7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

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 cow-towed 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 Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich 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.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

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 cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“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.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.

mountain

So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.

David_Petraeus

And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

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.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

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.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

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 with little to no sense of shame.

disagree

2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

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

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

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

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…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.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

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.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

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

“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!

2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and 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 have 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

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.

truth

Can’t We all Just Get Along?

“Can’t We all Just get along?” — Rodney King.

NO.  Liberals sure as hell don’t want to. They are to vastly superior for that.

In all my years, living through good times and bad, war, recession, periods of great advancement, social upheaval, the eradication of catastrophic diseases and the myriad of forward leaps and backward slides in this United States of America, I have never seen a time when our population was on such adversarial footing.

The problem is not just disagreement, that always has and always will exist, but it seems that in the past we were always able to find some common ground, with reasonable people on each side of an issue. Through civil discourse, and give and take, negotiations found a path both sides could live with.

I think our forefathers designed our government to make it possible for both sides of an issue to be heard, but look how far that concept has fallen, with congressional leaders not even allowing legislation they disagree with to even get to the floor for debate.

It seems, today, instead of engaging in two-sided conversations and attempts to understand each other, we tend to label and lump all those who disagree with us into categories we consider to be mentally inferior to us, considering anything they say to be out of step, off the wall or just plain stupid.

For instance, if you let it be known that you don’t go along with the global warming theories, you are labeled a mental Neanderthal, unable to understand the catastrophic threat to the planet, and even though, for the last century, the apologists have vacillated between devastating heat and ice age and neither have transpired, you are considered to be a flat earth type doofus.

People from both sides of the liberal-conservative issue will resort to rancid hyperbole and insulting name-calling before they even learn each other’s names, raising tempers to the point that any sensible discussion is all but impossible.

People who consider themselves our intellectual betters, those who spout ideological condescension and know beyond a shadow of a doubt what is good for us, rarely have the foresight to consider what the ramifications of their actions would be, and they consider it an insult to their superior intellect when called on it.

Then there are those who use the word “racist” to describe anyone with the nerve to criticize President Obama or believe that “all lives matter.”

If you consider an unborn fetus to be a person, especially if you are a man, you are quickly told that what a woman does with her body falls under a “woman’s right to choose.” It’s a category that supersedes all others governing natal matters, something that is none of a man’s business.

They have the power of life and death and you don’t, son shut the F*ck up, you don’t matter. 🙂

Poor me, I was unaware that a woman could become in a “family way” without the participation of a male.

The Feminists of today are sure working hard for it. Or at least just making the Male just a necessary evil or cattle.

The Republican presidential debates this year, especially the ones hosted by CNN, at least in my opinion, have been more incendiary than informative. The moderators have plumbed the ignition points and tried to pit candidate against candidate, resulting in petty arguments about who did what, when and to whom, each candidate trying to one up the other in exposing past mistakes and present faults. Meanwhile, the audience is left wondering if either one is worth voting for.

Only Hillary. To The Media SHE IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE. Everyone else is just an annoyance to swat down.

I don’t really know what has lead to this attitude of prejudging someone and labeling their ideas irrelevant and contrary before even a word is said, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the nova explosion of social media could claim a lion’s share of the blame.

Being able to hide behind an avatar and say basically anything you want to without even having to reveal your true identity or whereabouts emboldens even the faint of heart to say things they would never say to someone’s face.

Plus, narcissism that just say they are right and you’re wrong and that’s it. And they are the “victims” of hate even when they are perpetrating the hate.

And you can find plenty of sides to choose and plenty of examples to follow if you’re not the kind of person who thinks for themselves. So many people fall into this trap, faithfully repeating what they have heard, never mind checking the validity. They lead the conversation with slights and insults and never even get past the verbal garbage to meaningful dialogue about whatever the subject was in the first place.

The anything with a (D) crowd. 🙂  “What difference does it make?” 🙂

It has digressed to the point that so many people are able to tell you that you’re an idiot, racist, backward-thinking, bigoted misogynist, but for the life of them, they can’t tell you why they feel that way.

But don’t challenge them, because you’re still an an idiot, racist, backward-thinking, bigoted misogynist regardless. 🙂

Preconditioned ideas, without reason, are a dangerous thing.

What do you think?

I think Liberal think with their emotions and emotions have been proven to override logic and reason.

Greed and Fear. That’s the liberal way.

Pray for our troops and the peace of Jerusalem

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels

 

You Just Might Be A Liberal…

Are you not sure that you’re a liberal? Well, there’s an easy way to find out. You might be a liberal if…

1) ….Your newspaper calls people “bigoted” for being worried about bringing Syrian refugees to America, but you won’t run pictures of Muhammad because you’re afraid Muslims might kill you for it.

2) ….You think every man accused of sexual assault is guilty until proven innocent except Bill Clinton.

3)….You insist that anyone who questions global warming hates science even though you don’t understand any of the science behind it yourself and you say we have to do something about climate change primarily because you want to impress your liberal friends.

4) ….You are terrified that holding terrorists at Guantanamo Bay who are trying to murder Americans might make the other terrorists who are trying to murder Americans mad.

5) ….You believe there’s a “Republican War on Women;” yet you are okay with aborting baby girls for any reason, think any man who says he identifies as a woman should be able to use the women’s bathroom and you want to put Bill Clinton back in the White House.

6) ….You claim to constantly hear Republican “dog whistles” that 99% of the population misses; yet you’d deny you’re racist for insisting that black Americans aren’t competent enough to get an ID to vote.

 

7) …You think there’s a possibility that Obama might be able to have a productive conversation with radical Islamists who want to kill us, but dialogue with the NRA is impossible.

8)….You believe Hillary Clinton is telling the truth. About anything. Ever.

9) ….You simultaneously believe the police are violent trigger-happy racists who shoot people for no good reason and that we should disarm the populace so that only the government has guns.

10) ….You went to a talk given on your campus by a conservative just so you could scream at him for “invading your safe space.”

11) ….You think Chris Kyle was a monster for killing so many enemies of America while Bowe Bergdahl deserves to be treated with respect and compassion after deserting his unit.

12) ….You believe you’re a caring and compassionate person because you advocate giving other people’s money away to people you hope will vote for candidates you like.

13) ….You believe that anyone who dislikes Barack Obama must hate him because he’s a minority, but your hatred of Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas is perfectly justifiable.

14) ….You think you are a sophisticated person with a deep understanding of complex political issues, but sum up every one with some variation of, “Republicans are evil, racist, and they hate you while liberals like me are nice!”

15) ….You think it’s vitally important to increase the number of Muslim immigrants coming to America so they can inform on all the other Muslims who are planning terrorist attacks.

16) ….You blame the Republicans for the failure of Obamacare even though none of them voted for it.

17) ….Your first response to a terrorist attack committed by radical Islamists who’ve sworn allegiance to ISIS is to try to disarm every law-abiding gun owner in the country.

18) ….You think an unemployed, white factory worker who’s struggling to feed his family has some sort of racial privilege compared to Barack Obama, Melissa Harris Perry or Al Sharpton.

19) ….You say fences don’t work and gun-free zones do, but if Republicans wanted the fence around the White House taken down and demanded that the Secret Service be disarmed, you’d accuse them of trying to get Obama killed.

20) ….You believe Bruce Jenner is a woman, Rachel Dolezal is black and Elizabeth Warren is an Indian.

21)  Food in any way can be a “microagression” based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity.

22) Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. Guns kill people so getting rid of Guns will kill less people.

23) The Power of Life and Death is “Pro-Choice”.

24) Any immigration is good no matter how it was done and anyone opposed to any immigration of any kind is “racist”.

25) A Religion is a Race, unless they are Christians, then they are just bigots.

26) Utter the word “islamophobia” and mean it.

27) Anything with a (D) after their name is ok and can do anything they want because it’s better than they alternative.

28) Democrats Lie, but it’s your fault not theirs.

29) A Tax is a Penalty, even after it’s ruled a Tax it’s still a Penalty.

30) “What Difference Does it Make?”

31) It was the fault of a You Tube Video.

32) That the Media is not biased and that people like Hillary and Barack are “moderates” and any Republican is “extreme”.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Why They Do it

Global Warming: The United Nations climate summit was billed as the meeting that would save the world. But that’s not what the conference delegates want — their goal is to fundamentally transform the world.

Obama said in 2008 that he planned to “Fundamentally Transform America.” He has remained true to that promise.

In the days leading up to the 21st session of the Conference of Parties to the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, hardly a living person could avoid hearing the desperate talk about the Paris summit being our last chance to save the world from global warming . It was all a pretense, however, because what the global warming alarmist community says it wants isn’t what it truly hungers for.

Like most things with Liberals, deceit and fear is the only way for them.

The U.N.’s many climate meetings and its interest in climate through the years have nothing to do with warming, climate, weather or the environment.

The goal has always been to wreck capitalism , punish prosperous economies that became rich through free markets, reward poorer nations that are impoverished by policies that starve markets, and reshape the world in the image of left-wing thought.

Don’t believe it? It’s right there in the U.N.’s own documents.

The “Draft conclusions proposed by the Co-Chairs,” distributed on Dec. 5, confirms that the parties of a climate agreement are united in “emphasizing the importance of promoting, protecting and respecting all human rights, the right to development, the right to health, and the rights of indigenous peoples, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable climate situations (and under occupation).”

The draft also underscores the need to promote “gender equality and the empowerment of women, while taking into account the needs of local communities, intergenerational equity concerns, and the integrity of ecosystems and of Mother Earth, when taking action to address climate change.”

Yes, that’s Mother Earth with an upper-case M and upper-case E.

The same document refers as well to “the imperatives of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities.”

All of these issues being “emphasized” and “taken into account” are goals the political left has pursued for decades, and all require more government intervention into private affairs. This is what the global warming scare is about. It’s not about rescuing cities from encroaching seas, saving populations from drought, preventing “dirty weather ” or protecting polar bears.

Look at those around the world who are advancing the global warming scare. The movement is led, and followed by, figures from the political left who loathe capitalism, are repulsed by the wealth in advanced economies and want to exercise control over their fellow humans. The talk about climate change is a smoke screen to cover their true ambitions.

The Paris climate summit was to end this weekend, with a deal likely struck. The nabobs will claim victory, but that won’t end the hectoring. By the time spring rolls around, they’ll again be claiming the 2016 Morocco summit will be the last chance to save the world. (IBD)

And they did.

Do it our way, give us you life, or else!

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Failing Grade

Despite all the catastrophic hyperbole tossed around leading up to the climate mega-conference in Paris, the American public is not paying much attention. For months we have been warned by the prophets of doom, that the United Nation’s climate conference marks the final and best chance for humanity to save itself from certain destruction. We are told that if the 2015 Conference of the Parties (COP21) fails to deliver a major climate change treaty, the world will have missed the last opportunity to mitigate global warming and avert a worldwide disaster. To save ourselves, we simply need our collective governments to agree to impose regulations that change our lifestyles, downgrade our standards of living, and sacrifice our economies. But the alarmist sales job isn’t working, and any binding agreement is highly unlikely to emerge from Paris.

Environmentalists are frustrated. They’ve worked so hard, for so long, to get the U.S. onboard with a binding international climate treaty. So far every attempt has failed, in large part because the American public is not convinced. The main problem with alarmist propaganda of the last two decades is that they can only cry wolf so many times before the public begins to doubt the story. Al Gore’s Academy Award winning documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” proved to be short on truth. A British court went so far as to identify nine scientific errors in the film, and mandate that it could only be shown in British schools with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination.

For years Hollywood environmental crusaders such as Leonardo DiCaprio, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Robert Redford, Harrison Ford and Sean Penn, have used their fame to try to influence public opinion about global warming. But for all their alarmist drama, a new Washington Post/ABC poll shows that today only about 47 percent believe the government should do more to deal with global warming, down from 61 percent in 2008. According to Schwarzenegger in an interview last week with the Sacramento Bee, it’s all because of a failure to communicate, “I think it is sad the way, you know, the miscommunication about climate change, because so many times, you know, you hear … that the oceans will rise, and the sea levels are rising and the temperature’s rising and the icebergs’ melting, and it’s all stuff that people cannot even relate to,” Schwarzenegger said, “I mean, our brain is not wired that way, that we’re worried about things that are happening in 2050, or 50 years from now. It’s wired about what’s happening today, and no one – even the top environmental officials – really communicates this the right way.” Of course, if the public is too dumb to understand something so important, then governments need to be convinced to make decisions for them, which is why Schwarzenegger, Robert Redford and Sean Penn are taking the stage in Paris this week.

Environmentalists have tried the political route to stir up support. They hoped they could turn global warming into a major campaign issue and elect candidates who agree with their agenda. They spent tens of millions on this endeavor in 2014 – and failed. Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer alone spent $58 million and saw almost every candidate he backed defeated. When his PAC, NextGen Climate Action Committee, realized the millions they spent on climate alarm ads weren’t moving the numbers, they were forced to switch to ads on social issues and the economy. A 2014 Gallup poll showed climate change ranked 13th as an issue of importance, with only 40 percent of voters identifying climate change as either “very important” or “extremely important” to their votes. Only 3% of voters rank climate change as the number one election issue.

 

Mainstream media outlets have provided an echo chamber for climate fear mongering. They enthusiastically play along with every attempt to link global warming to the latest weather pattern or tragedy. This week’s headlines offer great examples; The Clock is Ticking Toward Climate Catastrophe (Yahoo News), Climate Change is a Form of Terror (CNN), COP21: Humanity’s Last-Chance Saloon (Huffington Post), Obama: Climate change could lead to rise in extremism (The Hill), Climate Change: 48-page document could save the planet (CNN.com<http://cnn.com>), If the Republicans Destroy Our Planet, Blame It on the Devil (Haaretz), Faith communities organize to save the planet at COP21 (National Observer). But for all their combined efforts to raise public concern, a poll recently conducted by GlobeScan in 20 top industrial countries showed a 13 point drop since 2009 in those who view climate change as a “very serious” issue.

President Obama, intent on making climate change a legacy issue, has used his bully pulpit to amplify climate alarmism and to demagogue warming deniers. He began his second term with a State of the Union speech claiming climate change is the “greatest threat to the nation.” Then, following the Paris terror attacks, he used the opportunity to make a bizarre reference about Islamic terrorist’s opposition to COP21, “What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be, when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.” One could almost infer that the President was suggesting the terror attacks in Paris were an attempt to deter world leaders from tackling global warming. A new Economist/YouGov poll shows only 8 percent of Republicans, 19 percent of Independents, and 25 percent of Democrats believe there is any connection between climate change and an increase in terrorism.

Pope Francis triggered new enthusiasm with environmentalists when he took up the mantle of an eco-evangelist. Perhaps by making global warming a religious moral issue, many in the public would finally have a climate change conversion. In anticipation of the Paris climate conference the Pope rolled out his encyclical teaching on global warming earlier this year, and has used every opportunity to implore the world to adopt the Paris accord. His encyclical frames the fight against CO2 emissions as a moral imperative for the Catholic Church. Fossil fuels are characterized as the embodiment of evil. On Sunday he prayed, “For the sake of the common home we share and for future generations, every effort should be made in Paris to mitigate the impact of climate change and, at the same time, to tackle poverty and to let human dignity flourish.” If the Pope’s prayer were answered it would be unfortunate for the poor. The U.N.’s regulation of fossil fuels would have the greatest negative impact on the quality of life for those who are more concerned about immediate nourishment and shelter than anthropogenic climate model projections.

Despite the Pope’s climate sermons, impoverished countries know how much their economies and citizens depend on access to affordable fossil fuels. It’s the key reason they won’t sign on to an equivalent deal without the extracting a long-term financial prize from wealthy nations. The religious dogma hasn’t inspired a host of new believers. According to a recent Pew Research Center poll, around 47 percent of Catholics, attributed global warming to human causes, and less than half viewed it as a very serious problem. The demographic groups least concerned about global warming happen to be religious communities – white Catholics and white evangelicals.

So what’s the deal? Why all the climate apathy and global warming denial? Is Arnold Schwarzenegger right – a majority of people are simply too ignorant to understand what they are being told? I don’t believe it’s a communication problem. I believe it’s a science problem, and a global warming solutions problem. Global warming alarmists are masters of propaganda. They have employed the most Orwellian tactics in their attempt to produce a seismic shift in the American conscious over global warming.

The fact that alarmists effectively changed the basic term of the debate from “global warming” to the catch all term “climate change,” even though the science they continue to reference is all about warming, is revealing. First, it should make us all skeptics. If global warming was an undisputed fact, evidenced by Al Gore’s warming predictions actually becoming reality, alarmists wouldn’t need to change the term to “climate change.” It also reveals how shrewd they are with their warming rhetoric. Climate change is a convenient catch all propaganda term for alarmists. It encompasses every weather related event, every storm, every drought. It can be twisted and distorted to mean almost anything. Even war and terrorism can now be blamed on the weather. But after all the manipulative word games, millions of dollars spent on promoting global warming ideology, celebrity prattle, and a U.S. President who claims that global warming is the greatest threat to mankind – public opinion appears to be, at best, stagnant or shifting in the opposite direction.

When 150 world leaders gather to discuss something, that something must a real big deal. But the world is giving a collective yawn to the international confab in Paris. That’s a mistake. We should pay attention, not because the alarmists are correct with their predictions of a global warming Armageddon, but because three quarters of the world’s leaders are attending a meeting for the purpose of inking an agreement to significantly change our quality of life, strangle our economy, eliminate jobs, and provide billions of taxpayer dollars to developing country’s economies in the form of green bribes.

If you aren’t a skeptic about global warming science, you should be a skeptic about global warming solutions. Take a few minutes and browse the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (unfccc.int<http://unfccc.int/>), or their blueprint for sustainable development, Agenda 21 (sustainabledevelopment.un.org<https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf>). It’s big government on steroids, imposing international regulations on almost every component of our lives. It uses climate change as an excuse for government to address every Leftist issue imaginable, from wealth redistribution to empowering unions, to feminism. It’s not compatible with the U.S. Constitution, our democracy or our ideals. There are many nuances to the art of twisting the facts to influence opinions and behavior, but political propaganda is most effective when its target audience fails to recognize the persuasive tactics being employed and how they shape the public’s beliefs. It’s been said that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” When it comes to climate propaganda, and meetings like COP21, Americans should all be very vigilant. A binding U.N. climate treaty would prove to be a real man-made global disaster. (David Spady)

Save us from The Chicken Little Orwellian Dictator Wanna-be’s.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

The Hitler Youth of AGW

Now remember, the Global Warming Goosesteppers always say it’s about “the science” and the “consensus” therein… <wink, wink nudge, nudge…>

If there were any doubt that we’ve entered a witch-hunt era when it comes to global warming, what happened in the state of Washington should remove it. Doug Ericksen, a state senator who represents the people of Ferndale as a duly elected lawmaker, has been the target of a student mob that wanted Western Washington University to revoke his master’s degree from that school because, as Watchdog.org put it, “he’s not radical enough on global warming.”

As chair of his state’s Senate Energy, Environment and Telecommunications Committee, Ericksen “has blocked efforts to force businesses and residents to go green,” though “he supports voluntary compliance.” He does, however, oppose “mandated cap-and-trade programs and low-carbon fuel standards.” All of this was enough for his antagonists to label him a “denier.” The next step is to outfit in him a tunic bearing a scarlet “D.”

The students’ campaign against Ericksen forced a person with a sound mind who has some authority to step in, and one did. Western Washington University President Bruce Shepard said that the school was not going to “penalize a graduate for the positions they express” and found the mob’s objective to be “a disturbing misunderstanding of the intellectual freedoms any university worthy of the name must stand for. And protect.”

“Sen. Doug Ericksen is welcome to have whatever political views he wants, but by misinforming the public on the science of climate change, he is undermining the credibility of our own degrees and reflecting poorly on the caliber of education students receive here,” the students said in a statement to the Herald.

The students acknowledged they weren’t trying to change Ericksen’s mind on the issue.

“We’re framing it in a more radical way,” students said of the effort to revoke Ericksen’s degree. “We’re not just trying to have a conversation with him or hold him accountable. We’re trying to revoke his degree and get people to pay attention.” (Watchdog)

Translation: Fear Us! We want to destroy you if you disagree with us! The typical Leftist tactic on everything, fear & intimidation combined with a desperate need to censor people who disagree with their holier-than-thou views.

“The strength of our democracy is that all citizens, including students and leaders like Sen. Ericksen, have the freedom of expression to take positions with diverse viewpoints,” said Shepard.

This isn’t the first time that Ericksen has been the quarry for those invested in the global warming narrative. Watchdog.org says that billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer has invested “$1 million in the state races, with his primary goal of unseating Ericksen.”

Steyer is free to spend his money however he wants. But we hope that he’ll soon tire of funding environmentalist nonsense and go look for another toy. (IBD)

Let this be yet more evidence how weak the AGW case is that extremists must stoop to this level against those who dare think for themselves and do not march in lock-step with the enviro-nazis. (Midas Milligan, commentor n Watchdog)

Well, it’s about the Leftist control freak politics, they just hide it under “science” but you won’t get them to admit that’s The Agenda, no way. The Narrative has to be what they say it is, and that’s it and censoring and cause fear (and intimidation) are the only thing the weapons they want to use.

They are bullies, not “scientific”, that’s the only real consensus you can reach about them and their need to control you.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

The Hook

Warming: The U.N.’s climate chief is scheduled to visit Australia, where she’ll be welcomed by an advisor of the prime minister who isn’t mincing words in explaining to his countrymen what their guest is all about.

Mind you they used Orwellian tactics to change it from “Global Warming” to the non-descript “Climate Change” to avoid the embarrassments of things like it snowing on their conferences or Flagstaff,AZ getting hit with snow in early May.

Maurice Newman, chairman of Prime Minister Tony Abbot’s Business Advisory Council, doesn’t seem too thrilled about the visit from Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Writing in the Australian, Newman said the “climate catastrophists” are “opposed to capitalism and freedom” and aim to establish a “new world order under the control” of the United Nations.

The British Telegraph reports that Newman’s critics describe him as a “whacko.” But he is correct: The goal of those who want the world to believe that man’s carbon dioxide emissions are dangerously changing the climate is to pull down capitalism. And that’s not us saying it. Figueres herself has admitted this.

“This is the first time” in history, she said earlier this year, that there’s a chance “to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

See The Watermelon analysis.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/just-say-no-to-watermelons/

Watermelon Environmentalist: Behind all the acronyms and the jargon, they say, is a conspiracy to promote a nakedly political aim – anti-big business; anti-free market; pro-tax increases. In short, green on the outside but red on the inside…

Newman points this out in his op-ed, warning fellow Australians that “the real agenda is concentrated political authority.” Global warming? It’s merely “the hook.”

He also notes that Figueres “is on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model.”

Newman courts even more criticism when he boldly states that in Figueres’ “authoritarian world there will be no room for debate or disagreement.”

He adds: “Make no mistake, climate change is a must-win battlefield for authoritarians and fellow travelers.”

Such comments will surely get him removed from many cocktail party invitation lists, but the price for being right is often stiff.

Newman also noted that those he describes as “eco-catastrophists”:

• “Won’t let up” and “have captured the U.N. and are extremely well funded.”

• “Will keep mobilizing public opinion using fear and appeals to morality.”

• “Have successfully enlisted compliant academics and an obedient and gullible mainstream media to push the scriptures regardless of evidence.”

Newman could have mentioned, as well, that while many who are aligned with Figueres are motivated, as she is, by a raging desire to quash capitalism, the fight against man-made global warming and climate change has become a religious crusade for more than a few.

Count another U.N. climate chief among them. The freshly resigned Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Chairman Rajendra Pachauri said earlier this year that “the protection of planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems, is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.” His religion.

University of Wisconsin law professor Ann Althouse made a similar remark a year later. “When everything is evidence of the thing you want to believe, it might be time to stop pretending you’re all about science,” she wrote.

The global warming/climate change debate should not be driven by religion or a loathing toward free-market economies. It should be about science.

On that count, the skeptics and doubters have the advantage. As Newman reminds us, “95% of the climate models we are told prove the link between human CO2 emissions and catastrophic global warming have been found, after nearly two decades of temperature stasis, to be in error.”

Newman did his countrymen a favor by alerting them to Figueres and those who hold similar if not identical beliefs, and push the same false agenda. Now they need to do their part and heed his warning.

James Lovelock, the scientist who brought us the Gaia theory that Earth is a living being.

On MSNBC three years ago, he said that environmentalists have created a “green religion” that “is now taking over from the Christian religion.” He admitted then: “We don’t know what the climate is doing.”

We don’t know what the climate is doing because it doesn’t ask our permission or respond much to our input. To think otherwise is to believe in a fairy tale.
Or a Politically motivated “religion” disguised as “concern” and “science” as most Liberal things are. It’s also the endorsed religion of the Left. This holy writ and holy mantra is Politically Correct and any heretic who strays from the truth must be put down.

Now that’s Science, for you. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Keystone Cops

Imagine Democrats with confused looks on their faces! The journey to clearing the path for the Keystone Pipeline has been a bitter fought battle, but it looks like now the White House and its administration can’t fight any more.

Oh but they will. They’ll fight to the bitter, partisan end. The Agenda is the Agenda and Oil is Devil’s Brew and they are Prohibitionists!

In a new report done by the State Department it has been confirmed, “the project would not accelerate global greenhouse gas emissions or significantly harm the natural habitats along its route”.

Like Liberals care about Truth or facts.

As ABC reports (yes even the mainstream media is picking up on this),

“The approval or denial of any one crude oil transport project, including this proposed project, really remains unlikely to significantly impact the rate of development of the oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil in the U.S.,” said Kerri-Ann Jones, the Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs.

The State Department, which conducted the study because the pipeline would cross an international boundary, also suggested in a voluminous report that impacts on air, water and landscape would be minimal.

The agency found it “very unlikely” that the pipeline would affect water quality in any of the four aquifers through which it crossed. It also concluded that along one part of the proposed route, in the case of a large-scale oil spill, “these impacts would typically be limited to within several hundred feet of the release source, and would not affect groundwater.”

Government analysts found that Keystone XL would each year produce the equivalent carbon dioxide emissions of 620,000 passenger cars operating for a year. But they concluded that whether or not the pipeline is approved, those emissions would still likely occur because of fuels produced and obtained from other sources.

So it’s down to rancorous, petty, petulant politics. And no one is more petulant than a Modern Democrat.

Now, we all know the fight that has been going on between environmental activists and those who support the Keystone Pipeline. But now it seems that there is no real argument for the environmentalists. What can they possibly complain about now?

Everything and Anything. After all, Oil Companies are right up their in top of Hell’s Pantheon along with “Rich” people, Corporations, and George W Bush.

Oh wait, here it is, apparently the government and the State Department don’t really know what they’re talking about, according to the president of Friends of the Earth. He says, “The draft SEIS reads like an on-ramp to justify the Keystone XL pipeline project. We cannot solve the climate crisis when the State Department fails to understand the basic climate, environmental and economic impacts of the Keystone XL pipeline.”

Was this Hilary’s State Depart or John “F*ing” Kerry’s?

So basically it seems that no matter what supporters of the pipeline do, it is not good enough. We now have the Obama administration on our side, and it is still not enough for these “green” people. They used to try the excuse that the people of the states affected didn’t like it, but now Nebraska, Montana and South Dakota have all signed-off on the pipeline plan and their governors and congressional delegations have been calling on Obama to follow suit. It is time everyone wakes up and realizes this pipeline is the best choice to create thousands of new jobs and provide gas to thousands of people across the country.

Bill McKibben, the founder and spiritual leader of 350.org, is in high dudgeon. 350.org has organized several protests in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere around the country. McKibben and others have managed to get themselves arrested at the White House in what he thinks of as the great tradition of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. In fact, in an email sent shortly after the release of the SEIS, McKibben proclaimed that Keystone is “the Stonewall and the Selma of the climate movement.” In the same email he describes Keystone as an “800,000 barrel-a-day fuse to one of the planet’s biggest carbon bombs” and describes the State Department’s findings as “nonsense.”

It’s HERESY!!!!

McKibben calls for volunteers to staff “a team of rapid responders coast-to-coast who can turn around with 24 hours notice and raise a ruckus” whenever and wherever Secretary Kerry or President Obama appears in public. 350.org plans for a massive day of action and training in May to “stick it to the pipeline.” So the president and secretary of state will be under plenty of pressure to nix the project.

Fear and Intimidation! 🙂

They don’t want it anyways. The Chevy Volt  and Solar Panels awaits…
But then again, he does like playing golf with those big-money guys.  🙂
But then He declared he wasn’t a “Dictator” recently.

A dictator doesn’t listen to his subjects. He rules by fiat. He can’t abide criticism and dissent, and uses his power to stifle it. He’s the center of a cult of personality, reveling in the adoration of his devoted minions.

Does that sound like President Barack Obama to you? (DC)

🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Veni Vidi Vici

Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance because of tobacco penalties in President Barack Obama’s health care law, according to experts who are just now teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation.

ObamaCare allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums starting next Jan. 1.

For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year. A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums.

There rich, I’m sure they can afford it. After all, they voted for Obama because of his Health Care and their Entitlements….

Younger smokers could be charged lower penalties under rules proposed last fall by the Obama administration. But older smokers could face a heavy hit on their household budgets at a time in life when smoking-related illnesses tend to emerge.

Workers covered on the job would be able to avoid tobacco penalties by joining smoking cessation programs, because employer plans operate under different rules. But experts say that option is not guaranteed to smokers trying to purchase coverage individually. (DC)

So what next after Smokers?
First they came for the smokers
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a smoker.
Then they came for the junk food
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a concerned
Then they came for the “fat” people,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t fat (I thought).
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.

Meat? Salt? Drinks? What won’t they stop at, in the name of “health care”?

Nothing. Why would they. It’s for your own good! and it makes them “feel” good.

We are from the Government and we are here to help you… 🙂

Obama: Together, we resolved that a great nation must care for the vulnerable, and protect its people from life’s worst hazards and misfortune.

Through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumbed to the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone. Our celebration of initiative and enterprise; our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility, are constants in our character.

But central authority to a liberal IS the answer to everything. And Entitlements are the answer to “fairness” and “equality” and “compassion” and success is bad (except when you fund their political campaigns so they can do even more “good” for themselves and thus for you…:) )
“In 1960, social-welfare programs accounted for less than a third of all federal spending. Today, it counts for nearly two-thirds of federal spending. Welfare spending is nearly twice as much as defense, justice and everything else Washington does combined.” Megyn Kelly
But if you cut anything other than Rich people’s loopholes and the Military you’re a heartless, racist, evil bastard who just want old people and kids to starve and die!! 🙂

Obama: The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries – we must claim its promise.

So if we have 15 more Solyndras that is better than one evil Keystone Pipeline. Oil is evil Oil companies, doubly so. So what if it’s cheaper and more efficient and everyone uses it now we don’t care.

So what if the technology is not there. It makes us feel superior.

So what if the Chinese kicked our asses on it.

So what if it Many , Many Times MORE expensive. So what. It’s Better for you. 🙂

It makes us feel better about ourselves. And you will too, or else!

California has been a leader in Renewable Energy production, in part due to federal and state level policies that provide incentives for producers of renewable power. However, a new report found that California’s Energy policies will raise state power rates and associated costs by nearly 33 percent.

The report by the free-market Pacific Research Institute specifically focuses on the additional costs imposed by a state mandate that requires 33 percent of its power come from renewable sources, like wind, solar and geothermal by 2020. PRI estimates that the California renewable portfolio standard will be an additional $5 billion in 2020.

The mandate represents an implicit 27 percent tax on power generation in the state due to the “the forced substitution of expensive power in place of cheaper electricity, particularly in terms of transmission, backup, and generation costs.”

“Moreover, this implicit tax to be imposed upon the California economy will grow each year as the size of the electricity market expands and the RPS requirement forces ever-greater amounts of high-cost power onto the market,” writes PRI senior fellow and report author Benjamin Zycher.

“This perverse effect inexorably will be reflected fully in rising rates paid by consumers, whether directly or indirectly,” Zycher continues.

The costs to California consumers in 2020 will rise by more than 13 percent as a result of the renewable fuel mandate. However, the report notes that even without the mandate, state power rates would rise by nearly 20 percent due to “various capital investments driven by both economic and regulatory factors,” and because of the state’s cap-and-trade program.

All of these policies taken together will cause power rates and costs to rise nearly 33 percent between now and 2020, according to the report.
California already suffers from high retail electricity rates relative to the rest of the country. PRI reports that retail rates in the Golden State are up to 131 percent higher than rates in the Pacific Northwest and 70 percent higher than rates in the Mountain region. In fact, California rates are 53 percent higher than the U.S. as a whole.

“This adverse effect is certain to worsen the other important disadvantages that various California public policies have created in terms of competitive dynamics with other states,” writes Zycher.

State residents are already being hit hard if they do not install solar devices onto their rooftops. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Californians who don’t have solar rooftop installations paid an extra $1.3 billion in yearly power bills.

“The higher costs to be borne by the California economy will not be offset even in part by economic benefits,” concludes Zycher. “That the rising costs to be imposed upon the private sector might engender greater political opposition to the RPS requirements may be a source of hope for policy reform.” (DC)

But don’t worry this won’t hurt the poor and the elderly…and imagine if you’re a smoker too! 🙂
And do you know where the majority of the electric Power from the Palo Verde NUCLEAR Power Station west of Phoenix goes to?
One Guess.
California. 🙂

Gotta love Liberals. Otherwise taking that line from Shakespeare about killing all the lawyers starts to come to  mind. (kidding…no need for Janet to send her goons to my door).

Sort of. 🙂

And lastly, remember when Liberal were insane to destroy Bush (for many reasons even today) over his “handling” of Katrina.

Well, did you know there are  Super storm Sandy victims that are still freezing this winter because of a lack of response by the Government?

But since they are predominately Liberals I’m sure they will give Obama and company a pass right?

It’s no big deal.

Not even a $2500 Debit Card… 🙂

The superstorm destroyed their homes — and the cold weather is playing havoc with their lives.

Sandy-ravaged homeowners have been driven to extremes as they try to survive in houses that are essentially construction sites.

“It’s colder here because of the water,” said Mary Lou Foley, a Breezy Point, Queens, resident who has spent the past week huddling under a slew of comforters and carrying a space heater from room to room.

“It’s 18 degrees in the city, but it feels like 5 because of the wind. It’s just too cold,” the 56-year-old said Thursday.

She has been staying here for the past month without heat, sleeping on a comforter on the floor but she has remained optimistic and says she is “happy.”

I bet if it were Bush Or even Romney,, she wouldn’t be. 🙂

Foley is one of the lucky ones because she has power in some parts of her partially rebuilt house, allowing her to use an electric heater.

But she can only plug in one at a time.

“If I plug in two heaters, I’m afraid I will blow a fuse. So I plug in one heater and try to stay close to it,” she said. “I have to do this until I have power restored.”

Construction crews are working as fast as they can in Sandy-afflicted areas like the Rockaways, but no one can slow down Mother Nature.

But someone has sure slowed down the “outrage”. 🙂
Where are the FEMA trailers that were demanded by the Left the last time?

“It’s freezing in my house,” the mom said. “I’m hearing a lot of horror stories from my neighbors. Their pipes are bursting. It’s that cold.”

Eddie Saman, 47, of New Dorp Beach in Staten Island, insulated his walls with donated blankets in a futile attempt to trap his radiator’s weak heat.

Where’s the outrage?

The Congress passed a relief bill, half of it was Pork for NASCAR, banks and other ‘constituents’ of importance.

Where’s the outrage?

Let’s be “fair” shall we. If you want government to run your life for you because you’re a moron, then you should demand they do a better job of it, just to be “fair” and “equal”… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Sky isn’t Falling!

This will annoy the faithful of the Religion of Global Warming.  But as Douglas Adams once said, “For Proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing” so the faithful will carry on because it is much more about the religion now than the science. The science was justifying the religion and they will still use it and abuse it but it’s a religion now and faith is more powerful than science.

And this all it comes from the Holy site, the Met Office in Great Britain. And they did it in typically liberal style, a weekend document dump.

UK Daily Mail: The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week. 

The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.

This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years.

global temperature changes

The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land and sea, was issued  quietly on the internet, without any media fanfare, and, until today, it has not been reported.

This stands in sharp contrast  to the release of the previous  figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 – a very warm year.

Ending the data then means it is possible to show a slight warming trend since 1997, but 2011 and the first eight months of 2012 were much cooler, and thus this trend is erased.

Some climate scientists, such as Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, last week dismissed the significance of the plateau, saying that 15 or 16 years is too short a period from which to draw conclusions.

But THEY HAVE BEEN DOING JUST THAT THEMSELVES. The whole Global Warming scam has been based on these short time periods and then predictions of doom for all mankind in the future  if we didn’t cow-tow to their control over everything. The Sky was falling! The Sky was Falling!

Well, maybe not…

Others disagreed. Professor Judith Curry, who is the head of the climate science department at America’s prestigious Georgia Tech university, told The Mail on Sunday that it was clear that the computer models used to predict future warming were ‘deeply flawed’.

Just like your religion. But that won’t stop you now.

Even Prof Jones admitted that he and his colleagues did not understand the impact of ‘natural variability’ – factors such as long-term ocean temperature cycles and changes in the output of the sun. However, he said he was still convinced that the current decade would end up significantly warmer than the previous two.

Because that is what the religion dictates. Science is about facts, not religious doctrines.

The regular data collected on global temperature is called Hadcrut 4, as it is jointly issued by the Met Office’s Hadley Centre and Prof Jones’s Climatic Research Unit.

Since 1880, when worldwide industrialisation began to gather pace and reliable statistics were first collected on a global scale, the world has warmed by 0.75 degrees Celsius.

Some scientists have claimed that this rate of warming is set to increase hugely without drastic cuts to carbon-dioxide emissions, predicting a catastrophic increase of up to a further five degrees  Celsius by the end of the century.

The new figures were released as the Government made clear that it would ‘bend’ its own  carbon-dioxide rules and build new power stations to try to combat the threat of blackouts. 

At last week’s Conservative Party Conference, the new Energy Minister, John Hayes, promised that ‘the high-flown theories of bourgeois Left-wing academics will not override the interests of ordinary people who need fuel for heat, light and transport – energy policies, you might say, for the many, not the few’ – a pledge that has triggered fury from green activists, who fear reductions in the huge subsidies given to wind-turbine firms.

So it’s about greed. Pure and simple. Your own pet projects for your own pet money. How basically and base capitalist can you get from socialists. 🙂
It’s about their government largesse. Their “interest group”. Their money.
Their greed.

Here are three not-so trivial questions you probably won’t find in your next pub quiz. First, how much warmer has the world become since a) 1880 and  b) the beginning of 1997? And what has this got to do with your ever-increasing energy bill?

You may find the answers to the first two surprising. Since 1880, when reliable temperature records began to be kept across most of the globe, the world has warmed by about 0.75 degrees Celsius.

From the start of 1997 until August 2012, however, figures released last week show the answer is zero: the trend, derived from the aggregate data collected from more than 3,000 worldwide measuring points, has been flat.

So the religious would say it’s BECAUSE they have been pushing so hard (and failing but that’s not a part of a religious argument) that we need to continue to do so or else doom itself will breath down all our necks.

Sounds very religious doesn’t it? 🙂

Not that there has been any  coverage in the media, which usually reports climate issues assiduously, since the figures were quietly release online with no accompanying press release – unlike six months ago when they showed a slight warming trend.

The answer to the third question is perhaps the most familiar. Your bills are going up, at least in part, because of the array of ‘green’ subsidies being provided to the renewable energy industry, chiefly wind.

They will cost the average household about £100 this year.

In American terms that is about $160. So if your energy bill is is higher because of greenie religious fervor from the left, is that not a “middle class” hike in costs? Aren’t the greenies hurting the poor with their religious obsession?

Solyndra, First Solar and other  BILLIONS of dollars wasted on fear and intimidation.

This is set to rise steadily higher – yet it  is being imposed for only one  reason: the widespread conviction, which is shared by politicians of all stripes and drilled into children at primary schools, that, without drastic action to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, global warming is certain soon to accelerate, with truly catastrophic consequences by the end of the century – when temperatures could be up to five degrees higher.

Hence the significance of those first two answers. Global industrialisation over the past 130 years has made relatively little difference.

And with the country committed by Act of Parliament to reducing CO2 by 80 per cent by 2050, a project that will cost hundreds of billions, the news that the world has got no warmer for the past 16 years comes as something of a shock.

It poses a fundamental challenge to the assumptions underlying every aspect of energy and climate change policy.

This ‘plateau’ in rising temperatures does not mean that global warming won’t at some point resume.

But at this point the science doesn’t back up the fear campaign and thus should that not be questioned?

Or is that Heresy? 🙂

But according to increasing numbers of serious climate scientists, it does suggest that the computer models that have for years been predicting imminent doom, such as  those used by the Met Office and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are flawed, and that the climate is far more complex than the models assert.

‘The new data confirms the existence of a pause in global warming,’ Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at America’s Georgia Tech university, told me yesterday.

‘Climate models are very complex, but they are imperfect and incomplete. Natural variability  [the impact of factors such as long-term temperature cycles in the oceans and the output of the sun] has been shown over the past two decades to have a magnitude that dominates the greenhouse warming effect.

‘It is becoming increasingly apparent that our attribution of warming since 1980 and future projections of climate change needs to consider natural internal variability as a factor of fundamental importance.’

Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did.

The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’.

Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’

But the religion must live on! After all, their is a “consensus” that it is happening according to the religious Left. 🙂

Yet he insisted that 15 or 16 years is not a significant period: pauses of such length had always been expected, he said.

Yet in 2009, when the plateau was already becoming apparent and being discussed by scientists, he told a colleague in one of the Climategate emails: ‘Bottom  line: the “no upward trend” has to  continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’

But although that point has now been passed, he said that he hadn’t changed his mind about the  models’ gloomy predictions:  ‘I still think that the current decade which began in 2010 will be warmer by about 0.17 degrees than the previous one, which was warmer than the Nineties.’

Only if that did not happen would he seriously begin to  wonder whether something more profound might be happening. In other words, though five years ago he seemed to be saying that 15 years without warming would make him ‘worried’, that period has now become 20 years.

Meanwhile, his Met Office  colleagues were sticking to their guns. A spokesman said: ‘Choosing a starting or end point on short-term scales can be very misleading. Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system.’

He said that for the plateau to last any more than 15 years was ‘unlikely’. Asked about a prediction that the Met Office made in 2009 – that three of the ensuing five years would set a new world temperature record – he made no comment. With no sign of a strong El Nino next year, the prospects of this happening are remote.

Why all this matters should be obvious. Every quarter, statistics on the economy’s output and  models of future performance have a huge impact on our lives. They trigger a range of policy responses from the Bank of England and the Treasury, and myriad decisions by private businesses.

Yet it has steadily become apparent since the 2008 crash that both the statistics and the modelling are extremely unreliable. To plan the future around them makes about as much sense as choosing a wedding date three months’ hence on the basis of a long-term weather forecast.

Few people would be so foolish. But decisions of far deeper and more costly significance than those derived from output figures have been and are still being made on the basis of climate predictions, not of the next three months but of the coming century – and this despite the fact that Phil Jones and his colleagues now admit they do not understand the role of ‘natural variability’.

The most depressing feature  of this debate is that anyone who questions the alarmist, doomsday scenario will automatically be labelled a climate change ‘denier’, and accused of jeopardising the future of humanity.

HERESY! BURN THE HERETIC!

So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications.

But rather than science, the faithful will turn to the warmth of their religion for comfort against the heretics in their midst.

But is it man or nature? The Politics of Fear and Control?

Fear and Control, sounds familiar somehow…Obam…something…:)

 

The Rules of The Game

President Obama: My general view has been consistent throughout, which is that I want all businesses to succeed.

As long as they are “green”, Liberal, and Unionized.

I want all Americans to have opportunity.

To be dependent on the Government from cradle to grave.

I’m not the president of black America.

But I’m sure not interested in white folks. Just blacks, hispanics and gays. Oh, and illegal aliens are my future voting base.

I’m the president of the United States of America, but the programs that we have put in place have been directed at those folks who are least able to get financing through conventional means, who have been in the past locked out of opportunities that were available to everybody.

The rich? Because most of your programs are aimed at screwing the ‘evil’ rich people, corporations and business you don’t like. Like Coal.

In 2008 he was all for “clean burning” Coal but since election he had a one man war on West Virginia.

And the 1700+ waivers for ObamaCare went almost exclusively to his  Democrat cronies and Unions buddies.

The ‘official’ non-U6 umeployment rate has been over 8% since February 2009 and has been going up this year recently fairly steadily. But that’s not his fault! 🙂

Taxmageddon is coming. But he really doesn’t care because it will kill the economy AFTER the election. So he just has to demonize Republicans as loving “rich”n people now and blame them later for the tax increases if he manages to sucker enough people into voting for him and the Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

And the lying won’t stop there. The Obama SuperPAC largely responsible for the Pro-ObamaCare ads is back!

Mind you, Obama hated SuperPACs until he needed them.

“I don’t think Mitt Romney understands what he’s done to people’s lives by closing the plant,” said Joe Soptic, a former employee at GST Steel in Kansas City, in the ad. He says he lost his health care, and then his wife became ill.

“I don’t know how long she was sick, and I think maybe she didn’t say anything because she knew that we couldn’t afford the insurance,” Soptic adds. When she finally went to the hospital they found out that it was stage-four cancer, he says. She died soon after.

Soptic concludes, “I do not think Mitt Romney realizes what he’s done to anyone, and furthermore I do not think Mitt Romney is concerned.”

The Republican candidate left Bain before GST Steel’s 2001 bankruptcy; Obama’s team has argued that the story is fair because Romney was at Bain when the initial investment was made. Politico notes that Ranae Soptic died in 2006, long after the plant closed, and CNN adds that at some points during that time she had insurance through her own employer.

Romney spokesman Ryan Williams called the ad one of many “discredited and dishonest attacks” meant to “conceal the administration’s deplorable economic record.”

So Romney is a soulless, mean, uncaring outsourcer and destroyer of lives :). The facts don’t matter.

Tell a Lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

While Team Obama promotes fables to indict Romney, the incontrovertible stories of the current administration’s economic malpractice are finally getting out. In 2010, I first reported on how Obama’s UAW bailout threw tens of thousands of nonunion autoworkers under the bus. It’s the ongoing horror story of some 20,000 white-collar workers at Delphi, a leading auto parts company spun off from GM a decade ago.

The news site The Daily Caller has obtained internal government emails that show the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, pushed in 2009 to end the pensions of 20,000 non-union employees of GM’s Delphi auto parts unit as part of the auto bailout.

By its own reckoning, organized labor spent nearly $400 million to get Obama elected in 2008, more by far than any other interest group. So it’s no surprise the White House punished nonunion workers and rewarded union members when it came time to “bail out” GM.

Total value of the auto industry bailout to the unions was, by one estimate, $26 billion. For the unions, their $400 million was money well spent indeed.(IBD)

As Washington rushed to nationalize the U.S. auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team and the Treasury Department schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts.

In addition, the nonunion pensioners lost all of their health and life insurance benefits. The abused workers — most from hard-hit northeast Ohio, Michigan and neighboring states — had devoted decades of their lives as secretaries, technicians, engineers and sales employees at Delphi/GM. Some workers have watched up to 70 percent of their pensions vanish.

“I worked for 34 years at GM/Delphi Corp. When Delphi went bankrupt, we lost everything,” Dana Strickland of Michigan wrote me. “Because I was salaried (middle management), we lost our pension and health insurance. I did not belong to the union, so GM/Delphi could have cared less. I have never felt so betrayed. We never hear this brought to the public’s attention. People need to know how we were screwed, while the Obama administration kissed up to the union.”

“I’m one of the Delphi Salaried Retirees that lost the health care, life insurance and 67 percent of the pension I was promised in retirement after working hard for 40 years,” Charles Stone of Michigan e-mailed. “Words cannot describe the frustration and let down these events have thrust on my family’s lives, and to have GM’s rescue all sugar-coated in the current political environment is like putting lipstick on a pig. … We will continue to fight to right this grievous wrong.”

Tom Rose of Ohio added: “I am one of the 20,000 salaried retirees that lost all of my health care and — in my case — a 40 percent pension cut. So I am now paying increased health care costs with fewer pension dollars and contributing what is left to our lawsuit to correct this injustice. Meanwhile, the politically connected union has their full pension and 90-plus percent of their health care. You have hit upon the key question: How can our own federal government pick winners and losers amongst its own citizens?”

Through two costly years of litigation and investigation, the Delphi workers have exposed how the stacked White House Auto Task Force schemed with union bosses to “cherry pick” (one Obama official’s own words) which financial obligations the new Government Motors company would assume and which they would abandon based on their political expedience. Obama’s own former auto czar Steve Rattner admitted in his recent memoir that “attacking the union’s sacred cow” could “jeopardize” the auto bailout deal.

In June, 20 months after a federal judge first ordered the government to cooperate, the Delphi Salaried Retirees Association broke through the administration’s information stonewall and dislodged 62,000 pages of documents in their lawsuit to right the administration’s wrongs. As The Daily Caller reported on Tuesday, the documents included “internal government emails (that contradicted) sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts … and that administration figures violated federal law.”

Meanwhile, the Delphi workers who got shafted are getting in the faces of the administration and the public with a new web ad produced by conservative advocacy group Let Freedom Ring. They are asking, “Why, Mr. President? Why?” They — and America — deserve answers and justice, not more Bizarro World smears and fantastical bedtime stories. (Michelle Malkin)

But worst of all, perhaps, it’s convinced millions of Americans there’s no longer a level playing field — that this hyper-politicized White House can reward its friends and punish its enemies with impunity. (IBD)

Tell a Lie often enough and it becomes the truth.

And now more people are unemployed in 2012 than 2008. But you won’t hear that from the Ministry of Truth Media or Obama or his SuperPac surrogates.

Funny how Liberals hate the Citizens United decision with unrelenting bile, butn they use it to spread THEIR unrelenting bile. 🙂

“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.” — Saul Alinsky

Even if the present system is Obama’s! Just convince them it’s not! 🙂

“A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage — the political paradise of communism.”  p.10 Rules for Radical, Saul Alinksy

“An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent… He must create a mechanism that can drain off the underlying guilt for having accepted the previous situation for so long a time. Out of this mechanism, a new community organization arises….
     “The job then is getting the people to move, to act, to participate; in short, to develop and harness the necessary power to effectively conflict with the prevailing patterns and change them. When those prominent in the status quo turn and label you an ‘agitator’ they are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to agitate to the point of conflict.” p.117

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals:

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.
The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.

Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

So lie often. Piss your opponent off with lies. 24/7/365.

Vote for me, the other guy is an asshole!!! 🙂

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

The Cost of Liberalism

The Obama administration’s new plan to grant temporary work permits to many young, illegal immigrants who otherwise could be deported may cost more than $585 million and require hiring hundreds of new federal employees to process more than 1 million anticipated requests, according to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The Homeland Security Department plans, marked “not for distribution,” describe steps that immigrants will need to take — including a $465 paperwork fee designed to offset the program’s cost — and how the government will manage it. Illegal immigrants can request permission to stay in the country under the plan by filing a document, “Request for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” and simultaneously apply for a work permit starting Aug. 15.

The plans estimated that the Homeland Security Department could need to hire more than 1,400 full-time employees, as well as contractors, to process the applications. (KFYI)

I guess that’s one way to create jobs. But they are GOVERNMENT public sector jobs paid for by taxpayers (the few we have left).

A spokesman for the Homeland Security Department, Peter Boogaard, said the plans were “preliminary documents” and the process is still being worked out. Mr. Boogaard said processing immigrant applications under the program “will not use taxpayer dollars” because of the fees that will be collected.

“We anticipate that this will be a fee-driven process,” Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano said.

REALLY! The Liberals are going to collect Fees from illegals! Who’s kidding who here. They are going to collect them from “poor” hispanics. That I want to see. 🙂

Fee waivers could dramatically affect the government’s share of the cost. The plans said that, depending on how many applicants don’t pay, the government could lose between $19 million and $121 million. Republican critics pounced on that.

“By lowering the fee or waiving it altogether for illegal immigrants, those who play by the rules will face delays and large backlogs as attention is diverted to illegal immigrants,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “American taxpayers should not be forced to bail out illegal immigrants and President Obama’s fiscally irresponsible policies.”

Business owners will pay $4 billion more in taxes under President Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) than the Congressional Budget Office had previously expected.

In short, CBO revised the Obamacare tax burden upward by $4 billion for businesses and $1 billion to $1.5 billion for individual workers.

The report dubs the individual mandate a “penalty tax” — that is, “a penalty paid to the Treasury by taxpayers when they file their tax returns and enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.”

But don’t worry, it’s not a tax. And that money won’t be passed down to the consumers.
🙂
Then there are the four deadliest words in the Obama Language… “Let Me Be Clear”. Bend over you’re about to get a telephone pole rammed up your ass!
2010: “Let me be clear: If you like your doctor or healthcare provider, you an keep them. If you like your health care plan, you can keep that too.”

About one in 10 employers plan to drop health coverage when key provisions of the new health care law kick in less than two years from now,

While small business don’t face fines for failing to offer coverage, companies with 50 or more full time employees face a penalty starting at $2,000 per worker.

Deloitte Consulting conducted the study between February and April — before the Supreme Court upheld most of the law — and surveyed corporate and human-resources executives from 560 companies currently offering benefits.

In contrast, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that around seven percent of workers could lose coverage under the law by 2019.

And what of the cost of those 1700+ waivers to Obama’s apparatchiks? Hmm…

When President Obama was selling health reform, he often talked about providing universal coverage. But a Congressional Budget Office report out this week finds that goal getting more elusive.

The report found that despite ObamaCare’s $1.2 trillion price tag, it would only cut the ranks of the uninsured in half, leaving 30 million without coverage. That’s seven million more uninsured than the CBO first projected in March 2010.

The latest downgrade comes in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, which gave states the freedom to reject ObamaCare’s massive expansion of Medicaid. Since then, governors in more than 25 states have said they will refuse to expand Medicaid or are leaning in that direction, despite the generous federal contributions.

But the uninsured problem under ObamaCare could be much worse than the CBO projects.

What the report doesn’t cover is the fact that the other legs of the ObamaCare stool designed to expand insurance coverage — the individual mandate, the employer mandate and the state insurance exchanges — are also buckling.

As a result, ObamaCare will likely cover far fewer uninsured than advertized. There’s even a chance that, if all goes wrong, it could actually make the uninsured problem worse.

The individual mandate, for example, is a cornerstone of ObamaCare’s effort to expand coverage. But tax experts who’ve studied how the IRS will enforce the mandate conclude that it’s likely to be ineffective, because the law makes it virtually impossible for the IRS to collect the tax penalty from those who don’t pay it.

Under normal circumstances, the IRS has broad powers to collect taxes from those who don’t pay what they owe. It can charge civil and criminal penalties, impose liens, and seize assets and bank accounts.

But ObamaCare specifically blocks the IRS from using these enforcement tools when it comes to collecting any unpaid ObamaCare tax penalties.

These restrictions “make it unlikely the IRS can effectively enforce the individual mandate,” according to a detailed analysis of the tax penalty by Jordan Barry and Bryan Camp, law professors at the University of San Diego and Texas Tech University, respectively.

“The individual mandate,” they conclude, “may not actually be mandatory after all.”

The problem is that if the mandate doesn’t work, ObamaCare could make the uninsured problem worse, at least in the individual insurance market.

That’s because ObamaCare’s insurance market reforms — called “guaranteed issue” and “community rating” — force insurers to cover anyone, regardless of their health status, while forbidding them from charging the sick more than the healthy. (IBD)

WNEW News reports that  (James “The Joker”) Holmes was awarded a prestigious grant from the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md. NIH is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

It gave the graduate student a $26,000 stipend and paid his tuition for the highly competitive neuroscience program at the University of Colorado in Denver. Holmes was one of six neuroscience students at the school to get the grant money.

List Of Failed Green Energy Jobs & Companies – By Obama

Update: 7/19/12: The Amonix Solar: FAIL – manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas, subsidized by more than $20 million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama Administration, has closed its 214,000 square foot facility a year after it opened.

  • Solar Trust of America: FAIL – Filed Bankruptcy in Oakland, CA, April 3, 2012 – On April 2, 2012
  • Bright Source: FAIL – Bright Source warned Obama’s Energy Department officials in March 2011 that delays in approving a $1.6 billion U.S. loan guarantee would embarrass the White House and force the solar-energy company to close. Lost Billions of dollars but Getting More Money To Keep Trying. Can you say, “This isnt working?”
  • Solyndra: FAIL – Obama gave Solyndra $500,000,000 in taxpayer money and Solyndra shut its doors and laid off 1100 workers in August 2011 After Billions in Losses due to failure to make a solar product that works!
  • President Obama rubbed elbows Monday night with two men at the center of the Solyndra loan scandal at an exclusive fundraiser in California.

    Steve Westly, a financier whose money-raising prowess helped to snag him a post on the administration’s energy advisory board, and Matt Rogers, a former Energy Department senior adviser who helped to approve the Solyndra loan, were spotted by reporters at the $35,800-per-person fundraiser for the president’s re-election campaign.

  • LSP Energy: FAIL – LSPEnergy LP filed bankruptcy protection and a sale of its assets in Feb 2012
  • Energy Conversion Devices: FAIL – On February 14, 2012 Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. and its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy
  • Abound Solar: FAIL – Abound Solar received a $400 million loan guarantee from Barack Obama announced in June, 2012 that it would file for bankruptcy
  • SunPower: FAIL – SunPower stopped producing solar cells last year at near bankruptcy restructured only with help of, get this, oil giant TOTAL who owns 60% stake. Irony! Still struggling…
  • Beacon Power: FAIL – Beacon Power Corp filed for bankruptcy Oct 2011 just a year after Obama approved $43 million loan Government loan guarantee
  • Ecotality: FAIL – ECOtality, a San Francisco green-tech company that never earned any money on the verge of bankruptcy after receiving roughly $115 million in two loan guarantees from Obama
  • A123 Solar: FAIL-A123 received $279 million from taxpayers thanks to President Obama’s Department of Energy loan guarantees and after Solyndra bankruptcy is getting another $500M from Obama and it has lost $400M
  • UniSolar: FAIL – Uni-Solar filed for Ch 11 bankruptcy in June 20 this year laid off hundreds got more Obama money still failing but still in business
  • Azure Dynamics: FAIL – Azure Dynamics files for bankruptcy in June ter millions in Obama “Stimulus”
  • Evergreen Solar: FAIL – Evergreen Solar received $527 Million in Taxpayer money from Obama filed bankruptcy
  • Ener1: FAIL received more than $100 million in government funding from the Obama administration filed for bankruptcy January 2012

Update:  In May 2012 Obama visited a dusty, desert town 30 miles outside Las Vegas Wednesday to declare he’s doubling down on failed federal efforts to boost the solar industry which has NEVER proven to produce a single working product. Like Socialism, no evidence ot works, but they just keep doubling down on the failed ideals!.

Because they have “good” intentions and if they just try hard enough and spend enough money it will work…eventually… 🙂

So what if the record is 0 for $6 Trillion in taxpayer debt in less than 4 years. So what if less people are working now than 4 years ago. So what if more people more people than ever are dependent on the government dole (that is paid by less and less taxpayers).

They have the moral high ground, in their own minds, so they are just better than you grubby little capitalist bastards.

Obama Fails on Energy

On March 22 Obama announced an offer of up to $35 million over three years to support research and development in advanced biofuels, bioenergy, and high-value biobased products. These types of fuels are 20 plus years away from practical use.  On that same day the White House announced a $14.2 million DOE effort to accelerate the development and deployment of stronger and lighter materials for advanced vehicles which will not be available for 20+ years.The initiatives, which are doomed to failure,  are aimed at reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and limit carbon pollution.  But carbon pollution data is based on false data and the United States has more oil than Saudi Arabia and would make America energy independent for 200 years. But Democrats and Obama could care less about these facts.

Because it “feels” good. They have “good” intentions. So you’re just angry, mean old troll who’s in the pocket of evil rich oil people who want to rape and destroy the planet if you disagree.

Lip Reading: “all this for a flag?”

Perhaps Mrs. Obama thinks that all the pomp and circumstance she experiences in her daily life has something to do with her, rather than the unofficial office she holds.

Well, I guess it’s off on another $100,000 jaunt to an exotic location for her. And another round of golf and a fundraiser (AT $40,000 a plate) for Michelle “Marie Antoinette” Obama and her Husband The Emperor King.

NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

The End Justifies The Means

“We’re headed in the right direction. Unemployment continues to drop and those people who are unemployed, they’re not going to be voting for the party who wants to cut their benefits, cut access to food stamps, cut job training,” Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA) said on MSNBC’s Al Sharpton program.

“The idea that Republicans are trying to help those who are unemployed is nonsense and I think that on this election day, those who have a job can credit the administration for stabilizing our economy and those who don’t know that this administration is trying to put them to work,” he said.

We’re Counting on Naivete,Greed, and Narcissism and if that doesn’t work, then we’ll just use Fear,Envy, Cheating, and Intimidation.

Democracy, Liberal style!

More people giving up and being taken off the unemployment statistics is not progress. And 8%+ for OVER 3 YEARS STRAIGHT is not an “accomplishment” in a good way, unless you’re a Liberal or a slobbering Ministry of Truth hack like NBC.

But here’s a creative solution to the Post Office’s Bankruptcy problems (no government unions and their campaign money were harmed during this presentation):

Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) comes up with a plan to save the collapsing United States Postal Service: build wind farms off of the Atlantic Coast to power a new fleet of battery-operated postal delivery vehicles.

<<RIMSHOT>>

Man, with brain power like that no wonder everything is just perfect in Liberal La-La Land.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

“[O]il and gas is an enforcement priority, it’s one of seven, so we are going to spend a fair amount of time looking at oil and gas production,” Al Armendariz says in the video.

The top-ranking EPA official goes on to explain his philosophy of policy enforcement [emphases added]:

“But as I said, oil and gas is an enforcement priority, it’s one of seven, so we are going to spend a fair amount of time looking at oil and gas production. And I gave, I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement, and I think it was probably a little crude and maybe not appropriate for the meeting but I’ll go ahead and tell you what I said. It was kind of like how the Romans used to conquer little villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they would crucify them. And then you know that town was really easy to manage for the next few years. And so you make examples out of people who are in this case not compliant with the law. Find people who are not compliant with the law, and you hit them as hard as you can and you make examples out of them, and there is a deterrent effect there. And, companies that are smart see that, they don’t want to play that game, and they decide at that point that it’s time to clean up. And, that won’t happen unless you have somebody out there making examples of people. So you go out, you look at an industry, you find people violating the law, you go aggressively after them. And we do have some pretty effective enforcement tools. Compliance can get very high, very, very quickly. That’s what these companies respond to is both their public image but also financial pressure. So you put some financial pressure on a company, you get other people in that industry to clean up very quickly. So, that’s our general philosophy.”

“[The] EPA’s proposal for controlling greenhouse gas emissions from about half the nation’s electric power supply is a poorly disguised cap-and-tax scheme that represents energy and economic policy at its worst,” President and CEO Hal Quinn said in a statement from the National Mining Association.

The regulations will limit the emissions from new coal-based plants (as opposed to plants that existed before the drafting of the proposal). This, of course, will discourage entrepreneurs from establishing and building new power plants. And although the proposed regulations don’t specifically dictate which fuels a plant can and can’t burn, the rules still require new coal plants to match the dioxide emissions from more their “more efficient” gas-powered cousins, according to Reuters.

In order to meet the EPA’s new emissions standards, coal-based power plants have been encouraged to invest in equipment that captures carbon emissions and buries them underground for “permanent storage.” But there’s a catch: carbon capture and storage technology isn’t yet “commercially available,” according to the coal industry.

So what, Solar power is not commercially viable at this time but yet the little skulls of “feel good” mush want it anyways. They don’t care how many companies go bankrupt because in typical liberal fashion – The End Justifies The Means.

Not to worry; the EPA believes the tech will be available soon enough.

Just like that Algae-driven car. 🙂

“Supporters of the rules argue that the industry has been moving away from coal and towards natural gas because of low prices and abundant supply,” Reuters reports.

“The portion of U.S. electricity fired by coal has slipped from about 50 percent to 45 percent in the last few years as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and other drilling techniques have allowed access to vast new domestic supplies of natural gas,” the report adds.

However, as Ed Morrisey of Hot Air points out, considering the EPA’s current stance against natural gas, this argument may not hold up very well:

This leads us to the natural-gas option…The response might be, “Well, okay, Obama’s bankrupting the coal industry, but we can still use natural gas.”  That’s only true if we can get the natural gas.  The EPA has also begun blocking the use of hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, which allows for massive improvement in extraction and access to vast amounts of natural gas.

Environmentalist groups praised the Obama administration for proposing “performance standard rules” they say will help “protect the country from climate change.”

“The bottom line for our country is that cleaner power will cut harmful carbon dioxide pollution, protect our children and help secure a safe prosperous future,” said Vickie Patton, the general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund.

Oh, but here’s the best part: none of these new EPA climate rules need to be approved by Congress.

“After Congress refused to pass carbon caps, the administration insisted there were other ways to skin the cat, and this is another way — by setting a standard deliberately calculated to drive affordable coal out of the electricity market,”

More stealth regulations, maneuvers, and back-handed “well if I can’t get by Congress I’ll get it my way anyhow by regulations”

Higher utility bills and fewer jobs are the only certain outcomes from this reckless attempt to override Congress’s repeated refusal to enact punitive caps on carbon dioxide emissions.

But it’s for your own good. So what if you’re unemployed or poor and you have to pay higher utility bills. Vote for Obama, he’ll make you feel better than that evil capitalist pig “silver spoon” Romney.

After all, they are evil polluters and you should be glad to have that $40 light bulb and pay 4,5,6 times as much for electricity than you do know.

The government will take care of you! 🙂

They will provide!

Unlike the republicans who just want you to starve, and die. 🙂

Trust them. They have your back (the large and multiple knifes in your back are the Republicans fault for not wanting to do as we wanted them to).

This proposal is the latest convoy in EPA’s regulatory train wreck that is rolling across America, crushing jobs and arresting our economic recovery at every stop. It is not an “all of the above” energy strategy; it does not create jobs; and it does not make it easier for Americans to pay their mortgages. Instead, the proposed New Source Performance Standards would deliberately push America to abandon coal, its most abundant and reliable energy source in favor of costlier fuels—even though Congress has repeatedly rejected this policy.

“If you thought gas prices will never stop rising, just wait until you see what happens to electricity after the Barack Obama’s EPA gets its way,” Ed Morrissey writes. (The Blaze)

President Obama’s Interior Secretary Ken Salazar confirmed that the administration has gotten “more strict on denying drilling permits” since the Deepwater Horizon, though he contended Obama is also pursuing an effective all-of-the-above energy strategy.

“Yes,” Salazar answered when asked if he is “being more strict on denying drilling permits based on safety and environmental concerns” since the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

“We have new sets of regulations that that have been put into place,” Salazar told reporters at the National Press Club yesterday. “The permit reviews are rigourous. We make sure that any company that is going to be operating in the waters of the United States is going to be complying in the rules that we set out.”

Salazar also declared that “we are now producing 13 percent more oil off of our public lands than was being produced three years ago.”

The Department of Energy seems to contradict Salazar’s claim. Oil production is at the same level it was in 2009 — and dramatically lower than in 2010 — according to a recent report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. (Washington Examiner)

Less is More because I said so. 🙂

The oil production that is up is on PRIVATE LANDS not federal lands. But it’s not like Liberals care about Facts…

“they don’t think we should be getting rid of every regulation on the books.”-Obama when asked about Congressional Republicans and the people.

I love the all-or-nothing extremism of Liberals. It’s either do it my way or it must be the most extreme on the other end.

Obama 10/2011: “My plan says we’re going to put teachers back in the classrooms, construction workers back to work,” President Obama said at a campaign event today. “Tax cuts for small businesses, tax cuts for hiring veterans, tax cuts if you give your workers a raise –- that’s my plan.”

The Republicans plan, Obama says, boils down to this: ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.’ (RCP)

“Frankly, I know that there are good, decent Republicans on Capitol Hill who, in a different environment, would welcome the capacity to work with me,” Obama said. “But right now, in an atmosphere in which folks like Rush Limbaugh and Grover Norquist are defining what it means to be a true conservative, they are lying low. My hope is that after this next election, they’ll feel a little more liberated to go out and say, ‘Let’s redirect the Republican Party back to those traditions in which a Dwight Eisenhower can build an interstate highway system.'”

So basically, there’s a category of “decent” Republicans who believe in a large role for the federal government, but those of us who believe in a smaller government are somehow indecent, and are holding the good guys hostage.(Washington Examiner)

Can I get an “Amen”. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Bolling Over

Since March, <Eric> Bolling (Fox Business Network)  has pleaded to President Obama to reach out to him about his ideas for reducing the price of gasoline, even giving out his phone number on the air during Fox & Friends in hopes that the Commander-in-Chief would give him a ring to discuss his “silver bullet” solution.

No such luck, especially when your rigid ideology does not permit it. The President and his “green” commandos only want less supply and higher priced oil so that you’ll be forced (in their minds) to kiss up to their “green” agenda.

The Agenda is the Agenda after all.

You know, the one that has cost jobs and a well over half a trillion dollars of taxpayer money in one bankruptcy after another.

So what if the technology isn’t there yet and it costs multiple times more than what we have now — It’s better than oil!! 🙂

So we have $4 a gallon in April.

Twice as much as it was when Obama took office. But don’t worry, it’s still Bush/Republican/Rich people’s fault.

And you’ll always have this sage advice from Candidate Obama in 2008: “There are things you can do individually, though, to save energy,” Obama said. “Making sure your tires are properly inflated – simple thing. But we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling – if everybody was just inflating their tires? And getting regular tune-ups? You’d actually save just as much!”

Now don’t you “feel” better. 🙂

The EPA & Moratoriums have nothing to do with it.

This effects the entire economy. You’re paying for the inflation in trucking & transportation costs of just about everything you buy from T-Shirts to Peanut Butter (which is up 27% in the last 2 years by the way– I guess the guys at Big Peanut are getting fat rich over it!) Where is Rachael Maddow when you need her! We Need the Jiffy Police!! We Need to expose Big Peanut for the greedy, capitalist SOBs that they are! 🙂

Your costs are going up. Have you noticed?

The Environmentalists and their lawyers are a bane on our existence in the 21st Century with their 19th Century mentality.

The EPA, run by environmental ideologues crushes businesses and us with choking regulations.

But there is another predator out there that most don’t see because “Big Oil” is the evil Boogeyman by the Left.

Which as a sidenote I never quite got because the oil itself comes largely from the Middle East so the money ultimately goes there because that is where the product came from to begin with so they are ultimately the “source”.

Oh and there’s this tidbit: The Chinese government dealt the public relations strategy of green technology advocates in the Obama administration a blow last month when Premier Wen Jiabao announced that the state-run economy would stop expanding its wind and solar industries, choosing instead to focus on nuclear, hydroelectric and shale — or fracking — as the energies of the future.

“It is getting tougher and tougher for the Obama administration to argue that somehow we’re in this big race for green power worldwide when the rest of the world seems to have decided that the race isn’t worth winning,” Daniel Kish, the senior vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research, told The Daily Caller.

The Chinese were, after all, the reason Solyndra, Beyond Solar, and other “green” companies went bankrupt. It had nothing to do with mismanagement at all.

But back the hidden danger.

It’s The Banks. You know, the “rich” people who were bailed out by Obama in 2009. The ones that are still bankrolling politicians on both sides. The ones who when effectively forced by the Democrats to make whacko risk loans to people who could afford them started a trading industry to try and package and re-sell impossible debt. It worked for about 10 years then crashed the entire economy horribly in 2007.

They are the largest “speculators” on the petroleum market. It was estimated by Eric Bolling that they add around 17 cents a gallon alone.

Government taxes on gasoline makes more money than Oil Companies do on the Oil itself.

The fact that 87% of off-shore oil is inaccessible because the government says so (because the environmentalist say so) and that new drilling is all but prohibited by the Obama Administration is a real problem. Not a phony Class Warfare one.

The Keystone Pipeline, folks. remember that?

The “increase” in production that Obama sights when criticized isn’t due to him AT ALL. And he knows it, but a liberal is more than happy to lie if it can throw you off the sent and the class warfare is just a bonus.

Put simply: If you lower supply what happens to the price when demand goes up?

“So…the solution…” Bolling announced.

“You know a little bit about this, don’t you, Eric?” Palin interjected.

“I’ve had 20 years experience in the trading world in oil and gas…” Bolling noted. “Can we bring in the top secret…”

Suddenly a security guard brought out Bolling’s top secret envelope encased in a bulletproof suitcase.

“We have a top secret silver bullet here,” Palin observed. “We are criticized, I know I am, for preaching all the time, drill baby, drill. Well, this goes beyond drill baby drill!”

“If I could ask you to open — to reveal the envelope so I can step away and put this around,” Bolling instructed Palin.

Palin finally opened the envelope, and the cat was out of the bag.

“Top secret…In addition to drill baby drill,” Palin clarified.

Bolling spun his chalk board around which read, “RAISE ENERGY MARGIN REQUIREMENTS, ALL ENERGY TRADED ON EXCHANGE.”

“It doesn’t replace drill, baby, drill, Governor,” Bolling explained. “It’s in in addition. Raise energy trading margin requirements. All energy has to be traded on an exchange. Bear with me. It’s a little technical. The reason why so many billions of barrels are traded…is because the banks can trade it. People are allowed to trade it for little or no money down. At some point, Goldman Sachs decided they want to buy oil barrels it pushes the price up. If they sell them in the same day, they don’t have to put a penny up to do that trade. It’s a free trade for them. If they want to hold it overnight, sometimes they will pay up to $2,000-$3,000 on a contract that is worth $100,000. So governor, this we need to make this equation a little bit more even. We need to bring this bowl down to something more reasonable.”

What I took from this, because I’m no economics genius, was that if you raise the risk (the price paid for those speculations) the people who are speculating now will think a bit more before pulling the trigger.

If there is no risk and all reward the sky’s the limit.

And If I buy it for X and sell it to the next guy for X+2 I just made a profit but now the other guy has to sell it for even more to make their profit so the price goes up and up and up.

The problem is that the smaller investors who aren’t the deep pocket banks could be hurt by it.

So like most ideas it’s not perfect but it’s better than the one we got.

And if it doesn’t work, well, there’s always “Drill, Baby, Drill” 🙂

Because the best way to beat high demand is high supply and that means we use what we have instead of getting the majority of it from people who have even more dubious and devious purpose than Liberals, people like Hugo Chavez, George Soros, Iran,The Middle East.

Natural Gas Prices show this. 5 years ago they were at an All-time high. Now with a much higher supply the price is low.

But to do it you have to have the Political will to fight Liberals, Environmentalists and Their Lawyers, and the Networks –which boils down to Liberals anyways.

And they don’t play nice. They don’t play by any rules. They don’t respond to logic and reason. And they are as mean,nasty, and intolerant a bunch as you’ll ever meet.

But they are the ones you have to defeat.

And they are the ones that must be defeated in 2012.

Period. End of Story.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Lies, Damn Lies…and Liberals

If you’re thinking about buying a fuel-efficient hybrid, electric or otherwise eco-friendly vehicle as a way to save money over time, do your homework — or be prepared to wait.

Buyers who choose Nissan’s all-electric Leaf ($28,421) over its approximate gas-powered equivalent, Nissan’s Versa ($18,640), will likely wait nearly 9 years until they break even, according to a new report by The New York Times that examines the cost of fuel efficiency.

For drivers of the Chevrolet Volt ($31,767), the wait is even longer— 26.6 years.

A few vehicles begin paying off relatively soon after leaving the dealership. Two hybrids— Toyota’s Prius ($23,537) and Lincoln’s MKZ ($33,887)— as well as Volkswagen’s diesel-powered Jetta TDI ($25,242) all take less than two years before they start saving their owners money.

Another reason to buy the Obama Vehicle- The Volt. 🙂 It promises great things, costs too much and is a fake (only 40 miles on electric charge) and then underperforms spectacularly.

But I’m sure it’s the Republican’s Fault!!! 🙂

In an interview with South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R), TIME magazine asks if she will tip Sikh taxi drivers more during her visit to New York City.

Haley, who was born into a Sikh family, now identifies herself as a Christian.

“In New York City, which you’re visiting for a couple of days, a lot of our taxi drivers are Sikhs. If you get one, are you going to give them a slightly bigger tip?” Belinda Luscombe, a TIME editor, asked Haley.

“I give the same tip to everyone,” Haley responded.

Wow.

Mary J Blige is apologizing for A Burger King Commercial which according to some race obsessed Liberals (who see racism everywhere and in everything): “Having a black woman sing about chicken was no mistake. They’re trying to reach the ‘urban’ (aka black) demographic and they used you,” in an open letter. “Because God knows black folk won’t buy anything unless there’s a song, and preferably a dance, attached to it.”

“Crispy chicken, fresh lettuce, three cheeses, ranch dressing wrapped up in a tasty flour tortilla” — is set to “Don’t Mind,” a song from Blige’s album “My Life II… The Journey Continues (Act 1),” the Washington Post reports.

Yeah, that was what I was thinking… 😦

SO Blige decides to cover her butt:

“I agreed to be a part of a fun and creative campaign that was supposed to feature a dream sequence,” Blige tells Us Weekly in a statement of the spot, which was slammed by critics and subsequently yanked from the airwaves after going viral earlier this week.

Furthers Blige: “Unfortunately, that’s not what was happening in that clip, so I understand my fans being upset by what they saw. But, if you’re a Mary fan, you have to know I would never allow an unfinished spot like the one you saw go out.”

So the next time you see a Burger King ad, you must think , gee was that racist in your wildest most insane moments? Because the Liberals will.

Since even You Tube buckled.

Here it is: http://www.tmz.com/2012/04/04/mary-j-blige-burger-king-chicken-ad/#.T37nftU0jTo

If after seeing it you don’t get it, you’re not a Politically Correct Race Obsessed Liberal and have some brains left in your head.

ERIC HOLDER SCOLDED

Attorney General Eric Holder’s 3 Page Homework assignment about Judicial Review and his whiny ,”yes, mom” response is here : http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/2012/04/05/justice-department-letter-to-5th-circuit-court-appeals/

“Sure, SCOTUS can overturn a federal law, declaring the law unconstitutional, but SCOTUS should give President Obama and congressional Democrats what they want anyway.” (Wizbang)

I agree. It’s a typical liberal argument. I want what i want when I want it and how are you have the temerity to question my superiority.

OBAMACARE

During a tense White House press briefing Wednesday, Jay Carney had a long exchange with Fox News reporter Ed Henry about what President Obama really meant when he said the Supreme Court would be engaging in activism should ObamaCare be struck down. Carney’s response to the outrage?

Americans just didn’t “understand” what President Obama said because he is a “law professor.” 

Henry: The president is a former constitutional law professor. One of his professors is Laurence Tribe. He now says, in his words, the president “obviously misspoke earlier this week”, quote “he didn’t say what he meant and having said that in order to avoid misleading anyone, he had to clarify it.” I thought yesterday you were saying repeatedly that he did not misspeak. What do you make of the president’s former law professor saying he did?

Carney: The premise of your question suggests that the president of the United States in the comments he made Monday, did not believe in the constitutionality of legislation, which is a preposterous premise and I know you don’t believe that.

Henry: Except this is from Laurence Tribe, who knows a lot more than you and I about constitutional law.

Carney: What I acknowledged yesterday is that speaking on Monday the president was not clearly understood by some people because he is a law professor, he spoke in shorthand.

So you are too dumb to understand. Yeah, that’s the ticket!!

At that press event, Obama told any justice thinking of overturning ObamaCare’s central tenet that “in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure that people with pre-existing conditions can actually get health care.”

But this is false.

In fact, Obama himself argued precisely the opposite during the 2008 campaign, saying a mandate wasn’t needed to achieve universal coverage. “The reason people don’t have health insurance isn’t because they don’t want it,” he said then. “It’s because they can’t afford it.”

Plus, ObamaCare itself proves a mandate isn’t needed to cover those with pre-existing conditions. The law set up federal “high risk” pools that offer insurance to those denied it by private companies. Yet instead of making this a permanent solution, Obama kills these pools off in 2014 in favor of the mandate.

Obama also claimed at that press conference that the law “was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

Also false.

The House approved it by a slim 7-vote margin, with 34 Democrats joining every Republican to oppose it. Less than a year later, the House voted to repeal ObamaCare by a significantly larger margin, 245-189.

It was only in the Senate, where Democrats held a temporary supermajority, that it did well, and even then they could only get it through using a variety of unusual parliamentary tricks. What’s more, just 51 Senators voted to keep the law in a 2011 vote.

But as the old saying goes, lies beget more lies. Here’s just a sampling of past Obama prevarications about his signature reform law:

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”

Fact: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that as many as 20 million will be forced off their plans as employers dump workers into the government health exchanges to avoid ObamaCare’s costs. A survey by McKinsey and Co. found that nearly a third of employers were likely to drop coverage for employees once ObamaCare kicked in.

And an analysis by the Medicare actuary found that ObamaCare’s attacks on Medicare’s private insurance options would force nearly 8 million seniors out of plans they’ve chosen.

“If any bill arrives from Congress that is not controlling costs, that’s not a bill I can support.  It’s going to have to control costs.”

Fact: The law Obama signed contains no meaningful cost-control provisions, something every honest health care analyst admits.

“We will bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.”

Fact: The CBO projects that premiums over the next decade will climb at a faster rate than they did in the past five years. The CBO also projects that premiums in the individual insurance market will be as much as 13% higher in 2016 as a result of the law. Premiums for small businesses could go up 1%. Meanwhile, a study done for Wisconsin by one of the architects of ObamaCare found that “the majority of individuals in the nongroup market will pay more in premiums for health insurance in 2016 than they do today.” The average increase: 30%.

“And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.”

Fact: ObamaCare will accelerate spending at every level. In 2014, when the law takes full effect, national spending on health care will shoot up 8% and go on climbing at more than 6% a year, according to official government forecasts.

“The plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years.”

Fact: The current Congressional Budget Office report pegs the 10-year cost of ObamaCare at $1.7 trillion. The only way Obama could get his price tag down so low is by putting off the start date by four years. Once Obama-Care fully kicks in, it will add $260 billion a year, and rising, to the budget.

“To help ensure that everyone can afford the cost of a health care option in our exchange, we need to provide assistance to families who need it. That way, there will be no reason at all for anyone to remain uninsured.”

Fact: Despite spending $800 billion to subsidize premiums in the government-run exchanges, over the next 10 years, along with $931 billion in new Medicaid costs, ObamaCare will still leave 27 million — or 10% of the population — uninsured, according to the CBO.

We could go on, but you get the idea.

The best thing the Supreme Court could do for the country is to chuck the entire law, and give Congress the opportunity to put together an honest package of reforms.(IBD)

But Liberals want what they want when they want it and will lie to get and if you don’t you’re a racist and a liar.

Ah, 2012 in America.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

I Spy Pie In the Sky With My Little Eye

First off, Just to let you all know- This blog will be down for a few days because I have something important that has be taken care of.

Now onto it…

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

The Liberal Meme: But opposition to the mandate also stems from the public’s failure to understand — or, alternatively, the administration’s failure to communicate — basic facts. (How many YEARS has this been the liberal line- after all you “have to pass it to know what’s in it”!!??)

And when you know you’ll jump for joy. And if you don’t you just don’t understand. 🙂

That’s why it’s just as unpopular (or more so) now as it was over 2 years ago when it passed!

“People don’t understand how the mandate works at all, and they don’t understand why it’s there,” Kaiser’s polling director, Mollyann Brodie, told me. Brodie suspects that it’s too late to change minds. “This law as a whole has really become a symbolic issue to people, and they really aren’t open to information,” she said.

Maybe, but the administration must keep trying — not only to sell the law’s goodies but to explain how the mandate makes them possible. Otherwise, they could end up winning the minds of the justices, yet losing the hearts of the people whose votes they need to keep the law in place.

The most compelling sentences in the Obama administration’s brief defending the constitutionality of the health care law come early on. “As a class,” the brief advises on page 7, “the uninsured consumed $116 billion of health care services in 2008.” (Ruth Marcus)

Yeah, and the CBO says it will cost twice as much as it was when it was sold by the Liberals and it hasn’t even “started” yet.

So I am inclined to believe her pie-in-the-sky Government can fix everything Liberalism…NOT!

ENERGY POLICY

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The administration’s new tax-reform proposal indicates a continued stubbornness to pick winners and losers in the marketplace — slashing, among others, broad-based provisions that benefit all industries such as accelerated depreciation, deductions for interest expense, LIFO for inventory accounting along with tax provisions for the oil and gas industry in order to finance tax breaks and permanent credits for expensive renewable energy.

It’s a disturbing plan after so many failed renewable energy gambles including Solyndra. A new report by a White House-appointed commission concluded that the U.S. could lose as much as $2.7 billion as a result of the loans offered to the renewable energy industry.

Meanwhile, consumers are losing. Gas prices aren’t showing any signs of decreasing. The president’s thumbs-down to the Keystone XL pipeline cost the U.S. thousands of new jobs, economic growth and energy price stabilization.

His 2012 budget calls for cutting outlays for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program to $3 billion, nearly $2 billion less than in the 2011 budget. This drastic cut will leave many homes in cold weather states suffering and is further evidence of misplaced priorities when it comes to the administration’s energy policies.

But they better vote for him anyways, because he’s going to kiss their government dependent asses… 🙂 Otherwise, they might be “racists” or just “mean”. 🙂

The president’s “promise of clean energy” comes with a high price tag. Data from the Department of Energy’s EIA show that new electric generating capacity using wind and solar power tends to be considerably more expensive than conventional, available and secure natural gas and coal resources.

And in a world of real tradeoffs, every dollar spent producing more expensive renewable energy is money that could be used for producing jobs and spurring economic growth. Indeed, there is a direct linkage between energy use and economic recovery, as in recent years each 1% increase in GDP has been accompanied by a 0.2% increase in energy use.

Simply put, it takes more power to turn on more light switches in more plants that employ more people.

The problem, of course, trickles down to consumers, as well. USA Today recently reported “households paid a record $1,419 on average for electricity in 2010, the fifth consecutive yearly increase above the inflation rate.” This “jump has added about $300 a year to what households pay for electricity. That’s the largest sustained increase since a run-up in electricity prices during the 1970s.”

Meanwhile, subsidizing renewables costs jobs and slows economic growth, burdening taxpayers by grabbing up a massive share of tax code subsidies.

In 2010, an estimated 76% of the $19.1 billion in federal tax incentives went to renewables for energy efficiency, conservation and alternative technology vehicle projects (while only 13% went to fossil fuels), according to the Congressional Research Service. Some renewable electricity enjoys negative tax rates: Solar thermal’s effective tax rate is -245% and wind power’s is -164%.

Yet the federal government continues pouring money on non-traditional energy sources, which is especially troubling since the wind, solar power, biofuel and ethanol industries do not meet the standard criteria used to justify taxpayer-funded subsidies for their deployment across the U.S. economy.

They are not “infant industries” or essential for U.S. economic and job growth, and they are unlikely to provide benefits commensurate with their costs. Addressing the huge U.S. federal budget deficit requires cutbacks in programs whose costs exceed their benefits.

There are much fairer policies available that do not force the government to pick winners and losers. Accelerated depreciation, Section 199, the foreign tax credit deduction and LIFO are examples of tax code provisions that are available to any industry and are not considered “subsidies.”

Perhaps even more frightening than the government’s current tax incentive structure and spending for renewables and alternative fuel vehicles is the potential for a national mandate (called a Clean Energy Standard) requiring electricity retailers to supply a specified share of their sales from clean energy sources.

This would have adverse economic impacts. A recent Department of Energy analysis shows that by 2035 the mandate will raise electricity prices by 20% to 27% and reduce GDP by $124 billion to $214 billion.

For those who support clean energy powering our nation’s economy, all is not lost: The issue is simply about responsibly looking away from the “promise of clean energy” and focusing on the reality of clean energy.

Government funding for basic research and development of renewables and conservation may be a better use of taxpayer dollars than the current suite of tax incentives and direct spending programs, for instance. Clearly, there are more efficient ways to meet our nation’s needs for today and tomorrow. (IBD)

But it won’t make Liberal “feel” good and be the soothing pie-in-the-sky warm fuzzy that they want it to be.

And if you disagree, well, you’re just “mean”.

MADDOW: So, President Obama in 1990 said that he wanted to move — wanted to work toward a world, country, that was less mean-spirited, and more generous. The right says that means he hates America. I think it sounds like I want a kinder and gentler America, which is what George H.W. Bush said.

LEWIS BLACK: That’s then. That language doesn’t apply anymore. That is a different Republican Party because we have moved on, there is a new Republican Party, and they seem to have — that language doesn’t work for them.

It’s a new Republican Party. It’s — there is a — it’s like — I mean, I think of it like if you were in the Communist Party, toe the line, here`s what they think, that`s the deal, screw him, that`s the deal, you can’t — are you going to use those words, or those words don`t work? Whatever words he uses, don’t work for them.

(and that doesn’t sound Like the Liberals wanting to control everything and everyone from birth to death at all!) 🙂

MADDOW: But do you think we’re at the point some were some — I mean, I feel like it’s not that weird. It wouldn’t be that much of a joke for a Republican candidate to come out and say, actually, we need a less gentle, meaner country. (Katie Pavlich)

Apparently wanting to balance the budget and limit burdensome debt for future generations is somehow “mean.”

It sucks being the grown-up in the room instead of the head-in-the-clouds, pie-in-the-sky Liberal whose hubris prevents them from not feeling vastly superior to other living beings doesn’t it? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Is it Fair?

Stephen Moore: President Obama has frequently justified his policies—and judged their outcomes—in terms of equity, justice and fairness. That raises an obvious question: How does our existing system—and his own policy record—stack up according to those criteria?

Is it fair that the richest 1% of Americans pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes, and the richest 10% pay two-thirds of the tax?

Is it fair that the richest 10% of Americans shoulder a higher share of their country’s income-tax burden than do the richest 10% in every other industrialized nation, including socialist Sweden?

Is it fair that American corporations pay the highest statutory corporate tax rate of all other industrialized nations but Japan, which cuts its rate on April 1?

Is it fair that President Obama sends his two daughters to elite private schools that are safer, better-run, and produce higher test scores than public schools in Washington, D.C.—but millions of other families across America are denied that free choice and forced to send their kids to rotten schools?

Remember Liberals are “Pro-Choice”. Just not about anything other than abortion, especially not Education,Unions, or Health Care.

Is it fair that Americans who build a family business, hire workers, reinvest and save their money—paying a lifetime of federal, state and local taxes often climbing into the millions of dollars—must then pay an additional estate tax of 35% (and as much as 55% when the law changes next year) when they die, rather than passing that money onto their loved ones?

Damn those evil rich people! The only thing you should pay along to your kids is fealty to the government and DEBT.

Is it fair that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel and other leading Democrats who preach tax fairness underpaid their own taxes?

Or “Job Creation Czar”‘s GE who paid no corporate taxes at all. And speaking of “rich” people who’s giving Obama $38,500 a pop at his copious fundraisers, the guy who says “Do you want Fries with that?”.

Oh, right, as I said yesterday, when you have no standards you can be a doubletalking, double-dealing, hypocrite in your mind and no one on ‘your side’ will care and the people who do care should just shut up.

Is it fair that after the first three years of Obamanomics, the poor are poorer, the poverty rate is rising, the middle class is losing income, and some 5.5 million fewer Americans have jobs today than in 2007?

8%+ unemployment for more than 3 years. Oh, and the CBO just projected what everyone with a brain cell and some integrity said was going to happen, The Price of ObamaCare doubled BEFORE 2014 already!

Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?

But they are FAIR and Unbiased. 🙂

And that Public Sector Unions (government employees) are one of the biggest contributors. And in most of them, you have mandatory due that are collected and given to the Democrats. Now that’s “pro-choice”.

Is it fair that the three counties with America’s highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?

A coincidence. Nothing more, move along…nothing to see here…:)

Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is “subsidized”?

Big Bad Oil is so Evil! 🙂

Solyndra, Beyond Solar, and all the others that have gotten fat checks from the government and then given fat bonus to their execs just before they went bankrupt (usually with an year or so of getting the money) is the fault of the Chinese after all, so nothing to see here…more along… 🙂

Is it fair that those who work full-time jobs (and sometimes more) to make ends meet have to pay taxes to support up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits for those who don’t work?

You don’t want to be “mean” and “heartless” now do you? 🙂

Is it fair that those who took out responsible mortgages and pay them each month have to see their tax dollars used to subsidize those who acted recklessly, greedily and sometimes deceitfully in taking out mortgages they now can’t afford to repay?

Well, that was the “predatory” banks and mortgage companies fault. The fact that they were pushed by the Democrats in that direction forcefully and then the SEC was too busy watching Porn at work to notice is not relevant. 🙂

Is it fair that thousands of workers won’t have jobs because the president sided with environmentalists and blocked the shovel-ready Keystone XL oil pipeline?

Oil is evil. We only want Politically correct jobs.

Is it fair that some of Mr. Obama’s largest campaign contributors received federal loan guarantees on their investments in renewable energy projects that went bust?

Crony Capitalism is so Washington.

Is it fair that federal employees receive benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those of private-sector workers whose taxes pay their salaries, according to the Congressional Budget Office?

They think so. And no, they aren’t “greedy”. 🙂

Is it fair that soon almost half the federal budget will take income from young working people and redistribute it to old non-working people, even though those over age 65 are already among the wealthiest Americans?

Yeah, but the old people vote! 🙂

Is it fair that in 27 states workers can be compelled to join a union in order to keep their jobs?

The Unions and The Democrats certainly think so. That’s their #1 $$$ gravy train.

Is it fair that nearly four out of 10 (47%) American households now pay no federal income tax at all—a number that has risen every year under Mr. Obama?

Yes, because the more dependent on the government you are the more you’ll vote to continue porking yourself with other people’s money. Hey, it’s free! 🙂

And you don’t want to be “mean”,”Heartless”, or “racist” now do you? 🙂

Is it fair that Boeing, a private company, was threatened by a federal agency when it sought to add jobs in a right-to-work state rather than in a forced-union state?

Yeah, the Liberals have to stick up for their cronies in the Unions. 🙂

Is it fair that if you want to enforce Federal Laws about immigration you get sued by that same Federal government and are branded as racists?

Is it fair that our kids and grandkids and great-grandkids—who never voted for Mr. Obama—will have to pay off the $5 trillion of debt accumulated over the past four years, without any benefits to them?

Better than the people who spent it paying for it! 🙂

Is it fair The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that President Barack Obama’s tax and spending policies will yield $6.4 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than double the shortfall in CBO’s own fiscal baseline — even after taking credit for reduced war costs. (Politico)

Is it fair: While HHS under the Obama administration does everything in its power to force religions employers to pick up the cost of providing birth control against their religious conscience, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is allowing an Indian tribe an exemption to kill two bald eagles a year … for religious purposes:

The AP reports: “A federal government decision to allow a Wyoming tribe to kill two bald eagles for a religious ceremony is a victory for American Indian sovereignty as well as for long-suppressed religious freedoms, the tribe says.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service granted a permit March 9 to the Northern Arapaho Tribe allowing it either to kill or capture and release two bald eagles this year.” (Townhall.com)

‘African Americans for Obama’

The program urges black Americans to volunteer their time by making calls, organizing events and going door to door in their neighborhoods encouraging other African Americans to vote for Obama.

Again, imagine what the reaction would be any of the Republican candidates launched a ‘Whites for Romney’, ‘Whites for Santorum’ (Christian Conservatives for Santorum) or ‘Whites for Gingrich’ campaign. There would be non-stop uproar. But Obama does the equivalent and gets a free pass.

Now that’s fair, isn’t it? 🙂

Well, when Liberals have no standards…is it fair to judge them then? 🙂

Now doesn’t that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside as to how “fair” everything thing is…

Moving Forwards Backwards

Meet the Roberts electric car. Built in 1896, it gets a solid 40 miles to the charge — exactly the mileage Chevrolet advertises for the Volt, the highly touted $31,645 electric car General Motors CEO Dan Akerson called “not a step forward, but a leap forward.”

As the New York Times reported September 5, “For General Motors and the Obama administration, the new Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid represents the automotive future, the culmination of decades of high-tech research financed partly with federal dollars.”

Way to Go Greenies. Next thing you know, we’ll get a Steam Powered Car!!

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

According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.

Well, at least he knows what’s really important… HIM! 🙂

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

“You’ve got to hand it to Democratic strategists. Who would have thought six months ago that in the lead up to perhaps the most important presidential election of our time, the hottest political topic in the country would not be the weak economy, high unemployment, the huge national debt, record gas prices, or turmoil in the Middle East. Instead it’s Women’s Rights, or at least that’s what the Democratic party is calling it while miraculously managing to keep a straight face.

“A term that was once used in conjunction with women’s suffrage and the right to vote is suddenly synonymous in the modern day with free contraceptives at the expense of others. Gone are the likes of true icons like Susan B. Anthony. Now we have Sandra Fluke and her heroic crusade to mandate that her sexual lifestyle choices be subsidized. How proud the Democratic party must feel right now to have successfully revitalized the civil rights movement in the 21st century by equating it with luxury entitlement. The media must feel pretty good too. They’ve actually been able to substantiate this ridiculous narrative to the American public… or at least a targeted voting block within the American public.

“The Republicans’ War on Women – that’s the poll-tested talking point coming out of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC these days. Despite the absurdity and insulting nature of the claim, the mantra sure is getting a lot of attention. It’s also proving to be an effective weapon – one of several weapons from a year-long arsenal of distractions designed to keep the Republican party off step, off topic, and constantly on the defensive at a time when President Obama is wrapping up what is surely the most dismal presidential term of my lifetime.” (allapundit)

Mark Steyn: All of us are born with the unalienable right to life, liberty, and a lifetime supply of premium ribbed silky-smooth ultrasensitive spermicidal lubricant condoms. No taxation without rubberization, as the Minutemen said. The shot heard round the world, and all that. 🙂

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

The U.S. economy added 227,000 jobs in February vs. expectations for 206,000, continuing a recent trend of decent hiring activity. The unemployment rate held at 8.3%.

And it has been OVER 8% since February 2009!

But America remains mired in the longest jobs recession since the Great Depression. It’s been 49 months since the U.S. hit peak employment in January 2008. And with nonfarm payrolls still 5.33 million below their old high, the jobs slump will continue for several more years.

The previous jobs recession record — 47 months — came during and after the comparatively mild 2001 recession, which saw unemployment climb to only 6.3%. The average job recovery time since 1980 is 29 months, not including the current slump.

The labor market won’t truly return to health until some 10 million positions are created to rehire all those who lost their jobs and to absorb new workers.

The longest jobs recession in decades coincides, not coincidentally, with the longest stretch of anemic economic performance on record.

U.S. gross domestic profit hasn’t risen 4% or more in any quarter since the first quarter of 2006. That’s by far the longest such stretch on record going back to 1950. The only other sizable sub-par stretch was a three-year span from late 2000 to mid-2003 during the prior recession and sluggish recovery.

The current expansion, which began in mid-2009, is particularly disappointing, given the deep recession that preceded it. The best growth was a three-quarter run of 3.8%-3.9% gains.

After the severe 1981-82 recession, the U.S. economy enjoyed a five-quarter stretch of 7% or more — following a 5.1% annualized gain.

The U.S. economy is up just 6.2% above the level at the end of the recession vs. 14.9% in the 10 quarters after the 1981-82 slump.

President Obama may take hope that the U.S. economy has picked up from near-stall speed to a modest pace in recent months. But after the mild 1990-1991 downturn, the U.S. economy rose tepidly for a few quarters before growing more than 4% in every quarter of 1992. That still wasn’t enough to keep the first President Bush from losing to Bill Clinton.

And nobody is predicting 4% growth in 2012. (IBD)

Bernard Goldberg: For years, journalists have bristled at allegations of liberal bias in the news. “If you think we have a bias,” some of them would say, “that only proves one thing: that you’re the one with the bias.”

When my book “Bias” came out at the end of 2001 — despite a surprisingly good review in the New York Times — so-called mainstream reporters generally denounced it. “Liberal bias?” they asked incredulously. “What liberal bias?”

A few even called me a “traitor” for supposedly turning on my colleagues, which is kind of funny since these are people who won’t call a real traitor … a traitor.

Well, now we have Chuck Todd, political director and chief White House correspondent at NBC News, breaking ranks (sort of) with his fellow journalists.

In an interview with Politico, Todd says, “To me, the ideological bias in the media really hasn’t been there in a long time. But what is there that people mistake for ideological bias is geographic bias. It’s seeing everything through the lens of New York and Washington.”

Not really, but it’s good that Chuck Todd at least seems to be acknowledging that there was, once upon a time, an ideological bias in the mainstream media. To say it “hasn’t been there in a long time,” acknowledges that it was there, once. This is something a lot of journalists would never admit.

To Todd, bias in the news simply stems from too many elite journalists living in too few places — Manhattan and D.C. But what he doesn’t quite seem to understand is that geography influences culture and culture influences ideology.

Inside The Bubble

People on the Upper West Side of Manhattan don’t see ObamaCare, for example, the same way people in Alabama see it. That’s not because of geography. It’s because of ideology. Or to put it another way, there are a lot more liberals on the Upper West Side than there are in Montgomery.

Todd is hard on political journalists, but only up to a point, and makes sure we understand that they’re not slanting the news in favor of liberals because they themselves are liberals. The reason, he says, has a lot more to do with zip codes than party affiliations.

“I think sometimes there are too many people who cover politics that don’t understand the grass roots of the Republican Party,” he correctly tells Politico.

And why don’t they understand? Because they cover America from a safe distance, embedded in the nation’s media capitals — Washington and New York.

“Part of what animates them (political journalists) is if (Middle Americans are) pushing it, I’m against it. But also that we don’t understand their day-to-day lives. That we don’t respect the fact that they go to church twice a week. That when we look down our noses upon Wal-Mart, they see it as the only place to shop.”

Let’s see if I have this right: The sophisticates in Manhattan and Georgetown don’t like anything that the hayseeds who live in Middle America like. If the unwashed in Flyover Country are for it, the elites in New York and D.C. are against it.

That, Chuck, is not geographical bias. It’s the same old bias conservatives have complained about for years. It’s a bias based on the reporter’s ideology, the journalist’s liberal ideology.

By blaming it all on geography, Chuck Todd, intentionally or not, tries to take the edge off the problem. If it’s only geographical, it speaks only to a blind spot. It says, “Hey, we live in a bubble, that’s why we’re biased. And it has nothing to do with our politics.”

Yes, they do live in a bubble, but make no mistake: Inside that bubble, journalists don’t simply share the same geography — they share the same ideology. They’re almost all liberals inside the bubble who share the same values and believe those values are moderate, mainstream and reasonable while conservative values are extreme and dangerous.

In Love With Obama

“Too many people mistake ideological bias for what really is a matter of geography,” is how he ends his interview with Politico.

Sorry, Chuck, but you’re the one who is making a mistake. If almost all the media elites live in Washington and New York and are liberal, is the problem that they live in Washington and New York or that they’re liberal? If there were more conservatives in the ranks of elite journalists — editors, producers, anchors — it wouldn’t matter if they all lived on the same block.

But let’s give Chuck Todd some credit for even bringing up the subject of bias in the news. Halley’s comet flashing across the sky over the USA is a more commonplace event than a mainstream reporter admitting any kind of bias.

Still, it’s too bad, since he’s in charge of political coverage at NBC News, that Todd forgot to tell Politico about how supposedly objective journalists fell madly in love with Barack Obama four years ago and decided they would not settle for being eyewitnesses to history. The election was too important.

This time, they felt, they had to they help shape history. So they put on their short skirts to go along with their pompoms and shamelessly became cheerleaders for Mr. Obama — and will probably do it again once the Republicans pick their nominee. That kind of journalistic bias has very little to do with geography and whole bunch to do with ideology.

So, one cheer for Chuck.

A Bronx one, if you please 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Galluping Inability

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

According to Gallup, here are the job approval numbers for other presidents at this stage of their terms, a year before the re-election campaign:

— Harry S. Truman: 54 percent.

— Dwight Eisenhower: 78 percent.

— Lyndon B. Johnson: 44 percent.

— Richard M. Nixon: 50 percent.

— Ronald Reagan: 54 percent.

— George H.W. Bush: 52 percent.

— Bill Clinton: 51 percent.

— George W. Bush: 55 percent.

Barack Hussein Obama  43 Percent

What’s more, Gallup finds that Obama’s overall job approval rating so far has averaged 49 percent. Only three former presidents have had a worse average rating at this stage: Carter, Ford, and Harry S. Truman. Only Truman won re-election in an anti-Congress campaign that Obama’s team is using as a model.

Heard last night on MSDNC on the Rachael “Mad Cow” Maddow show Barney Frank’s advice to President Obama on his re-election (where Obama has had 54 events in the 42 days) was to run against the Republicans pointing out that “they are nuts”.

Thanks Barney, it sounds very much like the one I have been saying for a very long time — “Vote for Me, the Other guy’s an asshole!”

The fact that the Democrats are more nuts doesn’t come into it. After all, most extreme liberals think they are “centrists” and the “extremists” are anyone that isn’t them (aka Republicans, Independents, and Conservatives).

Then there’s this: Which is Brilliant and to the Point.

Debt scale update: The U.S. government is already borrowing every three days what all of America spent on Black Friday. And that was the biggest Black Friday on record.

In the last three years, the president has taught us a great deal about America, the world, and himself.

Before Obama, many Americans still believed in massive deficit spending, whether as an article of fairness, a means to economic growth, or just a lazy fallback position to justify an out-of-control federal government. But after the failure of a nearly $800 billion “stimulus” program — intended to keep unemployment under 8 percent — no one believes any more that an already indebted government will foster economic growth by taking on another $4 trillion in debt. In other words, “stimulus” is mostly a dead concept. The president — much as he advised a barnstorming President Bush in 2005 to cease pushing Social Security reform on a reluctant population — should give it up and junk the new $500 billion program euphemistically designated as a “jobs bill.”

Obama has also taught us that prominent government intervention into the private sector often makes things worse, and invites crony-capitalist corruption. Nearly three years into this administration, it is striking how seldom Barack Obama brags about Cash for Clunkers, the Chrysler and GM bailouts, or Solyndra. He either is quiet about them or sort of shrugs, as if to say, “Stuff happens.” Even creative bookkeeping cannot mask the fact that the auto-company bailouts (begun, to be sure, by the Bush administration, but made worse under Obama) will prove a huge drain on the Treasury. No one even attempts any more to convince us that we will like Obamacare once we read the legislation, or that it will save us costs in the long run, or that it will cheer up businesses so that they will invest and hire. All that was dreamland, 2009, and this is reality, 2011, when we hear only “It could have been worse.”

Obama has also taught us that a president’s name, his father’s religion, his ethnic background, loud denunciations of his predecessor, discomforting efforts to apologize, bow, and contextualize past American actions — none of that does anything to lead to greater peace in the world or security for the United States. And by the same token, George Bush’s drawl, Texas identification, and Christianity did not magically turn allies into neutrals and neutrals into enemies.

The Obama legacy in the War on Terror is as Predator-in-Chief — boldly increasing targeted assassinations tenfold from the Bush era, on the theory that we more or less kill the right suspected terrorists; few civil libertarians care much, apparently because one of their own is doing it.

Even Chris Matthews’s leg has stopped tingling. There will be no more Newsweekcomparisons of Obama to a god. Even the Nobel Prize committee will soon grasp that it tarnished its brand by equating fleeting celebrity with lasting achievement.

“Green” will never be quite the same after Obama. When Solyndra and its affiliated scandals are at last fully brought into the light of day, we will see the logical reification of Climategate I & II, Al Gore’s hucksterism, and Van Jones’s lunacy. How ironic that the more Obama tried to stop drilling in the West, offshore, and in Alaska, as well as stopping the Canadian pipeline, the more the American private sector kept finding oil and gas despite rather than because of the U.S. government. How further ironic that the one area that Obama felt was unnecessary for, or indeed antithetical to, America’s economic recovery — vast new gas and oil finds — will soon turn out to be America’s greatest boon in the last 20 years. While Obama and Energy Secretary Chu still insist on subsidizing money-losing wind and solar concerns, we are in the midst of a revolution that, within 20 years, will reduce or even end the trade deficit, help pay off the national debt, create millions of new jobs, and turn the Western Hemisphere into the new Persian Gulf. The American petroleum revolution can be delayed by Obama, but it cannot be stopped.

One lesson, however, has not fully sunk in and awaits final elucidation in the 2012 election: that of the Chicago style of Barack Obama’s politicking. In 2008 few of the true believers accepted that, in his first political race, in 1996, Barack Obama sued successfully to remove his opponents from the ballot. Or that in his race for the U.S. Senate eight years later, sealed divorced records for both his primary- and general-election opponents were mysteriously leaked by unnamed Chicagoans, leading to the implosions of both candidates’ campaigns. Or that Obama was the first presidential candidate in the history of public campaign financing to reject it, or that he was also the largest recipient of cash from Wall Street in general, and from BP and Goldman Sachs in particular. Or that Obama was the first presidential candidate in recent memory not to disclose either undergraduate records or even partial medical. Or that remarks like “typical white person,” the clingers speech, and the spread-the-wealth quip would soon prove to be characteristic rather than anomalous.

Few American presidents have dashed so many popular, deeply embedded illusions as has Barack Obama. And for that, we owe him a strange sort of thanks. (Victor David Hanson)

But remember, “Vote for me, The other guys nuts!!” 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

We Can’t Wait

“The President’s plan is to simply say ‘no’ to new energy production,” House Natural Resources Committee chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash, said to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar during a hearing pertaining to hydraulic fracturing. “It’s a plan that is sending American jobs overseas, forfeiting new revenue, and denying access to American energy that would lessen our dependence on hostile Middle Eastern oil.”

But it make environmentalist wackos happy and brings us more Solyndras. That can’t be bad, can it?

President Obama’s United States Department of Agriculture has delayed shale gas drilling in Ohio for up to six months by cancelling a mineral lease auction for Wayne National Forest (WNF). The move was taken in deference to environmentalists, on the pretext of studying the effects of hydraulic fracturing.

“Conditions have changed since the 2006 Forest Plan was developed,” announced WNF Supervisor Anne Carey on Tuesday. “The technology used in the Utica & Marcellus Shale formations need to be studied to see if potential effects to the surface are significantly different than those identified in the Forest Plan.” The study will take up to six months to complete. The WNF study reportedly “will focus solely on how it could affect forest land,” despite the significance of hydraulic fracturing to united proponents of the delay, “and not how it could affect groundwater.” …

The Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP) recently estimated that drilling in the Utica shale, which is affected by the suspension of the mineral lease auctions, would produce up 204,500 jobs by 2015.

And what about the jobs and the energy from Canada that the President refused earlier in the month, The Keystone Pipeline?

Keystone XL also has been challenged by lawmakers and activists in Nebraska who say the pipeline might break and spill oil into the Ogallala aquifer, a major source of water for Nebraska ranchers. This is not impossible, but after the world’s many years of experience with operating oil pipelines, it’s a bit like refusing to allow airplanes to fly over Nebraska for fear they might crash. (Barrons)

But the most nakedly political part of it is, they just delayed it until after the 2012 election, like most decision today. Because no one wants to confront them during a campaign. And a campaign is all we have now.

On Nov. 12, the White House and the State Department decided to give the pipeline route more study, at least until after the election in November, 2012. “This was not a political decision,” said an assistant secretary of state who must have practiced in front of a mirror to keep a straight face.

Political or not, final or not, investors and consumers should hope that the Keystone XL non-decision will not much hamper the development of the Alberta oil resource. Petroleum can be shipped to the U.S. by truck or train, and the capacity of existing pipelines can be increased, all without a pass from the State Department or the president.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, offered another possibility. He said that his government will work with pipeline companies to ship more Alberta oil to the Pacific coast for export to Asia. Harper observed, however, that the Keystone XL pipeline or something like it will eventually go through “because it makes eminent sense.”

But as the U.S. government has shown, making sense doesn’t have the same priority as political survival.

Charles Krauthammer: In 2008, the slogan was “Yes We Can.” For 2011-12, it’s “We Can’t Wait.” What happened in between? Candidate Obama, the vessel into which myriad dreams were poured, met the reality of governance.

His near-$1 trillion stimulus begat a stagnant economy with 9 percent unemployment. His attempt at Wall Street reform left in place a still too-big-to-fail financial system as vulnerable today as when he came into office. His green energy fantasies yielded Solyndra cronyism and a cap-and-trade regime not even a Democratic Congress would pass.

And now his signature achievement, Obamacare, is headed to the Supreme Court, where it could very well be struck down, just a week after its central element was overwhelmingly repudiated (2-1) by the good burghers of Ohio.

So what do you do when you say you can, but, it turns out, you can’t? Blame the other guy. Charge the Republicans with making governing impossible. Never mind that you had control of the Congress for two-thirds of your current tenure. It’s all the fault of Republican rejectionism.

Hence: “We Can’t Wait.” We can’t wait while they obstruct. We can’t wait while they dither with my jobs bill. Write Congress today! Vote Democratic tomorrow!

We can’t wait. Except for certain exceptions, such as the 1,700-mile trans-USA Keystone XL pipeline, carrying Alberta oil to Texas refineries, that would have created thousands of American jobs and increased our energy independence.

For that, we can wait, it seems. President Obama decreed that any decision must wait 12 to 18 months — postponed, by amazing coincidence, until after next year’s election.

Why? Because the pipeline angered Obama’s environmental constituency. But their complaints are risible. Global warming from the extraction of the Alberta tar sands? Canada will extract the oil anyway. If it doesn’t go to us, it will go to China. Net effect on the climate if we don’t take that oil? Zero.

Danger to a major aquifer, which the pipeline traverses? It is already crisscrossed by 25,000 miles of pipeline, enough to circle the Earth. Moreover, the State Department had subjected Keystone to three years of review — the most exhaustive study of any oil pipeline in U.S. history — and twice concluded in voluminous studies that there would be no significant environmental harm.

So what happened? “The administration,” reported The New York Times, “had in recent days been exploring ways to put off the decision until after the presidential election.” Exploring ways to improve the project? Hardly. Exploring ways to get past the election.

Obama’s decision was meant to appease his environmentalists. It’s already working. The president of the National Wildlife Federation told The Washington Post (online edition, Nov. 10) that thousands of environmentalists who were galvanized to protest the pipeline would now support Obama in 2012. Moreover, a source told the Post, Obama campaign officials had concluded that “they do not pick up one vote from approving this project.”

Sure, the pipeline would have produced thousands of truly shovel-ready jobs. Sure, delay could forfeit to China a supremely important strategic asset — a nearby, highly reliable source of energy. But approval was calculated to be a political loss for the president. Easy choice.

It’s hard to think of a more clear-cut case of putting politics over nation. This from a president whose central campaign theme is that Republicans put party over nation, sacrificing country to crass political ends.

Nor is this the first time Obama’s election calendar trumped the national interest:

• Obama’s decision to wind down the Afghan surge in September 2012 is militarily inexplicable. It comes during the fighting season. It was recommended by none of his own military commanders. It is explicable only as a talking point for the final days of his re-election campaign.

• At the height of the debt-ceiling debate last July, Obama pledged to veto any agreement that was not long term. Definition of long term? By another amazing coincidence, any deal large enough to get him past Election Day (and thus avoid another such crisis next year).

• Tuesday it was revealed that last year the administration pressured Solyndra, as it was failing, to delay its planned Oct. 28 announcement of layoffs until Nov. 3 — the day after the midterm election.

A contemporaneous email from a Solyndra investor noted: “Oddly they didn’t give a reason for that date.” The writer was clearly born yesterday. The American voter was not — and (s)he soon gets to decide who really puts party over nation and re-election above all.

We can’t wait.

Additionally: “Well, no one is asking him to go out there and asking him to be a jingoistic cheerleader. But when you call your own country ‘lazy’ when you are abroad and you call it unambitious and soft when you’re home, I think what you are showing is not tough love, but ill-concealed contempt,” Krauthammer said on FOX News’ “Special Report.”

“Obama is ready to blame everybody except himself for the lousy economy. And the lack of investment. Look, why are people reluctant to invest? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, in the industrialized world. Obama has spoken about it. It’s the one issue on which the Republicans would have agreed on lowering that rate, eliminating loopholes. In three years in office, he’s done nothing. He has an NLRB trying to shut down a $1 billion plant Boeing has constructed, as a favor to Obama’s union allies. People look abroad and say this isn’t a place I want to do business. Its his issues, his over-regulation over taxation and all the red tape he has added. And now he blames Americans’ laziness. I think it’s unseemly.”

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1283879431001/obama-putting-his-campaign-ahead-of-his-job-part-1

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1283879437001/obama-putting-his-campaign-ahead-of-his-job–part-2/?playlist_id=87937&intcmp=obinsite

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

 Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley