans?”

A False Choice Mr. President. Just like you.

Spend more Money. The Liberal answer to everything. Just Spend Even More!

$16 Trillion Dollars in Debt not good enough for you?

And giving more money to Education means giving more money to the Unions that turn around and give it to the Democrats. Giving more money to education is not about giving more money to the children.

Imagine That. 🙂

“So these investments — in things like education and research and health care — they haven’t been made as some grand scheme to redistribute wealth from one group to another,” the president said today at Florida Atlantic University. “This is not some socialist dream,” Obama added, as he called for tax increases on millionaires today to pay for those investments.

And he can say that with a straight face because he’s a practiced politician and his lap dog media are not going to challenge him on it.

And this ‘magical’ class warfare tax on Millionaire will do absolutely nothing for either job creation or debt reduction. But it will satisfy the heart and soul of liberalism — Divide and Conquer Class Warfare & Envy!

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” — Candidate Obama to then private Citizen Joe The Plumber.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky 2011: “You Don’t Deserve To Keep All Your Money”
“I’ll put it this way, you don’t deserve to keep all of it. It’s not a question of deserving, because what government is, is those things that we decide to do together.”

So “spread the wealth around” just don’t say those exact words and that isn’t what you mean even if it is. Orwell smiles upon you my son.

“If we would just convert these investments that we’re making through out government in education, research and healthcare. If we just turn those into tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, then somehow the economy is going to grow stronger. That’s the theory,” President Obama said about the right at a campaign event on the tax code in Boca Raton, Florida today.

“Here is the news. We tried this for eight years before I took office. We tried it. It is not like we did not try it. At the beginning of the last decade, the wealthiest Americans got two huge tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003. Meanwhile, insurance companies, financial institutions, there were all allowed to write their own rules, find their way around the rules. We were told the same thing we’re being told now — this is going to lead to faster job growth, it’s going to lead to greater prosperity for everybody. Guess what? It didn’t,” he said an audience at Florida Atlantic University.

See what I mean. Can’t you just feel the love. 🙂

Time to bring out one of my favorite videos yet again:

Romney, a former venture capitalist, paid a tax rate of just 13.9 percent in 2010, a far lower rate than the average American paid, as his fortune is mainly based on investment and not salaried income.

Warren Buffet’s income, even more so. Funny how that worked out…. 🙂

http://townhall.com/video/ingraham-what-happened-to-bringing-people-together

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

 Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

The Fairness Doctrine 2012

So if wealth is not a worldwide round-robin of purse-snatching, and if the thing that makes you rich doesn’t make me poor, why should we care about fairness at all? We shouldn’t.

Fairness is a good thing in marriage and at the day-care center.  It’s a nice little domestic virtue. But a liking for fairness is not that noble a sentiment.  Fairness doesn’t rank with charity, love, duty, or self-sacrifice.  And there’s always a tinge of self-seeking in making sure that things are fair.  Don’t you go trying to get one up on me. (PJ O’Rourke)

One of the most interesting aspects of this debate is that relatively few commentators tie the Obama “fairness” argument to the political tactics of collectivist ideologues.  Those tactics were once very well known: take a word or expression that people think we all know the meaning of – justice, democracy, peace, fairness – and appropriate it for militant statist schemes that actually portend something very different.  With this kind of political bait-and-switch fraud, you can gain control over the people that they had no idea they were ceding.  This has been the method of socialists for decades.

In the current case, for example, the Obama administration wants us to focus on “taxes” as we discuss disparities between rich and poor, and to predicate the whole debate on “fairness.”  We think we know what is meant by these terms.

But given the background and the trend of sentiments expressed by Obama and those in his administration, it is entirely reasonable to assess that what is important to them is not “taxes,” specifically, but “disparities between rich and poor,” and the association of “fairness” with giving the central government a charter to intervene in those disparities.  Taxes are a specific case on which to establish a general principle: that cultivating “fairness” requires government intervention.

Is fairness properly cultivated as a condition or an attitude?  The adult world once had a ready answer to that question.  Children were taught that we should take care to be fair with others (the attitude), but that life – in terms of events, outcomes, and other people – wouldn’t necessarily be fair (the condition).

  But no matter how fair we seek to be, there will continue to be unfair outcomes, and many of them will be out of our control. (hot air)

“Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes.”As usual, the president motivated the higher taxes with references to “fair play” and getting the wealthy to pay their “fair share” of taxes.

“Fairness” was the codeword of the State of the Union address, not the chronic problem of lingering high unemployment, something the president never even mentioned. (Fox)

Envy. Jealousy. Covetness. Some of the 7 deadly sins are what Obama and The Democrats want in order to win.

So what is Fair?

Is it Fair That I don’t make Millions of dollars a year or a movie or TV Show?

Would it not be more “fair” to make it illegal to make over say: $200,000 a year.

The problem is that all those who aren’t making $200,000 a year, it’s not “fair” to them still.

So to be fair, EVERYONE would have to make $200,000 a year. Even the pimply 16 year old who just handed you your fries.

Thus Tom Cruise, movie star, and Tom Cruise the Fast Food kid would make the same amount.

Now that’s “fair” isn’t it? 🙂

So do you think this has any chance of working. Not in this universe!

So you’d have to lower the expectations.

Say dropping some zeroes. Say $20,000.

So do you think this has any chance of working. Not in this universe!

For exactly same reason but not because businesses couldn’t afford it. Because No one who was making more than that would do it.

But it would be equally “fair” now wouldn’t it.

And we’d all be EQUAL as well. How could that be wrong??

We all know why. But that’s why the Democrats don’t go any farther than the “eat the rich” strategy.

Is it fair that I don’t look like Hugh Jackman?

Fat People, Skinny People, “beautiful” people and “ugly” people.

Is it fair that I’m not as talented as say, Tom Brady?

Is it fair I never got to to Harvard, like Obama?

Was it fair that my sister got better grades than I did?

Well, the Democrats really don’t care. They just want to use the worst instincts of people to win. They want you to see the worst in other people too.

And the worse it gets the better they feel.

Worst is First.

It’s not fair.

If we let fairness in the door as a controlling quantity, human history suggests that we will never meet its rigorous standard.  Nothing can ever be “fair” enough, because there will always be someone who isn’t happy with the current conditions, and can point out an undeniable situational disparity of one kind or another.

The sensation of unfairness comes from deep within the human consciousness.  But it cannot be assuaged by any perfect reordering of material conditions.  Indeed, when material conditions are promptly reordered in response to our childhood complaints about unfairness, that only encourages us to base our happiness on specific material conditions – and complain more and more readily at the drop of a hat.  On the other hand, when we learn to deal with unfairness under the tutelage of good-hearted, fair-minded adults, what we come away appreciating is the trust and sense of safety their fair-mindedness engenders in us, even though things aren’t always fair.

Fairness cannot be enforced, nor unfairness requited, by the actions of the state.  Politics doesn’t lead us, through its inherent clash of competing biases, to a universal standard of fairness.  It merely enforces one set of policy ideas over another.  The tendency of all of us to treat each other unequally in one way or another (many of them utterly benign) is not itself a reason for government to intervene between us, but rather for government – which is just other people to whom we have given authority – to be limited in what it can do to us, period.(hot air)

But for the Democrats that doesn’t get them what they want.

Complete Control of Everyone and everything.

And “fairness” is the ticket.

Fear, Envy, Covetness.

They want you to want the government to screw the “unfair”. The problem is, that that is inherently unfair and based solely on their own political bias and control freakishness.

In requiring “fairness” you don’t get it.

In requiring “equality” you don’t get it.

And you lose Freedom in the process.

The Democrats don’t care about any of them. They just want you to want it bad enough to re-elect them so they can take it away from you because you asked for it.

And the Republicans are too busy with their circular firing squad of death to notice.

Meanwhile, you don’t have a job. Your prospect are crappy. And Unemployment that officially has been over 8% for 3 years in a row suddenly vanishes in a haze of resentment.

But as long as you feel it’s “fair” everything is just perfect.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 

State of The Zombie Union

In a video preview e-mailed to millions of supporters on Saturday, as South Carolina Republicans went to the polls to help pick an alternative to him, Mr. Obama promised a populist “blueprint for an American economy that’s built to last,” with the government assisting the private sector and individuals to ensure “an America where everybody gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share and everybody plays by the same set of rules.”

Mr. Obama has honed that message for months as he has attacked Republicans in Congress and on the presidential campaign trail, contrasting it with what he has described as Republicans’ “go it alone” free-market views.

Don’t you just love the polar extremes.

Either you are for government running everything or nothing at all.

All or Nothing.

With most Americans registering disapproval of the president’s economic record after three years, it is all the more imperative for Mr. Obama to define the election not as a referendum on him but as a choice between his vision and that of his eventual Republican rival.

Emotion over logic. Throw reason out the window and go for “Hope & Change” 2.0 because he’s such a brilliant P.T. Barnum Speaker that he will bamboozle you again.

Fool me once, same on you. Fool Me twice, Shame on me!

And he will kick it off with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords who says she is resigning. He will pimp that for all the juice he can. The sugar overload will make everyone a diabetic.

Mr. Obama said he would call for “a return to American values of fairness for all and responsibility from all.” (Read: Marxist style socialism)

Because responsibility for all is not personal responsibility. That’s “going it alone”. 🙂

“We can go in two directions,” he said. “One is towards less opportunity and less fairness. Or we can fight for where I think we need to go: building an economy that works for everyone, not just a wealthy few.”

Class warfare, envy, and “fairness”. The Zombie march continues.

“We must offer an alternative vision,” Mr. Romney said. “I stand ready to lead us down a different path, where we are lifted up by our desire to succeed, not dragged down by a resentment of success.” (New York Times)

But resentment, envy, and fear are Zombie food.

Rolling up your sleeves, nose to grindstone, and being responsible for your choices and actions is like bullet to the brain of the Zombies.

The Government-must-do-it-for-me (and someone else must pay for it not realising it’s them anyhow) Zombie crowd is immune to reason and logic.

That’s why he will broadcast his Zombie-inspiring, Zombie-infecting State of the Union address.

The Zombie infection must spread and having an big TV audience will do nicely.

So, my recommendation: Watch “Chopped”. It will be more interesting…

P.s.

When burglar Kesler Dufrene became a twice-convicted felon in 2006, a  Bradenton judge shipped him to prison for five years. And because of  his convictions, an immigration judge ordered Dufrene deported to his  native Haiti.

That never happened.

Instead, when Dufrenes state prison term was up, Miami immigration  authorities in October 2010 released him from custody. Two months later,  North Miami police say, he slaughtered three people, including a  15-year-old girl in a murder case that remains as baffling today as it  did the afternoon the bodies were discovered.

DNA on a rifle found inside the house and cellphone tracking technology later linked Dufrene to the Jan. 2, 2011, slayings.

But North Miami detectives never got to interrogate him. Just 18 days  after the murders, Dufrene shot and killed himself when he was cornered  by Manatee County sheriffs deputies in Bradenton after an unrelated  break-in and shooting there.

 Now be “fair” and government will provide… 🙂

The Zombie Hoard

Last year I theorized that Liberals were Bees. Mindless angry drones that stung anything in sight.

For 2012 I have revised this analysis.

They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cowtowed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrinch about his “open marriage” and Gingrinch blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin. 🙂

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cowtow to them.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

So the alternative is to cowtow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

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

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

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

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.

Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up to with little to no sense of shame.

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

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

No.

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

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?

HELL NO!

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

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

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

And these zombies has Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.

FEAR IS HOPE!

My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

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

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Problem Solving- Obama Style

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

In 2007, then-senator Barack Obama insisted that the coming presidential primary- and general-election campaigns “shouldn’t be about making each other look bad, they should be about figuring out how we can all do some good for this precious country of ours. That’s our mission.”

“And in this mission,” he continued, “our rivals won’t be one another, and I would assert it won’t even be the other party. It’s going to be cynicism that we’re fighting against.”

My how things have changed. 🙂

I guess I missed the moment when Obama hung his “Mission Accomplished” banner. Because from where I’m sitting, it looks more like the president not only lost his battle against cynicism, he defected to the other side.

And don’t forget about the New Tone and “Civility”. The Democrats surely have.

Except inequality isn’t the cause of these problems, stagnating wages and unemployment are. But Obama wants to talk about inequality because it puts him on the convenient side of populist anger.
Sounding as if he were still running against George W. Bush, Obama laid the blame for our problems on the “most expensive tax cuts for the wealthy in history.” Of course, he leaves out that those tax cuts also went to the middle class.

“Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1 percent,” Obama barked. “That is the height of unfairness.” Except, when the Washington Post asked the White House for evidence to support the claim, an official confessed they “had no actual data to back up the president’s assertion.”

That’s okay. Who cares about the facts when you’re fighting to make America safe for cynicism again? (Jonah Goldberg)

So with that problem solved…we move onto the economy… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Charles Krauthammer: The president has nothing to run on but crude populism.

In the first month of his presidency, Barack Obama averred that if in three years he hadn’t alleviated the nation’s economic pain, he’d be a “one-term proposition.”

When three-quarters of Americans think the country is on the “wrong track” and even Bill Clinton calls the economy “lousy,” how then to run for a second term? Traveling Tuesday to Osawatomie, Kan., site of a famous 1910 Teddy Roosevelt speech, Obama laid out the case.It seems that he and his policies have nothing to do with the current state of things. Sure, presidents are ordinarily held accountable for economic growth, unemployment, national indebtedness (see Obama, above). But not this time. Responsibility, you see, lies with the rich.

Or, as the philosophers of Zuccotti Park call them, the 1 percent. For Obama, these rich are the ones holding back the 99 percent. The “breathtaking greed of a few” is crushing the middle class. If only the rich paid their “fair share,” the middle class would have a chance. Otherwise, government won’t have enough funds to “invest” in education and innovation, the golden path to the sunny uplands of economic growth and opportunity.

Aka, spend even more! 🙂

Where to begin? A country spending twice as much per capita on education as it did in 1970 with zero effect on test scores is not underinvesting in education. It’s mis-investing. As for federally directed spending on innovation — like Solyndra? Ethanol? The preposterously subsidized, flammable Chevy Volt? (which only met 60% of its very underwhelming sales targets to begin with)

Our current economic distress is attributable to myriad causes: globalization, expensive high-tech medicine, a huge debt burden, a burst housing bubble largely driven by precisely the egalitarian impulse that Obama is promoting (government aggressively pushing “affordable housing” that turned out to be disastrously unaffordable), an aging population straining the social safety net. Yes, growing inequality is a problem throughout the Western world. But Obama’s pretense that it is the root cause of this sick economy is ridiculous.

As is his solution, that old perennial: selective abolition of the Bush tax cuts. As if all that ails us, all that keeps the economy from humming and the middle class from advancing, is a 4.6-point hike in marginal tax rates for the rich.

Yes, Democrats really do think this is the devil. Then they propose a tax cut that will cost billions and will make the already bankrupt Social Security debt EVEN WORSE (this would be the payroll tax- the one that funds Social Security to begin with – so if it is getting even less money pour down that rat hole the debt rats are going to get even bigger!)

Oh, and the Democrats were going to pay for this by…<<drumroll>> increasing taxes on rich people!! Ta Da!

So wreck play class warfare (“you can’t possibly be against it”) cause even more  Social Security debt (so it will have to be bailed out) and raise taxes on the rich all at the same time. What a smorgasbord of liberal hate and fear! They love it!

This, in a country $15 trillion in debt with out-of-control entitlements systematically starving every other national need. This obsession with a sock-it-to-the-rich tax hike that, at most, would have reduced this year’s deficit from $1.30 trillion to $1.22 trillion is the classic reflex of reactionary liberalism — anything to avoid addressing the underlying structural problems, which would require modernizing the totemic programs of the New Deal and Great Society.

And no liberal can do that. They are the two of the 3 Holy Grails of Liberalism (ObamaCare being the third- being able to control who lives and who dies).

It’s just not “fair”. 🙂

And if you just give it more time it’ll work (The New Deal is around 80 years old BTW) 🙂

As for those structural problems, Obama has spent three years on signature policies that either ignore or aggravate them:

A massive stimulus, a gigantic payoff to Democratic interest groups (such as teachers and public-sector unions) that will add nearly $1 trillion to the national debt.

A sweeping federally run reorganization of health care that (a) cost Congress a year, (b) created an entirely new entitlement in a nation hemorrhaging from unsustainable entitlements, (c) introduced new levels of uncertainty into an already stagnant economy.

High-handed regulation, best exemplified by Obama’s failed cap-and-trade legislation, promptly followed by an EPA trying to impose the same conventional-energy-killing agenda by administrative means.

Moreover, one issue that already enjoys a bipartisan consensus — the need for fundamental reform of a corrosive, corrupted tax code that misdirects capital and promotes unfairness — Obama did nothing, ignoring the recommendations of several bipartisan commissions, including his own.

In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions “are now forced to take their children to food banks.” You have to admire the audacity. That’s the kind of damning observation the opposition brings up when you’ve been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection!

Why? Because, you see, he bears no responsibility for the current economic distress. It’s the rich. And, like Horatius at the bridge, Obama stands with the American masses against the soulless plutocrats.

And the Republicans are strictly FOR the same plutocrats so if you hate them, you hate Republicans!

Thus, “Vote for me! the other guy’s an asshole!” 🙂

This is populism so crude that it channels not Teddy Roosevelt so much as Hugo Chávez. But with high unemployment, economic stagnation, and unprecedented deficits, what else can Obama say?

He can’t run on stewardship. He can’t run on policy. His signature initiatives — the stimulus, Obamacare, and the failed cap-and-trade — will go unmentioned in his campaign ads. Indeed, they will be the stuff of Republican ads.

What’s left? Class resentment. Got a better idea?

And Racism. I can’t wait for that one again… 😦

Problem solved.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

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.

The Peasants are Revolting!!

“Sire, The Peasants are Revolting.”

“You’re telling me, they stink on ice” (Mel Brook’s History of the World Part 1)

And from one of the best films ever, Monty Python & The Holy Grail.

ARTHUR: I am your king! (Think Obama, The Ivy Tower Harvard Educated Community Organizer and Academic Professor )

OLD WOMAN: Well, I didn’t vote for you.

ARTHUR: You don’t vote for kings.

OLD WOMAN: Well, how did you become king, then?

ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held Excalibur aloft from the bosom of the water to signify by Divine Providence … that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur … That is why I am your king!

DENNIS: Look, strange women lying on their backs in ponds handing out swords … that’s no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. ( and ours ignores that in favor of  Socialist Keynesian Liberal Academic Fantasies and “democratic” cramdowns for your own good because we are so morally and intellectually superior)

ARTHUR: Be quiet! (HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to the Insurance Industry)

DENNIS: You can’t expect to wield supreme executive power just ’cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

ARTHUR: Shut up!

DENNIS: I mean, if I went around saying I was an Emperor because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, people would put me away!

ARTHUR: (Grabbing him by the collar) Shut up, will you. Shut up!

DENNIS: Ah! NOW … we see the violence inherent in the system.

ARTHUR: Shut up! (DAMN TEA PARTIERS!)

PEOPLE (i.e. other PEASANTS) are appearing and watching.

DENNIS: (calling) Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help, help, I’m being repressed!

ARTHUR: (aware that people are now coming out and watching) Bloody peasant! (pushes DENNIS over into mud and prepares to ride off) (Bloody Teabagger!)

DENNIS: Oh, Did you hear that! What a give-away.

ARTHUR: Come on, patsy.

They ride off.

DENNIS: (in the background as we PULL OUT) did you see him repressing me, then? That’s what I’ve been on about …

Call the NAACP!!, LA Raza, or MSDNC… 🙂

But now to the more serious point. This amazing article by Victor David Hanson.

Traditional peasant societies believe in only a limited good. The more your neighbor earns, the less someone else gets. Profits are seen as a sort of theft. They must be either hidden or redistributed. Envy rather than admiration of success reigns.

In contrast, Western civilization began with a very different ancient Greek idea of an autonomous citizen, not an indentured serf or subsistence peasant. The small, independent landowner — if left to his own talents and if his success was protected by, and from, government — would create new sources of wealth for everyone. The resulting greater bounty for the poor soon trumped their old jealousy of the better off.

Citizens of ancient Greece and Italy soon proved more prosperous and free than either the tribal folk to the north and west, or the imperial subjects to the south and east. The success of later Western civilization in general, and America in particular, is testament to this legacy of the freedom of the individual in the widest political and economic sense

We seem to be forgetting that lately — though Mao Zedong’s redistributive failures in China, or present-day bankrupt Greece, should warn us about what happens when government tries to enforce an equality of result rather than of opportunity.

Even after the failure of statism at the end of the Cold War, the disasters of socialism in Venezuela and Cuba, and the recent financial meltdowns in the European Union, for some reason America is returning to a peasant mentality of a limited good that redistributes wealth rather than creates it. Candidate Obama’s “spread the wealth” slip to Joe the Plumber simply was upgraded to President Obama’s “I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”

The more his administration castigates insurers, businesses and doctors; raises taxes on the upper income brackets; and creates more regulations, the more those who create wealth are sitting out, neither hiring nor lending. The result is that traditional self-interested profit-makers are locking up trillions of dollars in unspent cash rather than using it to take risks and either lose money due to new red tape or see much of their profit largely confiscated through higher taxes.

No wonder that in such a climate of fear and suspicion, unemployment remains near 10 percent. Deficits chronically exceed $1 trillion per annum. And now the poverty rate has hit a historic high. We are all getting poorer in hopes that a few don’t get richer.
The public is seldom told that 1 percent of taxpayers already pay 40 percent of the income taxes collected, while 40 percent of income earners are exempt from federal income tax — or that present entitlements like Medicare and Social Security are financially unsustainable. Instead, they hear more often that those who managed to scheme to make above $250,000 per year have obligations to the rest of us to give back about 60 percent of what they earn in higher health care and income taxes — together with payroll and rising state income taxes, and along with increased capital gains and inheritance taxes.

That limited-good mind-set expects that businesses will agree that they now make enough money and so have no need to pursue any more profits at the expense of others. Therefore, they will gladly still hire the unemployed and buy new equipment — as they pay higher health care or income taxes to a government that knows far better how to redistribute their income to the more needy or deserving.

This peasant approach to commerce also assumes that businesses either cannot understand administration signals or can do nothing about them. So who cares that in the Chrysler bankruptcy settlement, quite arbitrarily the government put the unions in front of the legally entitled lenders?

Health insurers should not mind that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius just warned them to keep their profits down and their mouths shut — or face exclusion from health care markets.

I suppose that no corporation should worry that the government arbitrarily announced — without benefit a law or court ruling — that it wanted BP to put up $20 billion in cleanup costs for the Gulf spill.

What optimistic Americans used to call a rising tide that lifts all boats is now once again derided as trickle-down economics.

In other words, a newly peasant-minded America is willing to become collectively poorer so that some will not become wealthier.


The present economy suggests that it is surely getting its wish. (
Townhall.com)

But damn it will feel good, at least for liberals, to stick to the rich bastards.

Class warfare is like the fire they set at night to keep them warm and to warn off the predators lurking in the dark. It warms the cuckolds of their hearts and give them sustenance.

Envy, and Fear. Fear and Envy.

FEAR IS HOPE

Mind you, Everyone in Congress and the President are “rich”, millionaires in fact. But they aren’t evil because they are Liberals. And they are in “Public Service” so they are the Insufferably Morally and Intellectually Superior Left and not evil “rich” millionaires.

And big companies run by Millionaire CEOs (hello, GM,Chrysler etc) or Unions are not evil capitalist bastards out to destroy everyone in their path, because they are Liberals.

Evil “rich” people are only Republicans and Conservatives, you notice. Funny how that works out. 🙂

No partisan politics involved there. <wink>

Orwell was piker compared to these guys.

Did you see him (the evil “rich” and/or republican) repressing me? 🙂