60 Years of Rosa Parks

On December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks refused to obey bus driver James F. Blake’s order to give up her seat in the colored section to a white passenger, after the white section was filled.
Now we have “safe zones” for blacks only. For example: In an ironic development, to say the least, protesters at the University of Missouri (MU) segregated themselves by race Wednesday night, having white students leave a gathering in order to create a “black-only healing space.”

John Wheeler's photo.

Isn’t Liberal “diversity” and “tolerance” a wonderful thing for racial progress. 🙂

The CryBaby Generation at it’s finest, reversing history but it’s a ‘good thing’.

The bad old segregation kept “colored people” in specific spaces. The good new segregation reserves spaces for “people of color”.

DIVERSITY IS SEGREGATION!

INCLUSION IS EXCLUSION!

Orwell would be proud of you.

And if you violate their segregation you’re an insensitive racist. 🙂

Additionally, a “Hurting and Healing” event, described as “a *for POC, by POC* art show,” is scheduled to take place at Pomona College on December 5. “This show’s intent is to create a space that is pro-POC, pro-black, and anti-white supremacist,” states the event’s website. “While you may want to invite a white friend or ally, to make this a safe and comfortable space for other POC, we ask that you do not.”

Now that we’ve brought back racial segregation as a progressive value, maybe we can make a new progressive Klan that will only harass white people? Then again it already exists. They call it Black Lives Matter. (Front Page)

Dear Dr Martin Luther Kings: I’m sorry that your movement became an utter failure, spit on your grave, and that you died for nothing.

All in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity”. 🙂

Orwell couldn’t have done any better.

Portland, OR:“Black Joy: Self Care Saturday for Black Girls and Women” will take place on November 28 at The Center for Intercultural Organizing, though there will only be one culture welcomed.

Oldham promises, “the day will be a safe space centered around Blackness, community love and radical healing.”

“It’s a space to self care and uplift black folks.

Up Lift them by Segregation. 🙂

“It’s important to reclaim that Black folks do have a space here and we can create our own. I think it is also important to just have spaces that are for ourselves, without any allies,” Oldham said.

Yes, nothing beats racism like segregation. There was a time in this country when blacks not only had their own “spaces”, but also their own schools, bathrooms, water fountains, etc…and for some reason they weren’t real happy about that. In fact there was this whole thing call the Civil Rights Movement that fought against segregation. Oldham should look it up on Wikipedia. (Downtrend)

I’ve been amused recently by strident calls from black students at UCLA who demand a blacks-only dormitory.

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL!!!

Gee, where have I heard that before? 🙂

Brown Vs. The Board of Education 1954 perhaps… 🙂

history2

And this time THEY WANT IT that way…. 🙂

Yet the irony of self-segregation isn’t lost on in that era of forced integration and hiring quotas based ONLY on race. The hilarity of “safe zones” is so Orwellian its very frightening.

Live and let live is not politically correct. Neither is do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Violate their “safe space” or “offend” then with disagreeing and your white, you’re automatically a callous, insensitive, evil, racist and bigot.

End of story.

As you’re well aware, social engineering is happening on a grand scale now. We see it from our dear POTUS, we see it in the courts, and we see it very clearly on college campuses. Since the new age of Sharpton and Jackson, blacks are learning and playing this game very well.

 

But when you have black students making demands on who and what color people are on a college campus we’ve gone to far. And even worse, now these brats want people punished for the simple act of not liking them.

In fact, there’s now a one-stop shop for Black Lives Matter activists and other campus whiners called TheDemands.org which posts ALL official demands from these groups. Take a look at it. You will not believe the crap they’re demanding.

As Steven Hayward writing for Powerline Blog reports, Nice of the protestors to gather all of their absurdity in one handy place.

Like this one from Tufts:

1. We demand that Black-identifying students make up 13 percent of Tufts undergraduate population.

 

“Black-identifying students?” Good to know Rachel Dolezal has a safe space waiting for her somewhere.

From Clemson University:

Additionally, we want a public commitment from the Clemson University Administration to prosecute criminally predatory behaviors anddefamatory speech committed by members of the Clemson University community (including, but not limited to, those facilitated by usage of social media).

So now Clemson is supposed to police Facebook and Twitter posts?

I’m surprised this demand from Middle Tennessee State University hasn’t received more media attention:

1. Change Forrest Hall, a group of students,faculty, and community members has one demand: the immediate removal of Nathan Bedford Forrest’s name from Middle Tennessee State University’s ROTC building.

How long before Washington and Lee University has to drop Lee’s name? And then Washington’s? Lewis and Clark? Can’t do that: imperialist exploiters. William and Mary? Nope: named for patriarchal privilege. Heck, why not drop all names from every college and university, and just go with “University?”

Students today have been raised to care about and act only on feelings. Not logic and reason. Talk to any college kid and you’ll see. They want fairness — even if it means being unfair to someone else. They don’t get the relationship here. They want free college even though it means it would cause damage to most of the country. They want free health care even though it’s not even rational or possible. Why do they want all of these things and more? Because they just feel it’s right. Yes it is…in cloud cuckoo land. (Eric Hall via Allen West)

I feel sick. But I’m white (and male! boo hiss!) so I’m not allowed to feel anything but my seething bigotry and racism because that’s all that defines me in the Politically Correct age of The Crybaby Generation. 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

It’s Worse than We Thought

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
It’s reality but not as we know it

John Hawkins: How radical, weird and out of touch have liberals on college campuses gotten since Obama came into office? It’s worse than you ever thought and although there is an almost unlimited number of problematic incidents to choose from, these 15 are particularly effective at getting across how bad things have become.

1) “College Students Say Remembering 9/11 Is Offensive to Muslims…. The everything-is-offensive brand of campus activism has struck a new low: Students at the University of Minnesota killed a proposed moment of silence for 9/11 victims due to concerns—insulting, childish concerns—that Muslim students would be offended.”

2) “Portland State University Offers Course Teaching How to ‘Make Whiteness Strange’…According to Portland State University Professor Rachel Sanders’ ‘White Privilege’ course, ‘whiteness’ must be dismantled if racial justice will ever be achieved. The course description states that ‘whiteness is the lynchpin of structures of racial meaning and racial inequality in the United States” and claims that ‘to preserve whiteness is to preserve racial injustice.’ Students taking the course will ‘endeavor to make whiteness strange.’ In order to make whiteness strange, the description says students must ‘interrogate whiteness as an unstable legal, political, social, and cultural construction.’”

 

3) “A University in the San Francisco Area Actually Told Students To Call 911 if They Were Offended….Administrators at a Catholic university in the San Francisco Bay Area have rescinded an official school policy instructing students to clog up the regional 9-1-1 emergency reporting system to report ‘bias incidents.’

The school is Santa Clara University, reports Campus Reform…Until this month, however, Santa Clara administrators have been instructing students to report ‘bias incidents’ using the emergency service reserved for dispatching police, firefighters and ambulances.

‘If the bias incident is in progress or just occurred: ALWAYS CALL 911 IMMEDIATELY,’ the Santa Clara website instructed students in fierce, all-capital letters.”

4) “Educators in the Volunteer State are very concerned that students might be offended by the usage of traditional pronouns like she, he, him and hers, according to a document from the University of Tennessee – Knoxville’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

…For all you folks who went to school back when there were only him and her – here’s a primer: some of the new gender neutral pronouns are ze, hir, zir, xe, xem and xyr.”

5) “A Professor at Polk State College has allegedly failed a humanities student after she refused to concede that Jesus is a ‘myth’ or that Christianity oppresses women during a series of mandatory assignments at the Florida college. According to a press release from the Liberty Counsel, a non-profit public interest law firm, Humanities Professor Lance ‘Lj’ Russum gave a student a ‘zero’ on four separate papers because the 16-year-old did not ‘conform to his personal worldviews of Marxism, Atheism, Feminism, and homosexuality.’ The law firm has called for a full, private investigation of the professor and the course curriculum.”

6) “College Codes Make ‘Color Blindness’ a Microaggression…wait, what?…. UCLA says “Color Blindness,” the idea we shouldn’t obsess over people’s race, is a microaggression. If you refuse to treat an individual as a ‘racial/cultural being,’ then you’re being aggressive.”

7) “The phrase ‘politically correct’ is now a microaggression according to the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The university’s ‘Just Words’ campaign is the work of UWM’s ‘Inclusive Excellence Center’ and aims to ‘raise awareness of microaggressions and their impact’—microaggressions like ‘politically correct’ or ‘PC.’”

 

8) ) “‘American,’ ‘illegal alien,’ ‘foreigners,’ ‘mothering,’ and ‘fathering’ are just a handful of words deemed ‘problematic’ by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide….Saying ‘American’ to reference Americans is also problematic. The guide encourages the use of the more inclusive substitutes ‘U.S. citizen’ or ‘Resident of the U.S.’ The guide also tries to get students to stop saying ‘Caucasian,’ ‘illegal Immigrant,’ ‘mother,’ ‘father’ and even the word ‘healthy’ is said to shame those who aren’t healthy.”

9) “Late yesterday afternoon, ACLJ filed a lawsuit on behalf of Brandon Jenkins against officials of The Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) in Maryland for denying Brandon admission to its Radiation Therapy Program in part due to his expression of religious beliefs. As one faculty member explained to Brandon, on behalf of CCBC, the ‘field [of radiation therapy] is not the place for religion.’”

10) “A California school co-founded by a firebrand who once called for an ‘intifada’ in the U.S. has become the nation’s first accredited Muslim college.”

11) “According to Coastal Carolina University, sex is only consensual if both parties are completely sober and if consent is not only present, but also enthusiastic. This is a troubling standard that converts many ordinary, lawful sexual encounters into sexual assault, and it should frighten any student at CCU.”

12) “Clemson University apologizes for serving Mexican food…Students took to Twitter to call the event culturally insensitive and to question the school’s efforts to promote diversity….Clemson Dining issued an apology to ‘offended’ students after hosting a ‘Maximum Mexican’ food day.”

13) “All-Women’s College Cancels ‘Vagina Monologues’ Because it Excludes Women Without Vaginas.”

14) “The ‘Black Lives Matter’ leader who landed a teaching gig at Yale University delivered a lecture this week on the historical merits of looting as a form of protest, backing up his lesson with required reading that puts modern-day marauders on par with the patriots behind the Boston Tea Party.”

15) “Assistant Dean (at Cornell) Tells a Project Veritas Investigative Journalist that the University Would Allow an ISIS Terrorist to Hold a ‘Training Camp’ on Campus, Saying: ‘It Would be Like Bringing in a Coach to do a Training on a Sports Team.'”

 
BE AFRAID of the Crybaby Generation, Be very Afraid.

Oh MY!

When Star Trek’s George Takei recently aimed his phasers at Chick-fil-A, the restaurant’s partisans ate his lunch. Takei, who played Hikaru Sulu on “Star Trek,” has made his mark as a liberal political activist.

Takei posted a list of “Companies You Should Avoid if You Support Gay Rights.” The featured image of the article is a Chick-fil-A bag.

And the end sentence: They’ve been blocked from opening a store in the Denver airport for their bigoted views.

These are the “diversity” police remember. The ones who preach “tolerance” at the end of a Lawyer’s sword.

You should know by now “anti-gay” means not willing kiss the Gay Mafia’s ass and appease them and their lawyers on speed dial for “offense”.

“These companies are free to have their own opinions, but we consumers are equally free to decide where to spend our money,” Takei wrote on Facebook.

Chick-fil-A’s fans then took over, flooding the page with reasons why Takei was wrong.

“Sorry George,” wrote Judy DeLaurentiis. “These companies have every right to their opinions and beliefs. Just as you do. You can’t demand these rights and then try to deny rights, freedom of speech and religion to anyone else who doesn’t agree with your views. Chicken fil a doesn’t discriminate against anyone. I’ve never seen anyone, ever, turned away and not served because of their sexual orientation at chick fil a.”

Others noted some actual evil in the world.

“If you are going as far to boycott what you consider anti-gay companies, better not buy any gasoline that comes from oil companies that was purchased in the Middle East where being gay there is a capital crime,” wrote Jason Roberts.

Some picked apart Takei’s logic.

“Careful with this kind of activism,” wrote Bob Wilkinson. “This logic is exactly what creates division and hate. Unintended consequences could include people with a different ideology deciding not to do business with those who do support gay rights. I like reading your posts George, but this is not an intelligent way to create positive change.”

Now ask, if any of the Leftist were actually comprehending any of it? 🙂

Perhaps the post from Chance Bunger said it best.

“I think I’ll just enjoy my chicken sandwich and leave politics out of lunch,” he wrote.

To wit, one of the first responses: Why? They use the money from your lunch to fund anti-equality groups.

Fascinating turn of phrase.

or “Human rights aren’t “politics”. “

They are so programmed they don’t even comprehend their talking points.

The some other companies (the article aborted suddenly):

Urban Outfitters: UO was labeled hypocritical after their CEO donated $13,000 to the campaign of anti-gay candidate Rick Santorum while the store sold “pro-gay” items.

HOW DARE THEY!

EXXON MOBIL: Well, that’s a given. They hate Gays and they are the cause of Global Warming, so they are a double threat.

“Exxon Mobil is the only Fortune 10 company that does not have a non-discrimination policy covering sexual orientation.”

WALMART: Big surprise. The most hated company by the LEFT, period.

“it has also associated with and donated to anti-gay organizations like Family Council Action Committee and the Christian Values Network.”

Are we starting to smell a trend here?  If you give to “pro-gay” causes and politicians you are good, if you ever gave to anyone who is even remotely against their political agenda, you’re a bigot and on the naughty list.

But it’s not about politics. 🙂

A-1 Storage (who?): A self-storage company in California.

“Owner Terry Caster and his family donated $693,000 to fight same-sex marriage in California back in 2008, earning a boycott from groups like Californians Against Hate.The Casters were the second largest contributors to Proposition 8…”
The defense of marriage act that passed, which means it’s automatically anti-gay and makes them bigots.

Next up: THE SALVATION ARMY!  Seriously…

“The seemingly wholesome organization harbors some deep anti-gay sentiments.Despite a PR push to refute their homophobic reputation, internal documents were leaked that confirm discrimination is alive and well at the Salvation Army.”

Leaked by a Liberal no doubt “heroically”.

So once again, if you disagree with a Leftist, you’re bigot. End of Discussion.

Alden Grove on Facebook response: I love this. It’s horrifically impressive how far into the sand, the clouds, and their own asses the “just live your life” people are. Do you have any idea how shaped the life you live is from the politics of the people who came before you?

Enjoy the sanctimony. The Left sure does. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

A Fool and his Freedom are soon Parted

Don’t fall for the ‘marriage equality’ sales pitch. It’s a deception.

Same-sex marriage is a notion that contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction. I doubt many have thought this through, with the ironic exception of the elites who have been pushing the agenda the hardest.

Most people are weary of it all and going along to get along, especially since dissent has become such a socially expensive proposition, almost overnight. That in itself should deeply concern anyone who values freedom of expression.

Sure, true believers scattered across the land really do think the entire project ends with allowing same-sex couples to marry. Most persist in the blind faith that a federal ban on the standard definition of marriage will have no negative effect on family autonomy and privacy. That’s a pipe dream.

The same-sex marriage agenda is more like a magic bullet with a trajectory that will abolish civil marriage for everyone, and in doing so, will embed central planning into American life. And that, my friends, is the whole point of it. Along with Obamacare, net neutrality, and Common Core, genderless marriage is a blueprint for regulating life, particularly family life.

The Rainbow’s Arc

Unintended consequences usually come about when we are ignorant or maybe lazy about a course of action. But we usually crash land after following an arc of logic, which in this case has gone largely undiscerned and unaddressed in the public square.

Americans are in a fog about how marriage equality will lead to more central planning and thought policing. This is partly because the media and Hollywood only provide slogans to regurgitate while academics and judges push politically correct speech codes to obey.

Let’s explore the fallout of that arc of faulty logic. Included below are some 15 of the gaping holes in the “marriage equality” reasoning that Americans have not thought through.

1. The Kids Are Not Alright

In March, six adult children from LGBT households filed amicus briefs opposing genderless marriage: see here, here, and here. You can read testimonials of many such children in a newly released anthology by Robert Oscar Lopez and Rivka Edelman, “Jephthah’s Daughters: Innocent Casualties in the War for Family ‘Equality.’”

Whenever a parent is missing—for whatever reason—a child feels a primal wound. In this respect, parents belong to their children more than children belong to their parents. We ought to recognize that privileges of civil marriage should ultimately exist for children, not for adults. Children have the right to know their origins and not to be treated as commodities. Same-sex parenting—which increasingly involves human trafficking, particularly with artificial reproductive technologies (see number eight)—deliberately deprives a child of a mother and/or a father. The “marriage equality” agenda requires that such children bear that burden alone and repress their primal wound in silence.

2. Love’s Got Nothing to Do with State Interest in Marriage

“Love is love” is an empty slogan when it comes to state interest in marriage. How two people feel about one another is none of the state’s business. The state’s interest is limited to the heterosexual union because that’s the only union that produces the state’s citizenry.

And it still is, whether the union happens traditionally or in a petri dish. Each and every one of us—equally and without exception—only exists through the heterosexual union. In any free and functioning society, there is a state interest in encouraging as much as possible those who sire and bear us to be responsible for raising us.

3. The Infertility Canard

Just as the state has no litmus test for feelings or motives, it has no litmus test for any heterosexual couple who do not produce children because of intent, infertility, or age. Conflating same-sex couples with childless or elderly heterosexual couples seems to be the fallacy of composition: claiming something must be true of the whole because it’s true of some part of the whole.

Sorry, but the heterosexual union, no matter how it takes place, is the only way any citizen exists, including intersex and transgender citizens. So recognizing that union without prejudice remains the only reason for state interest in marriage.

4. Same-Sex Marriage Will Settle Nothing

It’s only the starting point for a glut of philosophically related demands for state recognition and approval of many other types of relationships, including polygamy and incest. This will mark the sudden beginning of an even more sudden end for same-sex marriage, not so much because those other types of relationships prove immoral, but because they serve as exhibits for the argument that all civil marriage—including same-sex marriage—is unsustainable and discriminatory.

5. ‘Marriage Equality’ Opens the Path for ‘Unmarried Equality’

There’s a movement waiting in the wings called “unmarried equality,” which argues that all civil marriage should be abolished because it privileges married people over singles. If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, it will set the precedent for abolishing marriage. Far from getting the state out of the marriage business, it will invite the state to regulate all familial relationships, particularly those with children. Once the state doesn’t have to recognize your marriage, it is freer to treat your spouse and children as strangers to you.

6. Transgenderism Is a Big Part of This Package

Americans have not thought through the implications of same-sex marriage and how it is logically a big step to erasing all sex distinctions in law. If we become legally sexless, the implications are vast when it comes to how or whether the state will recognize family relationships such as mother, father, son, or daughter. There’s already a push to eliminate sex identification at birth, which could mean removing sex distinctions on birth certificates. This will seem logical because all gender identity non-discrimination laws already presume that everybody’s sex is something arbitrarily “assigned” to them at birth.

7. It’s an Open Invitation for State Licensing of Parents

If we allow the abolition of sex distinctions and civil marriage—both of which are written into the social DNA of same-sex marriage—we logically allow the state to gain greater control over deciding familial relationships. Civil marriage so far has presumed that a child born into a heterosexual union has the default right to be raised by his biological parents together. How can the presumption of maternity or paternity survive in a legal system that recognizes neither sex distinctions nor a marriage relationship?

The bellwethers are out there. MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris-Perry did a “Forward” spot for the Obama administration in which she stated that all children “belong” to communities, not families. Another friend of the Obama administration, gender legal theorist Martha Fineman, calls for state-subsidized care-giving units to replace marriage and the family.

8. Same-Sex Marriage Commodifies Children

You may think artificial reproductive technologies (ART) are fine as an avenue to obtain children for those unable to conceive. But in the context of genderless marriage, ART ramps up the potential for human trafficking. Check anonymousus.com to read testimonies of grief and loss felt by children who were conceived in this manner. Check the movies “Eggsploitation” and “Breeders” by the Center for Bioethics and Culture to hear stories of the exploitation of women in the industry. There is definitely an element of human bondage in all of this, particularly because human beings are being deliberately separated from their mothers and fathers, in a way that echoes the wounds of slavery’s separations and the search for one’s roots.

9. It Sets a Head-On Collision Course with Freedom of Religion

The handwriting is on the wall. You need only reflect on how a screaming mob managed to conjure up total surrender from Indiana Gov. Mike Pence so he would reject that state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Catholic Charities is closing its adoption services where same-sex marriage laws pressure them to reject their church’s teachings about marriage and family. Owners of businesses that serve the wedding industry are being forced to either scrap their consciences or shut their doors. Anti-discrimination lawsuits against churches that don’t perform same-sex marriages will undoubtedly increase.

10. It Sets a Collision Course for Freedom of Speech and Press

Campus speech codes. Social punishment. Firing Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla for discovering his thought crime of privately believing in marriage six years prior. The utter compliance of virtually every big business in America, every media outlet, every pundit who is permitted to have a voice in the public square.

11. It’s Especially On a Collision Course with Freedom of Association

I already mentioned that abolishing civil marriage, along with legal sex distinctions, puts the government in a better position to regulate familial relationships, and probably to license parents. If we think deeply about these things, it’s hard to avoid the fact that freedom of association begins with family autonomy, a place where the state is supposed to leave you alone in your most intimate relationships. It’s hard to see how freedom of association is not affected, especially when PC speech codes have everyone constantly checking their chit chat with neighbors, co-workers, and classmates. At Marquette University, staff were told that any conversation or remarks construed to be against same-sex marriage were to be reported to Human Resources, even if just inadvertently overheard.

12. Same-Sex Kills Privacy by Growing Bureaucracy

With the erosion of family autonomy practically guaranteed by the rainbow arc of same-sex marriage, private life will tend to evaporate, just as it always does in centrally planned societies. Distrust grows because people fear punishment for expressing dissenting views. The emphasis on political correctness in the name of equality, coupled with an ever-growing bureaucracy, is a perfect environment in which to percolate a surveillance society.

13. It’s Meant to Be a Global Agenda

The United States is already punishing countries and threatening to cut off aid if they don’t accept the LGBT agenda. This is especially true of developing countries, in which the whole idea is foreign to over 95 percent of the population. According to a report by Rep. Steve Stockman, corroborated by a Pentagon official, the administration held back critical intelligence from Nigeria which would have aided in locating girls kidnapped by Boko Haram. The new National Security Strategy recently released by the White House makes clear that the LGBT agenda is a global agenda. And it looks a lot like cultural imperialism of the worst kind.

14. It Promises a Monolithic Society of Conformity

In the past year or two, everyone with something to lose by opposing same-sex marriage—with the honorable exception of Eich—seems to have scuttled their principles. Five years ago, the American Psychological Association voted 157-0—that’s right, ZERO—to support genderless marriage. For an excellent assessment of what this sort of conformity means for a free society, read Brendan O’Neill’s article in Spiked, entitled “Gay Marriage: A Case Study in Conformism.” The agenda was imposed by elites, entirely due to a methodical blitzkrieg of programs and enforcement dictated from above. Same-sex marriage simply could not come about without suppressing dissent in all of our institutions.

15. Expect More Severe Punishment for Dissent

If you think the bullying of businesses, churches, and individuals who don’t get with the LGBT program now is bad, it promises to get much worse once codified. Is this really the sort of society you wish to live in? Where expressing an opinion from your heart on faith, family, marriage, relationships, love, or the very nature of reality—is routinely attacked as hate speech? Because that is exactly what you need to expect.

Justice Anthony Kennedy made it very clear in his words of the Windsor decision that any dissent on same-sex marriage was tantamount to animus. It is but a short step from presuming animus to punishing dissent.

So perhaps the biggest question hanging in the air is this: What will the authorities decide to do to dissenters?

The Tolerance Game

 This may not be as flashy as Hillary or Obama, but it still about Freedom and the intolerance of The Left that will come for you some day if you don’t do something about it. (anyone else find the banners ironic?) 🙂

Nothing says tolerance than being called the C-word for supporting religious freedom, or having a student-led petition started to have your banner removed at your respective school. That’s exactly what happened to Lindsey Kolb, a senior student at Missouri State University in Springfield, after she voiced her opinions in support of religious freedom a few weeks ago. At the time, the city was debating whether to add sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) to its nondiscrimination statutes.  Some, like Lindsey, felt the religious exemption wasn’t specific enough.

Yet, before we get into the liberal intolerance that was thrown at Kolb, let’s discuss a little more about the law’s aspects.

As the Springfield News-Leader reported, anyone found guilty of violating the ordinance would be served with a 180-day jail sentence and a $1,000 fine, though the city’s attorney said virtually all of these infractions would only result in a financial penalty. As for existing law, local columnists have come to the same scenario in question: bathrooms:

One thing that does change is that a business owner would not be able to preemptively kick someone out because the owner believes that person is a threat. As it stands now, if a business owner believes a person is in the “wrong” bathroom, the owner would have the right to tell the person to leave the business. With sexual orientation and gender identity protections in place, the person who is asked to leave would have the recourse to file a complaint with the Mayor’s Commission on Human Rights.

As for the religious exemption [emphasis mine]:

One ordinance suggested by the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Task Force included a broad religious exemption. Basically, any business owner could deny service if he or she did so on religious terms. However, the version of the ordinance the city adopted only exempts strictly religious organizations.For example, a church can deny employment to whomever it chooses, for any reason. A religious person, who owns a call center, shoe store, or any other such business, cannot.

And therein lies the controversy; a private business owner who is deeply religious would be forced to go against his own faith and beliefs. It’s the baker and the gay wedding cake scenario.

Kolb wrote an op-ed in the Standard on March 31, one week before the scheduled vote on the bill–in response to a satire piece that mocked Christians. Yet, it’s her final paragraph that struck at heart of the battles now raging over religious freedom laws:

My last point is to call for the entire community to engage in civil discourse regarding this topic. I ask you to consider both sides, read the bill, talk to your friends, talk to your family, do some research and come up with your own decision concerning your vote. Last week in The Standard, the attempt at making an argument for one side attempted to cease the conversation by using name-calling, making light of valuable political conversation and attacking one community with hopes that it will relieve tension on another community. This is not only unprofessional, unproductive and immature, but it is not held to the standards that our university has poured into our lives. Missouri State University is dedicated both to public affairs and creating educated persons. Let’s start having conversations now about important issues rather than turning to insulting tactics.

Trying to talk rational sense to The radical Left, now that’s just crazy!

On April 7, the ordinance failed by a narrow margin.* Nevertheless, the “Get Kolb” campaign was up and running.

They needed to lynch someone for losing. It couldn’t be them. Someone’s scalp had to pay for this injustice!!

Kolb said that the vitriol aimed at her included people telling her that she should commit suicide, along with other attacks laced with profanity and misogynist language (don’t be a cunt).

Kolb is former president of MSU’s College Republicans chapter and the State Chairwoman for the Missouri Federation of College Republicans, as well as a university ambassador, which explains one petition urging the school to remove her banner hanging on Carrington Hall–the main administrative building on campus.

From the petition’s description on Change.org, it says it doesn’t aim to make Kolb a “scapegoat,” (more like sacrificial goat to the God of  Progressive Liberalism) though it also says its impetus was grounded in “the things Lindsey has said in the past.” It’s an ideological mess [emphasis mine]:

My goal here is not to make Lindsey a scapegoat for the way the vote turned out yesterday [April 7] or attack her religious rights or right to free speech. The goal is to create dialogue that induces change here on campus and in our city. Yes, last night’s vote was disappointing, but the petition was not made because of the way things turned out, it was made because of the things Lindsey has said in the past that include the comments she made last night. I respect Lindsey’s right to say what she believes just as much as I ask anyone to respect my right to voice my opinion, however when one is the representative for something larger than themselves, it is important that their opinions and values align with those of the entity they represent. <Ours only> Missouri State claims to value its Public Affairs mission pillars of Ethical Leadership, Cultural Competence, and Community Engagement and each year chooses one pillar to highlight. This year, the chosen pillar is Ethical Leadership. In GEP classes, students are assigned projects to define and identify ethical leaders in our world. At SOAR, new students do group activities that represent our Public Affairs mission and one that I specifically remember is the one in regards to Ethical Leadership. My SOAR [Student Orientation, Advisement and Registration] group found that an ethical leader is one who has their own set of values but can recognize when the greater good requires them to set those values aside.…

Whenever Lindsey was approached in 2013 to be on the banner on Missouri State’s most recognizable building, she agreed. Through that agreement she also vowed to live our Public Affairs mission and be culturally competent, engage in her community, and be an ethical leader. For Missouri State to continue to endorse her discriminatory views is effectively showing that they do not in fact value ethical leadership. The goal of the petition is not to attack free speech or victimize Lindsey. The goal is to show that there are consequences to one’s speech whenever it is inflammatory and supports discrimination against those who the speaker represents.

Lindsey is not to blame for the loss for the LGBT+ community last night, but signing the petition can help change our campus and our city for the better. (which means we are going to sacrifice HER anyways for our political needs)

This classic American progressivism; we support free speech, just our version of free speech. At least they note that Kolb isn’t to blame for the failure of the ordinance since she has zero skin in the political game in Springfield.

“Personally, I don’t vote in Springfield. I vote in my home district. I advocated for the repeal because I believe in religious freedom. I believe that churches, businesses, and organizations, and people with religious convictions should be able to decide whom they serve,” she said.

Well, she’s in the majority. Overall, while Americans generally support gay marriage rights, a AP/GFK poll found that 57 percent think that a wedding-related business should be allowed to refuse service to a gay couple if it violates their religious beliefs.

In a poll conducted by Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research on behalf of the Family Research Council, they found 81 percent of Americans believed government “should leave people free to follow their beliefs about marriage as they live their daily lives at work and in the way they run their businesses.”

The Left and their false sense of Sanctimony and “outrage” would never TOLERATE such a thing. 🙂

Ironic is it not?

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Commander-in-Chief PETTY officer

There seems to be no end to the damage President Obama will inflict upon the nation of Israel. While wooing a genocidal regime in Tehran, this administration has treated our staunchest Middle East ally with a mix of pettiness, contempt and rage.

Following Benjamin Netanyahu’s huge election victory, Obama grumbled that it was time to “reassess” America’s relationship with Israel. Monday he began that effort when, for the first time ever, the U.S. delegation refused to speak in defense of Israel at the UN Human Rights Council. The council was adhering to the sinister-sounding Agenda Item 7, which mandates the discussion of “Israeli human rights violations” at every meeting.

Now the administration has shifted from mere rhetoric and diplomatic maneuvers to irreparable harm. The Jewish Press revealed that the U.S. has declassified Top Secret intelligence on Israel’s nuclear program:

The United States has just revealed a stunning amount of information on some of Israel’s the most closely guarded secrets: information about its military cooperation with America and 20 years’ worth of details on Israel’s nuclear technology development, up to the 1980s.

The 386-page report, composed in 1987 by the federally funded Institute for Defense Analysis, (an NGO that operates under the Pentagon), is titled “Critical Technological Assessment in Israel and NATO Nations.”

It was declassified by the Pentagon in early February – but oddly, the report has been redacted so as to black out or withhold everything the Institute wrote on America’s NATO allies – but to reveal all that American experts assembled in Israel.

Interestingly, no one reported the declassification other than two hostile news agencies that apparently were tipped off: Russia’s Putin-funded RT network and Iran’s mullah-funded Press TV. The Weekly Standard explains why this report’s release is such a big deal:

Israel has never admitted to having nuclear weapons. To do so might spark a regional nuclear arms race, and eventual nuclear confrontation.

The declassification is a serious breach of decades’ old understandings concerning this issue between Israel and its north American and certain European allies.

The Pentagon’s February declassification coincided with intense pressure on the Netanyahu government by the Obama administration, trying to force the Israeli prime minister to cancel a planned speech to Congress questioning the wisdom of a highly risky nuclear deal with the Iranian regime.

However, in the past 24 hours several media in the U.S. and elsewhere have now chosen to report on the February declassification by the Pentagon. This coincides with stepped up efforts this week by the Obama administration to weaken Israel’s deterrent capabilities, including leaking to the Wall Street Journal incorrect allegations that Israel directly spies on the U.S.

Consider me unsurprised that the guy who smiled and nodded his way through two decades of anti-semitic sermons and is friends with Israel haters like Rashid Khalidi and Bill Ayers is doing everything he can to undermine that nation. I wouldn’t be surprised by year’s end to see Obama refer to Israel as “the Zionist entity.”

It will be interesting to watch politically savvy Democrats distance themselves from Obama’s intensifying assault on the Middle East’s only democracy. Hopefully they won’t wait for Iran to get nukes before speaking up. (they will, and it’ll be GWB’s fault!)

Question for the comment section: Why should any ally trust the U.S. government now? (Jon Gabriel)

Under Obama, you can’t. Period. Neither can America.

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA now matter how narcissistic, petty,dangerous,  or unconstitutional it is no one is safe from THE EGO FROM THE DAWN OF TIME!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Have Your Gay Cake & Get Eaten Too!

A conservative legal firm is accusing a member of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission of comparing a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding to “slave owners and perpetrators of the Holocaust” in a new legal brief filed with a the Colorado Court of Appeals.

Part Two, below from Canada is even funnier: Lesbian Vs. Muslim in a  “Human Rights” Grudge Match!

The Alliance Defending Freedom, the firm representing Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips, the Christian baker who created a national controversy after refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, released a statement Monday that included controversial words attributed to civil rights commissioner Diann Rice

Rice’s purported comments were uttered during a commission hearing on July 25 last year and include the central claim that religion has, many times in the past, been used to harm and impede the rights of others.

“I would also like to reiterate what we said in … the last meeting [concerning Jack Phillips]. Freedom of religion and religion has been used to justify all kinds of discrimination throughout history, whether it be slavery, whether it be the Holocaust,” Rice said. “I mean, we can list hundreds of situations where freedom of religion has been used to justify discrimination. And to me it is one of the most despicable pieces of rhetoric that people can use – to use their religion to hurt others.”

So the Freedom Religion guaranteed in the First Amendment of the US Constitution is “discriminatory” and “despicable rhetoric”.

This is the Human Rights Education Association’s definition of slavery:

“To be a slave is to be controlled by another person or persons so that your will does not determine your life’s course, and rewards for your work and sacrifices are not yours to claim.”

Sounds like the Baker, to me. With the Gay Mafia and the Courts as the slave master.

Oh, as for that pesky Freedom of Speech & The Press, we turn to Andrea Mitchell- NBC NEWS:

“So why is it permissible to be as provocative as these anti-Muslim cartoons were?” Andrea Mitchell NBC News asked The French Ambassador about the Paris Terrorist attacks, before ominously adding, “This is a debate we’re having in the United States as well, you know.”
Yeah, why do you permit freedom of speech (offending someone) and freedom of the press? That’s debatable? Really??
These are “journalists” from the “news” Media whose freedom comes from the same place as yours does. Maybe we should debate still having it.

So let’s face it, to a Liberal The First Amendment is “offensive” and “discriminatory” and should just be gotten rid of altogether. 🙂

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!

Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Jeremy Tedesco said in a statement that these ideals reflect “alarming bias and hostility” toward Phillips’ religious beliefs and are specifically troubling in that they come from a member of a governmental commission that monitors how the baker can conduct his business in light of his faith.

“Commissioner Rice compared a private citizen who owns a small bakery to slaveholders and Holocaust perpetrators merely for asking that the state respect his right to free speech and free exercise of religion,” Tedesco said. ”Her comments suggest that others on the commission may share her view. This anti-religious bigotry undermines the integrity of the entire process and the commission’s order as well.”

As TheBlaze has previously reported, problems began for Phillips after he declined to make a wedding cake for Dave Mullins and Charlie Craig, a gay couple who approached him in 2012; they subsequently waged a complaint against Phillips, which has led to a legal battle over his refusal. 

Phillips told TheBlaze last June that he had no intention of providing confectionery services for gay and lesbian weddings even after Colorado’s Civil Rights Commission upheld a judge’s ruling that the baker was wrong to deny making the cake.

“I’m not going to make cakes for same-sex weddings,” he told TheBlaze at the time. “That violates my First Amendment speech … and my duty as a Christian abiding by my savior.”

Phillips said that he stopped taking all wedding cake orders last March, just three months after Judge Robert N. Spencer of the Colorado Office of Administrative Courts ruled against him, finding that he must serve gay couples.

In addition to making told he must not discriminate when making wedding cakes, the commission also said that he needed to “re-educate his staff that Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act means that artists must endorse same-sex marriage regardless of their religious beliefs,” according to Alliance Defending Freedom.

The ever “tolerant” Left.

Additionally, Phillips will need to file quarterly reports for a period of two years to detail which patrons were declined service along with the reason for that decision.

So now you get also (and this one makes cynical heart laugh) From Toronto, Ontario (2012) – The pinch line is at the end from 2014.

Lesbian Vs. Muslim in a  “Human Rights” Grudge Match!

So a lesbian walks into a Muslim barbershop, and asks for a “businessmen’s haircut”.

It sounds like the beginning of a joke, but it really happened, and now a government agency called the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario will hear her complaint.

Faith McGregor is the lesbian who doesn’t like the girly cuts that they do at a salon. She wants the boy’s hairdo.

Omar Mahrouk is the owner of the Terminal Barber Shop in Toronto. He follows Shariah law, so he thinks women have cooties. As Mahrouk and the other barbers there say, they don’t believe in touching women other than their own wives.

But that’s what multiculturalism and unlimited immigration from illiberal countries means. A central pillar of many immigrant cultures is the second-class citizenship of women and gays.

So if we now believe in multiculturalism, and that our Canadian culture of tolerance isn’t any better than the Shariah culture of sex crimes and gender apartheid, who are we to complain when Omar Mahrouk takes us up on our promise that he can continue to practise his culture — lesbian haircuts be damned?

He’s not the one who passed the Multiculturalism Act, and invited in hundreds of thousands of immigrants with medieval attitudes towards women and gays and Jews, etc. We did.

Mahrouk’s view is illiberal. But in Canada we believe in property rights and freedom of association — and in this case, freedom of religion, too.

But McGregor ran to the Human Rights Tribunal and demanded that Mahrouk give her a haircut.

In the past, human rights commissions have been a great ally to gay activists. Because, traditionally, gay activists have complained against Christians. And white Christians are the one ethnic identity group that human rights commissions don’t value, and that multiculturalism doesn’t include.

In recent years, Canadian human rights commissions have weighed a complaint about a women’s-only health club that refused a pre-operative transsexual male who wanted to change in the locker rooms.

They’ve ordered bed and breakfasts owned by Christian families to take in gay couples. They’ve censored pastors and priests who have criticized gay marriage. Gays win, because it’s a test of who is most outraged and offended.

But in the case of the Muslim barbers, the gay activists have met their match. If the test is who can be the most offended or most politically correct, a lesbian’s just not going to cut it.

Oh, McGregor is politically correct. But just not politically correct enough. It’s like poker.

A white, Christian male has the lowest hand — it’s like he’s got just one high card, maybe an ace. So almost everyone trumps him.

A white woman is just a bit higher — like a pair of twos. Enough to beat a white man, but not much more.

A gay man is like having two pairs in poker.

A gay woman — a lesbian like McGregor — is like having three of a kind.

A black lesbian is a full house — pretty tough to beat.

Unless she’s also in a wheelchair, which means she’s pretty much a straight flush.

The only person who could trump that would be a royal flush. If the late Sammy Davis Jr. — who was black, Jewish and half-blind — were to convert to Islam and discover he was 1/64th Aboriginal.

So which is a better hand: A lesbian who wants a haircut or a Muslim who doesn’t want to give it to her?

I’m betting on Mahrouk. And I predict that Muslim activists — not quiet barbers like Mahrouk, but professional Muslim busybodies — will start using human rights commissions more and more to push their way into places where they have no legal right, but where the human rights commissions are more than happy to engineer things for them, if they complain loud enough.

If I were a gay activist, I’d probably want to declare victory and shut down these human rights commissions right now.

In five years time, it won’t be gay activists forcing themselves into Christian B&Bs. It’ll be Muslim activists vetoing the gay pride parade.

Well, Sharia Law dictates I believe stoning these people to death. Now that’s quite a haircut… 🙂

But at least they were Politically Correct and “Multi-culturally sensistive” 🙂

Resolution: They bought each other off.

“Both Ms. McGregor and Mr. Mahrouk signed a confidentiality agreement that bars them from sharing any details — common practice when a conflict ends in mediation instead of moving on to an actual tribunal. But both expressed relief in the process.”

So the gay mafia lost this round and they used lawyers to force everyone to shut up about it.

“I probably wasn’t as stressed out as he was because I think there was more at stake for him,” Ms. McGregor said. “The resolution we came to I think is good. I’m satisfied with it,” she said, adding that she feels the process worked.

“I’m happy with the outcome.”

She got some legal “extortion” $$$$ no doubt. 🙂

When the story hit the media, Mr. Mahrouk declined to say much, but his colleague spoke with the Toronto Star:

“We live for our values. We are people who have values and we hold on to it. I am not going to change what the faith has stated to us to do. This is not extreme — this is just a basic value that we follow,” Karim Saaden, co-owner of the Terminal Barber Shop, told the paper. (Nationalpaper.com)

Funny, The Cake Baker said the same thing, only he’s “wrong”. 🙂

Fascinating.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Thou Shalt Not…Part II

Bacon, the Devil’s Food!

After Being Fined and Forced to Host Gay Weddings, Christian Farm Owners Make Drastic Decision That ‘Will Likely Hurt Their Business’

I want to thank the Egotistical Liberals for their “tolerance” and “sensitivity” for ruining the “choice” for everyone because they have to feel powerful and stroke their egos!

They go looking for people to sue and be “offended” by. It gives them power.

Yeah, they stuck it to those “hateful” “right wing Christians”! And I’m sure they are damn proud of themselves!

Congrats, you spoiled it for everyone. Your “discrimination” has hurt our “choice”. Your “freedom” to have your Lawyer-on-Speed-Dial crush anyone anytime some uppity non-Gay Liberal dares to get in your way is very “diverse” and loving of you.

Some are just more “equal” than others…. 🙂

Should the government be in the business of “re-educating” its citizens to change their moral beliefs?

No. But don’t tell that to the Sanctimonious Left!

A husband and wife who were fined $13,000 and told they could not discriminate against same-sex couples after refusing to allow a gay wedding on their New York farm have announced that they will “no longer host any wedding ceremonies on their property.”

“Going forward, [Cynthia and Robert Gifford] have decided to no longer host any wedding ceremonies on their property (other than the ones already under contract),” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney James Trainor told TheBlaze in a statement.

A judge ruled earlier this month that the Giffords’ farm is a public accommodation because they rent their space out, and they therefore must abide by New York anti-discrimination law.

“Since the order essentially compelled them to do all ceremonies or none at all, they have chosen the latter in order to stay true to their religious convictions, even though it will likely hurt their business in the short run,” Trainor said.

The family will continue hosting wedding receptions, but ceremonies — which have traditionally been hosted inside the Giffords’ home on the property or at another nearby location — will immediately cease. Same-sex receptions will be allowed on the grounds.

The move comes after Jennifer McCarthy and Melisa Erwin, a lesbian couple, approached Cynthia and Robert Giffords in 2012 and inquired about holding their nuptials at the Liberty Ridge Farm in Schaghticoke, New York.

The Giffordses, who are Christian and hold the belief that marriage is restricted to one man and one woman, said the couple was welcome to hold their reception on the property, but not the actual ceremony.

McCarthy and Erwin complained to New York’s Division of Human Rights, claiming they had been discriminated against as a result of their sexual orientation.

A judge subsequently ruled in their favor, rejecting the Giffords’ argument that the family owns a private business that is legally permitted to issue such refusals.

Judge Migdalia Pares ruled that Liberty Ridge Farm is a public accommodation because it rents its space and regularly collects fees from the public. The judge said the fact that the owners live on the premises does not mean that their business is private in nature.

Pares ordered that the Giffordses must abide by anti-discrimination regulations under New York’s Human Rights Law and must pay a $10,000 fine, as well as an additional $1,500 each to McCarthy and Erwin, Religion News Service reported.

A representative for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, told TheBlaze that in addition to the fines, New York State is forcing the Giffordses to” teach classes to their employees that impose the state’s view of marriage.” Gay marriage was legalized in the state in 2011.

The Alliance Defending Freedom said the Giffordses should have the right to hold and exercise their religious views without the “threat of government punishment.”

The Giffordses and their attorneys believe that the family has been punished for taking a biblical position and for exercising their First Amendment rights.

“The government should not force anyone to participate in or celebrate an event that violates their faith and beliefs. However, that’s exactly what the state of New York has done to the Giffords,” the firm said. “The Giffords serve all people with respect and care. They have hired homosexual employees and have hosted events for same-sex couples.”

The family has not yet decided if it will appeal the judge’s decision. (The Blaze)

The Giffords must pay a $1,500 mental anguish fine to each of the women and pay $10,000 in civil damages penalty to New York State. If they can’t pay in 60 days, a nine percent interest rate will be added to that total. Like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, the Giffords must also institute anti-discrimination re-education classes and procedures for their staff. (Daily Signal)

But what do I know…I’m just a “hater”…:)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

 

 

 

Reason

When people make statements that are completely at variance with reality and they continue to repeat them and you know they are not crazy, it’s only natural to wonder, what’s going on?

I’ve concluded that for some people on the left, political beliefs are like a false religion in which the parishioners become unable to distinguish myth from reality.

How else can you explain the statements of Donald Berwick, President Obama’s recess appointee to run Medicare and Medicaid, on his way out of office the other day? For starters, he claimed that the Affordable Care Act (what some people call ObamaCare) “is making health care a basic human right.” Then he went on to say that because of the new law, “we are a nation headed for justice, for fairness and justice in access to care.”

Now I can’t claim to have read everything in the 2,700-page law, but I can assure you that “making health care a right” just isn’t in there. Nor is there anything in the new law that makes the role of government more “just” or “fair.”

To the contrary, a lot of knowledgeable people (not just conservative critics) are predicting that access to care is going to be more difficult for our most vulnerable populations. That appears to have been the experience in Massachusetts, which Obama cites as the model for the new federal reforms. It’s not that Massachusetts tried and failed to expand access to care. It didn’t even try.

True enough, Massachusetts cut the number of uninsured in that state in half through Governor Romney’s health reform. But it didn’t create any new doctors. The state expanded the demand for care, but it did nothing to expand supply. More people than ever are trying to get care, but because there was no increase in medical services, it has become more difficult than ever to actually see a doctor.

And far from fair, the new federal health law will give some people health insurance subsidies that are as much as $20,000 more than the subsidies available to other people at the same level of income. In fact, the new system of health insurance subsidies is about as arbitrary as it can be.

Berwick isn’t alone in making bizarre statements about health reform. Right after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, administration health advisors Robert Kocher, Ezekiel Emanuel and Nancy-Ann DeParle announced that the new health reform law “guarantees access to health care for all Americans.”

In fact, nothing in the act guarantees access to care for any America, let alone all Americans. Far from it. Again, take Massachusetts as the precedent. The waiting time to see a new family practice doctor in Boston (63 days) is longer than in any other major U.S. city. In a sense, a new patient seeking care in Boston has less access to care than in just about every other U.S. city!

The disconnect between belief and reality is not unique to our country. With the enactment of the British National Health Service after World War II, the reformers claimed that they too had made health care a “right.” The same claim was made in Canada after that country established its “single-payer” Medicare scheme.

Yet in reality, neither country has made health care a right. They didn’t even come close. Neither British nor Canadian citizens have a right to any particular health care. A patient with a mysterious lump on her breast has no right to an MRI scan in either country. A cancer patient has no right to the latest cancer drug. A cardiac patient has no right to open heart surgery. They may get the care they need. Or they may not. Sadly, all too often they do not.

The British and the Canadians not only have no legally enforceable right to any particular type of care, they don’t even have a right to a place in line. For example, a patient who is 100th on the waiting list for heart surgery is not entitled to the 100th surgery. Other patients (including cash paying patients from the United States!) may jump the queue and get their surgery first.

Imagine a preacher, a priest or a rabbi who gets up in front of the congregation and gets a lot of things wrong. Say he misstates facts, distorts reality, or says other things you know are not true. Do you jump up from the pew and yell, “That’s a lie”? Of course not. But if those same misstatements were made by someone else during the work week you might well respond with considerable harshness. What’s the difference? I think there are two different thought processes that many people engage in. Let’s call them “Sunday morning” thinking and “Monday morning” thinking. We tolerate things on Sunday that we would never tolerate on Monday. And there is probably nothing wrong with that, unless people get their days mixed up.

In my professional career I have been to hundreds of health policy conferences, discussions, get-togethers, etc., where it seemed as though people were completely failing to connect with each other. One day it dawned on me that we were having two different conversations. Some people were engaged in Monday morning thinking, while everyone else was engaged in Sunday morning thinking.

Here’s the problem. Whether the beliefs are true or false, if people didn’t come to their religious convictions by means of reason, then reason isn’t going to convince them to change their minds.

This same principle applies to collectivism and health care. If people didn’t come to the false religion of collectivism by means of reason, you are not going to talk them out of it by means of reason. If you remember this principle, you will save yourself the agony of many, many pointless conversations. (Townhall.com)

And Boy have I had a few of those (!!) over the past 3 years!

Especially, one very strident liberal who refuses to acknowledge that the penalty for not purchasing health insurance (the mandate) levied by the IRS against your taxes is thus a tax and the Justice Department has defended it as such in court.

But since politically it can’t be a “tax” he’ll defend to end of the earth that this penalty is not from a tax, even though it is levied by the government’s tax collection agency.

I cite many case where the Justice Department called it a “penalty” in public but then a tax in court and he just says “no they didn’t”.

So I counter with:

In a Department of Justice (DOJ) legal brief  in the case of the State of Florida v. The Department of Health and  Human Services, the Obama Administration argues the individual mandate  (requiring Americans to buy a government-approved insurance plan even if  they can’t afford it) is a constitutional exercise of Congresss power  to collect taxes. 
July 17, 2010: It is a Tax In Court, the Obama  Administration defends the individual healthcare mandate as a tax,  painting the mandate requirement as an exercise of the governments  power to lay and collect taxes. Furthermore, Administration officials  say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of  the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being  challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private  organizations.

October 18, 2010 In Court:  Justice Department lawyers argue that the fine is a tax, which Congress  can impose under its constitutional taxing authority.

Ian H. Gershengorn, a deputy U.S. assistant attorney general, he said the penalty will act like a tax, paid  annually when individuals file their tax returns to the IRS.

October 19, 2010: It is a Tax When States suing the  federal  government over the constitutionality of the individual mandate  they  were answered with the response that Justice Department lawyers argue that the fine is a tax, which Congress can impose under its constitutional taxing authority.

And I get: “I noticed that in all of your articles about the court brief, none of them quote the court brief….”Again, just because the health insurance mandate penalty comes from the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes doesn’t make the health insurance mandate penalty a ‘tax’ — any more than the penalty for not filing a return can be called a ‘tax’.”

The doublespeak here is trying to disassociate the “penalty” from the TAX agency that would be collecting it and the fact that it is a tax. He knows it’s a tax, but ideologically that can’t be allowed  so it isn’t.

Thus, reason is not an option.

But there is something darkly satisfying about playing cat and mouse with liberals like this. I haven’t figured out exactly what though. I’m sure it’s a dark part of me as well.

But I’m reasonable enough to recognize it. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

I’ll hug him and squeeze him and call him Barack!
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

 

The Party of No!

Imagine this reversal of polarity:

The magnificent turmoil now gripping statehouses in Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana and others marks an epic political moment. The nation faces a fiscal crisis of historic proportions and, remarkably, our muddled, gridlocked, allegedly broken politics has yielded a singular clarity.

At the federal level, President Obama’s budget makes clear that Democrats are determined to do nothing about the debt crisis, while House Republicans have announced that beyond their proposed cuts in discretionary spending, their April budget will actually propose real entitlement reform. Simultaneously, in Wisconsin and other states, Republican governors are taking on unsustainable, fiscally ruinous pension and health-care obligations, while Democrats are full-throated in support of the public-employee unions’ crying, “Hell no.”

A choice, not an echo: Democrats desperately defending the status quo; Republicans charging the barricades. (Charles Krauthammer)

The Democrats are the Party of “No” now. 🙂

And not only that, but they celebrate the “heroic” Senators in Wisconsin and Indiana who fled their state to prevent government from functioning. Effectively, crippling the democratic process and a partial government shutdown. The Liberals and the Ministry of Truth have a “tingle up their leg” over it.

Imagine what the Ministry of Truth would have said if this had happened during the ObamaCare debate?

In the private sector, the capitalist knows that when he negotiates with the union, if he gives away the store, he loses his shirt. In the public sector, the politicians who approve any deal have none of their own money at stake. On the contrary, the more favorably they dispose of union demands, the more likely they are to be the beneficiary of union largesse in the next election. It’s the perfect cozy setup. (CK)

Unions only want what’s best for them. Screw you. Screw your kids. Screw everything. But don’t screw with them!

Government unions stymie education reform to protect their narrow interests — interests that don’t represent America’s students, parents and taxpayers.

America’s taxpayers want quality education at a reasonable cost. Education unions want guaranteed job security and the best benefits they can get.

So education unions have used their political clout to block the reforms that would most benefit the teaching profession: performance pay for teachers, tenure reform, and alternative teacher certification that allows more mid-career professionals and those without traditional teaching degrees into the classroom. They don’t want competition or the pressure to perform.

Education unions have also lobbied to prevent public-education employees from chipping in to cover the cost of their health insurance premiums. They prefer to leave that burden to taxpayers. They’ve also secured pension and health benefits that far exceed what most private-sector workers make.

These special-interest handouts don’t serve children or taxpayers, but unions fight fiercely to protect them. For example, the American Federation of Teachers spent more than $1 million last year to ensure that Vincent Gray — someone it knew would protect the failed educational status quo — defeated D.C.’s incumbent mayor, education reformer Adrian Fenty.

Education unions also continually oppose letting parents choose the school that best meets their child’s needs. Union political pressure resulted in the voucher program in our nation’s capital, the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, being phased out by the Obama administration. The scholarship program, which is now on life support, significantly improved graduation rates for low-income students in D.C.

Education unions are the most powerful force blocking meaningful education reform. They get the money to do this from millions of dues-paying members. In 28 states, teachers must pay union dues or lose their jobs. Unions spend these involuntary dues with little regard for teachers’ wishes.

The NEA’s own polling of public-school teachers found that 55 percent identified as more conservative than liberal. Yet more than 90 percent of the union’s campaign and political contributions go to Democrats — and we’re not talking chump change. The NEA and AFT spent more than $71 million on politics and lobbying in the 2008 election cycle. That’s roughly equal to public funding for a presidential campaign.

The result? Enormous amounts of money flowing into political campaigns to block education reforms. The good news is that some state leaders are beginning to push back on education unions and special interests. (DC)

And this special interest group gets to fund the people who are going to be sitting across the table from them in “negotiations” for “collective bargaining” and those people are dependent on them for re-election.

Sounds “fair” doesn’t it.

There are other states where this is rumbling, namely Ohio, Tennessee and Alabama.

The MoveOn.org “American Dream” rally in Sacramento produced one of the day’s more volatile moments. A man wearing a  Teamsters Local 439 jacket launched major body-check action on a Tea Party member. The union man with a bullhorn,was yelling across the street at the Tea Party activists, calling them “fascists.” Then one of the Tea Party activists, also bullhorn equipped, replied, “We pay your salary!”.So the “civil” union thug crossed the street and physically pushed the tea party member.
Because of it, Sacramento Police officers cited Richard Andazola for battery.

But don’t worry, it’s the Tea Party that is full of Racists and violent nutjobs. 🙂

The Mainstream Media/Ministry of Truth will see to it. Just ask the writers and producers of CBS’s The Good Wife where they just aired an episode where the Tea Party “bad guy” was also a “racist” and then a Democrat strategist on FOX defended it (paraphrase-because I was watching it- “there are just some people in the tea party that just can handle the fact the president is black”)

It just an accepted truth by many on the left that the Tea Party is racist simply because the president is Black. It can’t be anything else!

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/megyn-kelly-hosts-fiery-debate-over-racist-portrayal-of-tea-party-in-cbs-drama/

So just remember children, Raising taxes is good, Class Warfare is the only Politically Correct warfare allowed by the Left, Public Sector Unions funding Democrats with taxpayer money is good and if you disagree you’re a racist!! 🙂

Another Great Union Moment: What should we do to get America’s economy back on the road to prosperity? Raise taxes, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka suggests.

Trumka is a frequent guest at the White House.

In 2009, Wisconsin’s Democratic governor and Democratic Legislature passed legislation that raised taxes and fees by about $1.2 billion over three years. State lawmakers approved the bill on the very day it was introduced, with no public hearing. (Townhall)

This would be the crew that left a massive budget deficit for Gov. Walker but now blame him for trying to deal with it! And have complained bitterly that he wanted to “cram” the bill down their throats!

Hmmm..something vaguely familiar about that…. 🙂

Move.ong Org (co-founded by Socialist Billionaire George Soros) had their Whine & Cheese Saturday yesterday were they were going to make you afraid of cutting of their drugs (taxpayer’s money).

I Liked this one:

Rally in Los Angeles kicks off with union member screaming, “Let’s hear it for Obama!” ::crowd cheers:: “It rhymes with ‘yo mama!” ::confused silence::

Another speaker: “Tax the rich, not the workers! Tax the rich, not the workers!”

Class Warfare and Civil War are a very healthy on the LEFT.

ST Paul, MN: “You can’t have a democratic society without a strong union in the workplace,” one speaker notes.

These would be the same people who want to eliminate secret ballots and also “negotiate” with the people they put in power. Very “democratic”.

‘Ticked Turbin’: Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., praises Caesar Chavez for fighting for human rights.  Collective bargaining is a “basic human freedom,” Durbin says, a “right” Americans have “died for.”

So why then, Dick, were Federal Employees Unions banned from collective bargaining by Democrats in 1978??  (see yesterday’s blog for details).

Former Obama campaign employee and political appointee stands to speak in D.C. “This is not about Republicans and Democrats.  This is about a handful of billionaires… trying to take away all of our rights and all of our income.”

Just gotta drink from the sweet milk of Class Warfare.

By the way, the D.C. demonstration was organized by the International Socialist Organization.

Be afraid:

Jon Stewart is a significant source of news, particularly for younger viewers, although he insists he is simply a comedian. According to Pew Research, 16 percent of American said they regularly watched the Daily Show or it’s spin-off, The Colbert Report, and these viewers scored in the highest percentile of knowledge of current affairs.

Be afraid!

Sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words. Brought to you by the brain trust at the SEIU, the public sector union that visits the White House more than any other. (Notice the spelling)

SEIUAmerica

Obama’s Democrats have become the party of no. Real cuts to the federal budget? No. Entitlement reform? No. Tax reform? No. Breaking the corrupt and fiscally unsustainable symbiosis between public-sector unions and state governments? Hell no. (CK)

Armageddon awaits.

In the Democrat view, it’s all about them.

In the Republican View, it’s timidly about the future.

What is it in your View?

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Astroturf & Notes From The Left

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Doctors in white coats are standing outside the Wisconsin capitol in Madison, giving away fake doctor’s notes the way shirts are given out at basketball games. They’re a disgrace to our profession.

The news not only offends my professional pride and code of ethics, it also strikes me as a violation of their license to practice medicine.

The Wisconsin State Medical Examining Board of the Department of Regulation and Licensing should suspend these doctors for violating their Hippocratic Oath as well as their professional responsibility.

The 12.6 percent share of health-insurance costs that the new Wisconsin bill asks for from public employees is paltry by comparison to the 50 percent or more that many private employers now ask.

But if the doctors at the University of Wisconsin and the Medical College of Wisconsin who are writing these notes are so concerned about teachers and other employees being able to afford their health care, I’d suggest that these doctors (if they really are so altruistic) provide care to these public servants for free.

Are these disgraces to the profession unaware that the state of Wisconsin (as well as other states) is going bankrupt — even before ObamaCare forces huge new Medicaid costs on them?

The Wisconsin fake-note writers might also note that federal anti-trust law forbids physicians from engaging in collective bargaining or work stoppages. This law serves a purpose — it protects the American public from greed. The health of our patients would be threatened if we could go on strike, just as the education of the students of these protesting teachers is at stake here.

These doctors should value their medical degree more, before they lose the chance to use it to see actual patients.

Dr. Marc K. Siegel is a practicing internist in New York and a Fox News medical contributor. (NY Post)

Liberals don’t care. The law doesn’t apply to them.

But you know the Left is worried because now THEY HAVE A POLL to use as a Talking Point!!

It was conducted by the AFL-CIO, a Union. Guess what it said?

The Voters are with the protesters and hate Gov. Walker!!

I know, you’re shocked that a leftist poll done by a Union would side with the Union. It’s just so amazingly coincidental.

BTW:Average Salary In Wisconsin: $46,390
Salary raise last year: 4.7%
Salary raise over 10 years: 21.5%

The Daily Caller has broken out the salaries and benefits of teachers who have publicly entered the debate by commenting to the press.

Wisconsin’s 2010 Teacher of the Year, Leah Lechleiter-Luke of Mauston High School, told CNN the budget changes would force her to look for additional part-time work.

“When people say that public sector employees live high off the hog, I’d like to share that for 13 of my 19-year teaching career I have held a part-time job either in the summer or teaching night class at the local technical college,” Lechleiter-Luke told CNN. “In addition to tightening the belt even more and crossing our fingers that nothing breaks, I will need to find part-time work again.”

Lechleiter-Luke makes $54,928 in base salary and $32,213 in “fringe benefits,” which include health insurance, life insurance and retirement pay. (which she currently doesn’t pay for at all!)

Brad Lutes and his wife, Heather Lutes, told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz that Walker’s budget would hit them twice as hard.

“Having to explain to an 8- and 10-year old that the governor of your state basically wants to take money away from dad and mom? It’s just really, really frustrating,” Brad Lutes told Schultz.

He makes $49,412 in base salary with $27,987 in fringe benefits and his wife makes $50,240 with $9,413 in benefits. That’s $137,052 annually between the two of them.

ASTROTURF SALES SKYROCKET IN MADISON

The Community Agitater-In-Chief, Barack Obama, has sent his minions onto the battlefield to crush the State of Wisconsin’s government with his own apparatchiks and his narcissistic Union thugs.

All in the name of the children, and freedom of speech, of course. 🙂

So the teachers get fake doctor’s notes so they don’t have to show up and do their job and mobs of the Agitators minions shout down anyone who disagrees with them.

They have hateful, uncivil discourse and immature signs but don’t you dare call it hateful, uncivil, and immature because liberals are never hateful,uncivil or immature. 🙂  Just ask them.

And of course, they are geniuses and superior to everyone, especially YOU.

“The unions are the people who brought us a weekend. If we don’t do this now, our children will not have a weekend!” —One Protestor yelled out!

So the 88% of you who aren’t in a Union, you need bow down and kiss the ass of every Union member because they have brought you weekends!! Hallelujah!!

So why does anyone work on “the weekend” because the Unions brought it to you? Must be greedy capitalist pigs!

“We need to make sure that as loud as the voices are in the capital, we don’t let them overpower the voices of the tax payers I was elected to represent. We are willing to take this as long as it takes, because in the end, we are doing the right thing, and for us, we have to do this.”

There is so much wrong with how liberals go about attempting to exercise power. Teachers leave their work to hang out at the capitol to try to harangue the duly elected government? The schools they are supposed to be working in are closed down, the kids no longer having a place to go and their parents now responsible to stay home with them or find some other arrangement?

The Democrats that are supposed to be a functioning part of the government decided to leave the state they are supposed to be helping to govern and hid in Illinois to prevent the government from being able to move forward legislatively, making themselves a tyranny of the minority. In addition, the ‘protesters’ are now going to the home of the governor and scaring his family. These are the same tactics the union thugs did with the AIG execs.

A CNN reporter asked one of the protesters:

“You talk about coming to the table.. the governor coming to the table. Do you think it was the right tactic for the Democratic senators not to come to the table.”

At which point the CNN reporter was shouted down with

“United we stand. UNITED WE STAND. UNITED WE STAND…”

Nice answer. And these folks are teaching our kids? These people are an embarressment. The people of Wisconsin are being threatened by a thuggish political state.  (WThe)

Funny, That was the slogan of Ross Perot in the 1990’s, but that was evil. 🙂

American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees: $43,337,565 in political contributions in the last 12 years 98% Democrat.

National Education Assn: $32,021,910 93% Democrat.

American Federation of Teachers:  $28,731,591 98%-Democrat

Over a $100 million in 12 years!!

That’s a lot of dues. AFSCME was founded in Wisconsin.

So is it any wonder that the Community Agitator-in Chief would be very swift and decisive to save his own apparatchiks but dither like a person with Alzheimer’s on the Middle East?

No. But the left will use it for their own spin…

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: All right, one quick last question. When you make the reference to Egypt, you aren’t saying that the conditions that the Wisconsin teachers are teaching under with this new — new bill or without it is remotely like Egypt, or are you?

STATE SEN. LENA TAYLOR, D-WIS: No, what I’m saying in particular, Greta, is that in Egypt, if you look, after they overthrew their ruler, they had some specific rallies and protests, and one of the ones that they had was on workers’ rights. How ironic is that, right?

Sen. Taylor also said: I have to do what I have to do so that the people of Wisconsin can have an opportunity to be heard and that this bill is not rammed so rapidly that they have no idea what’s going on.

My immediate reaction to this was then Speaker Queen Pelosi’s: As the business community and more public polling shows opposition to ObamaCare, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tells us, “[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

But the Senate Democrats in Wisconsin are hiding out in Illinois (undoubtedly being paid by the Unions, George Soros, or the DNC) because they haven’t got the balls to face the democratic process when they aren’t the majority.

So enter the Astroturf:

We now know that Organizing for America (O.F.A) (Obama’s 2008 election campaign tactical team) and the Democrat Party have been hard at work supporting this protest. Ben Smith wrote this on February 17:

O.f.A Wisconsin’s field efforts include filling buses and building turnout for the rallies this week in Madison, organizing 15 rapid response phone banks urging supporters to call their state legislators, and working on planning and producing rallies, a Democratic Party official in Washington said.

And so I ask, who are the “Astroturf activists” now? Those people on the streets are not there as citizens, but as members of a powerful interest group, gathered to petition government for special treatment, with the DNC and Organizing for America coordinating the events on the ground from their offices in Washington DC.

The Astroturf activists on the streets of Madison may think they are helping their cause, but the American people are watching. And they are judging–judging them and those officials we elected to serve taxpayer rather than union interests.

America’s Organizer in Chief, President Obama, weighed in on the issue last week, calling Governor Walker’s actions an “assault on the unions.” You bet they are. And if the Democrats get this issue wrong like they got ObamaCare wrong, they’ll be hearing from the American people once again in 2012.

And this time, it just might cost them the U.S. Senate and the White House. (DC)

Michelle Malkin: Welcome to the reckoning. We have met the fiscal apocalypse, and it is smack dab in the middle of the heartland.

As Wisconsin goes, so goes the nation. Let us pray it does not go the way of the decrepit welfare states of the European Union.

The lowdown: State government workers in the Badger State pay piddling amounts for generous taxpayer-subsidized health benefits.

Faced with a $3.6 billion budget hole and a state constitutional ban on running a deficit, new GOP Gov. Scott Walker wants public unions to pony up a little more.

He has proposed raising the public employee share of health insurance premiums from less than 5% to 12.4%. He is also pushing for state workers to cover half of their pension contributions.

To spare taxpayers the soaring costs of byzantine union-negotiated work rules, he would rein in Big Labor’s collective bargaining power to cover only wages unless approved at the ballot box.

As the free-market MacIver Institute in Wisconsin points out, the benefits concessions Walker is asking public union workers to make would still maintain their health insurance contribution rates at the second-lowest among Midwest states for family coverage.

Moreover, a new analysis by benefits think tank HCTrends shows that the new rate “would also be less than the employee contributions required at 85 percent of large Milwaukee-area employers.”

Obama Speaks Up

This modest call for shared sacrifice has triggered the wrath of the White House-Big Labor-Michael Moore axis. On Thursday, President Obama lamented the “assault on unions.”

AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union bosses dubbed Walker the “Mubarak of the Midwest,” while their minions toted posters of Walker’s face superimposed on Hitler’s.

Moore goaded thousands of striking union protesters to “shut down” the “new Cairo” while the state’s Democratic legislators bailed on floor debate over the union reform package.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan spurned the opportunity to condemn thousands of Wisconsin public school teachers for lying about being “sick” and shutting down at least eight school districts across the state to attend Capitol protests (many of whom dragged their students on a social justice field trip with them).

Instead, Duncan defended teachers for “doing probably the most important work in society.” Only striking government teachers could win federal praise for not doing their jobs.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that bringing American union workers into the 21st century in line with the rest of the work force is tantamount to dictatorship.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that by walking off their jobs and out of their classrooms, they are “putting children first.”

If ever there was proof that public unions no longer work in the public interest, this is it.

Big Labor dragoons workers into exclusive representation agreements, forces them to pay compulsory dues that fatten Democratic political coffers and then has the chutzpah to cast itself as an Egyptian-style “freedom” and “human rights” movement.

Meanwhile, union leaders elsewhere are quietly forcing their low-wage members to share the sacrifice in order to preserve teetering health funds.

In New York state, Skidmore College campus janitors, dining service workers and other maintenance employees received late notice from the SEIU that 4.15% of their gross earnings will now be deducted from their paychecks to cover the cost of the health plan provided through the behemoth 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund. (If the name sounds familiar, it’s because this is one of several privileged SEIU affiliates that has received an ObamaCare waiver.)

These workers are forced to join the union in order to preserve their jobs, and unlike non-union workers, they are locked into a single health plan.

The SEIU has now decreed that they must pay new fees to include spouses on their plans and has hiked employee co-pays for doctor visits and prescription drugs.

What’s necessary for New York union workers is necessary for Wisconsin union workers — and for the rest of the protected union-worker class in bankrupt and near-bankrupt states across America.

The “persuasion of power” so ruthlessly and recklessly exercised by the SEIU and its thuggish allies must be broken by the moral courage of fiscal discipline.

It’s now or never.

The Top Ten ways to know if you’re in a Public Sector Union By Rod Pennington

10.) You take a week off to protest in Wisconsin and your office runs better.

9.) On a snow day when they say “non-essential” people should stay home you know who they mean.

8.) You get paid twice as much as a private sector person doing the same job but make up the difference by doing half as much work.

7.) It takes longer to fire you than the average killer spends on death row.

6.) The worse you do your job, the more your boss avoids you. (and the more raises you get)

5.) You think the French are working themselves to death.

4.) You know by having a copy of the Holy Koran on your desk your job is 100% safe.

3.) You spend more time at protest marches than at church.

2.) You have a Democratic congressman’s lips permanently attached to your butt.

1.) You pay more in union dues than you do for your healthcare insurance.

“The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” — John Maynard Keynes

The particular defunct economist who most dominates the minds of the Obama administration and the Democratic Party is Keynes himself.

But…shhhh..that’s a secret….so pass a note to the one next to you.

Don’t worry, the teacher will not catch you, she is too busy protesting to keep her greed to actually be in the classroom teaching.

MORE “CIVIL” DISCOURSE From Wisconsin Union Protesters:

Doubtful that any of the left-wing media is covering much of this.

One of many profane protest signs at the Madison, WI ‘sick out’ protest… great education for the students who were brought by their teachers.

And we end as it began, with Astroturf:

This sign cracks me up — it was obviously not grass-roots but professionally mass-produced, likely by the DNC or the unions: “Fox News will lie about this.”

Gee, I think we know who needs that new Center for Civility in Public Discourse that The University of Arizona just opened.

Or would that end up being an episode of A&E’s “Intervention”? 🙂

 

Obamacare Update

obamacare.jpg

The number of companies granted waivers to avoid ObamaCare has grown to 111. That’s 78 more companies and UNIONS since the first waivers were handed out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96Uu_tI0hTw

Yep, I guess we did need to “pass the law to see what’s in it” and now the waivers are coming thick and fast. Gee, If it was so great why are we waiving it again?? 🙂

Here’s the actual List:  http://www.hhs.gov/ociio/regulations/approved_applications_for_waiver.html

What’s fun is the list is peppered with lots of  Unions, HealthCare companies, restaurant and fast food chains.

Oh look, it’s Obama’s apparatchiks! What a shocker! 😦

We are from the Government and we are here to save you! 🙂

On November 2nd, the American people’s voice was heard at the ballot box. Voters in Arizona, Oklahoma and Missouri overwhelmingly voted for ballot measures stopping the enforcement of the individual mandate — one of the key provisions in Obamacare. The mandate, which takes effect in 2014, will force Americans to buy government-approved health care insurance whether they want to or not. Somehow, the Obama administration thinks this new mandate will boost our ratings in the first ever review by the United Nations Human Rights Council.

The administration claims that the new health care law “makes great strides” towards improving human rights in America. However, Obamacare is a blatant violation of human rights. Many young and healthy Americans who may rationally choose not to purchase expensive government-sanctioned health insurance will be forced to pay steep fines or ultimately face jail time. In the end, Noble Peace Prize-winner Barack Obama appears willing to throw an innocent person in prison for not purchasing the right health insurance. How, again, does that advance human rights?

Such use of government force is the kind of human rights violation that we are more accustomed to seeing from UN Human Rights Council members like Saudi Arabia, China and Cuba. We cannot allow blatant human rights abuses to occur in America, the land of the free.

In our land of religious freedom, consider the Christian Scientist, whose faith precludes him from seeing doctors. Would it not be a human rights violation for the government to force him to pay for health insurance that he doesn’t want or need and will not use?

Listed in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the “right” to health care. This is a perversion of the idea of rights. As the Declaration of Independence states, Americans have the unalienable right to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Note that none of these things require anything of anybody else. As Leonard Peikoff once put it, “they are rights to action, not to rewards from other people.” In other words, Americans have the right to do as they please as long as they do not harm others, but do not have the right to a vacation with the president in Martha’s Vineyard.

Health care does require something from someone else. It either requires time from a doctor or nurse or money from someone to pay for such services. To say we have the right to someone else’s time or services takes us back down a dark path in American history that most would not want to travel.

Some believe the government can just pay for such services at no harm to anyone. But the government does not have any wealth of its own. Every penny that the government redistributes was first forcibly taken away from a taxpayer. It is practically universally agreed upon that stealing from others is an immoral action. While Obamacare was passed under the guise of compassion, there is absolutely no virtue in spending others people’s money without their consent, no matter what the intention.

I urge everyone, including the millionaires who make up the Senate, to reach into their own pockets to donate money to help poor people in need of health care. Voluntarily donating to charities is a commendable action that should be encouraged. On the other hand, compulsory government “charities” — because they are in fact just taxes — violate human rights by coercing people to either pay or face harsh prison time.

We must step back and decide what kind of society we wish to live in. One where the government uses its monopoly on the legal use of physical force to coerce Americans to pay for mandatory government-approved insurance and threatens to jail those who refuse to do so? Or one that respects human rights and promotes peace by allowing Americans to make their own decisions regarding where their hard-earned money goes?

Fortunately, unlike many of the worst offenders on the UNHRC that will be judging our human rights record, the United States is still a democracy. As shown in the recent fair and free election, voters overwhelmingly oppose the government takeover of the healthcare system. We would be wise to listen to the message of the American people instead of a governmental body that includes some of the world’s worst human rights abusers. Ultimately, the American people will prove to be the ultimate protector of our own human rights.

Matt Kibbe is president and CEO of FreedomWorks, a nationwide grassroots organization fighting for lower taxes, less government and freedom and the author of Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto.

And just a final note, from the liberal Left’s favourite source for how wonderful ObamaCare will be…someday…they believe…they hope…they have faith in their own righteousness.

The Congressional Budget Office Long-Term Budget Outlook offers a frightening picture of the scale of America’s national debt. Under its alternative fiscal scenario, the CBO projects that US debt could rise to 87 percent of GDP by 2020, 109 percent by 2025, and 185 percent in 2035. While much of Europe, led by Britain and Germany, are aggressively cutting their deficits, the Obama administration is actively growing America’s debt, and has no plan in place to avert a looming Greek-style financial crisis.

Political Cartoon by Nate Beeler

A Letter from The President

Political Cartoon by Steve Kelley

From the Desk of President B. Hussein Obama:

Dear American Voters,

I want to take this opportunity to briefly explain why you simply MUST get out and vote this November 2 in support of our many fine Democratic candidates. There are several good reasons for you to do so, and I would like to touch on a few of them at this time.

First of all, recent polls suggest that former President Bush is now running neck and neck with Me in public opinion polling. This suggests that the Republicans have hatched a secret plan to bring that hateful and hated warmonger cowboy back as President! Think about it: first the Republicans take over the Congress, then they bring back Bush! It is definitely possible that they have hatched just such a nefarious scheme. Some of you have suggested to me that this is not possible due to something about “the Constitution” and “an amendment”. Quite frankly, I’ve never actually had the time to set down and read the thing (sooooooo ancient and boring, and I’ve got a lot of golf to catch up on) so I’ll just have to take your word for it. But even so, I can tell you that the constitution never stops me from doing what I want to, so why would the Republican be any different? So let’s get out the vote to defeat Bush!

Not only do we need to defeat Bush, we need to show the world that you people are over being the bunch of racist rednecks you have been in the past. Let’s face it, up until two years ago this was the most racist, backward, bigoted, redneck country on the face of the Earth. Two years ago you finally managed to get something right for the very first time. If you turn around and change your minds now that will totally blow it! Do you really want our great friends in Saudi Arabia, China, Pakistan and Turkey having to look down on you again because you can’t get it together on human rights? And how can you get it together on human rights if you reject Me, the Great Unifier of All Enlightened Ones? So get out the vote to show that you’re finally catching up with the Yemenis on human rights!

As to you seniors, let Me remind you of what you have to be reminded of every election cycle: If the Republicans win they’ll take away you’re Social Security and Medicare, and probably institute death panels to boot! That’s right, if you don’t vote Democrat there will be a freeze on your annual Cost of Living Adjustment for Social Security. Medicare will be stripped of funding, and you will be left out in the cold, eating cat food and waiting to die. So get out and vote for My party to make sure that there are no Medicare cuts (even if they were in the bill, all $500 Million of them), no Social Security freezes (even though we just froze them), and no death panels!:)

Finally, I expect you to do all you can to ensure My victory in November. You need to vote Democrat. You need to take your friends and family and have them vote Democrat instead. Maybe you could offer them a prize or incentive to get out and vote for Me. Many of you have pets (especially you “eccentric” senior ladies and your cats). Well remember, pets are people too! Just go down to your local Democratic Party HQ and they’ll make sure fluffy gets her absentee ballot. They can even fill it out for you!

Dead people in Chicago, may also apply. But Military personnel may not (they are evil and shouldn’t be allowed to vote). It was mere coincidence that the states that missed the mandated deadline were all liberal states like Illinois and New York.
Looking forward to seeing your smiling faces at my next rally. I need some good fainters for on-camera shots.

Your President for Life, (With ObamaCare that’s very Literally True)

B. Hussein Obama

P.S. I really hate to have to say it, but some of these polls I’ve seen force me to bring it up. Are you a bunch of racists? If not, then it’s time to prove it. Remember, vote Democrat to prove you are not a gun-toting, Bible-clinging, racist, homophobe, xenophobe, Islamophobic, redneck who wants to kill old people and children and go back to the old United States of Amerikkka. (a Blogger named Booger with a few additions by me.)

Obama & Co. don’t care about how hypocritical they look. The blog trashing the Chamber, “Think Progress,” is a project of the Center for American Progress. The Center doesn’t disclose its donors. Moreover, they’ve obviously forgotten the controversy in 2008 when thousands of dollars were pouring into Obama’s Internet coffers from an address in “GA.” The Obama folks said they thought that was “Georgia,” but it was Palestinian money coming from the Gaza Authority (as in the Palestinians).

Still, the network reporters tripped over themselves last week to sell the Obama storyline that Democrats were being swamped by ads from “special interests” that didn’t disclose their donors. Team Obama blames this scenario on the evil Supreme Court, and their ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission. CBS morning anchor Harry Smith said “thanks to recent Supreme Court decisions,”  a lot of money is pouring in, “especially on the Republican side. Some people suggest that this decision has allowed  all this money to come in and literally takes these elections out of the hands of the voters.”

Notice the double standard there. When Republicans are winning the battle in the polls and in the campaign coffers, voters are losing. When Democrats are winning, democracy has triumphed.(Brent Bozell)

So, vote for the Democrats, a triumph of Orwellian “reason” over common sense.

Why?

Because if you don’t your toothless grandma will be pennyless, homeless and have to live on other people’s dog food if the Republicans win!! 🙂

After all, we are Hope & Change.

And you don’t want to be a Racist, now do you?

Yes You Can. 🙂

Nuts to You

This is my kind of pizza!

I would add the ObamaCare Special: “I’m Sorry that’s bad for your Health, how about a nice organically grown  salad instead? no dressing, of course that’s evil fat”

But if you insist, that will $1,000.00 (That’s 992.00 for your Health insurance cost and 8.00 for the pizza with $50 per topping extra) 🙂

The Stimulus Pizza:  $1 Trillion dollars. And they serve you an empty plate because it will do nothing in the end so why bother but if you don’t buy it, the economy will crash!

The Mexican Pizza: If you don’t buy it you’re a Racist!

The Ground Zero Pizza: Islamic toppings but if you object you’re a Bigot!

Ever notice, Liberals are always wanting to point to a “few nuts” of their opponents as the mainstream way all of them are.

But you point to their “nuts” and you’re racist or a bigot for pointing to a “few nuts” as indicative of all of them.

Take Radical Islam. You point to the ground Zero Mosque and you are just overgeneralizing you bigot, but when they point to the 1 guy in 300,000 tea partiers who has a “nut” sign that’s indicative of the whole movement.

And the Liberal Media will be right their to ignore the Left’s “nuts” and 24/7 specials on the on the other “nut” (who may even be a plant by the Left to make it look like a “nut”). The Ministry of Truth really doesn’t care about silly little details like that.

Now that’s “journalism”. 🙂

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

Now, this was funny, to a cynic like me.

The Federal government has turned Arizona in as a Human Rights abuser (for crimes that haven’t actually been committed but because they COULD be committed) for wanting to enforce immigration laws and if we pull people over legally and then ask them if they are citizens.

The Horror! The Racism! Evil! Pure Evil!

So, now we get this from The Progressive Liberals Bible, The New York Times:

The Lake Shore Limited runs between Chicago and New York City without crossing the Canadian border. But when it stops at Amtrak stations in western New York State, armed Border Patrol agents routinely board the train, question passengers about their citizenship and take away noncitizens who cannot produce satisfactory immigration papers.

That’s right. The Feds can do the racial profiling (“your papers please”) but if anyone else does it, you’re a racist and human right abuser!

Or as two lawyers on The O’reilly factor last night said when ask what’s the difference? They both said in near-unison, “It’s the Federal government not the States”.

So yet again, if the government wants to selectively enforce the law you aren’t allowed to protest or object and you sure as hell can’t do it yourself! God Forbid!

We are the Government and we are here to protect you. Doesn’t that swell your heart with Hope and love and peace. 🙂

“Are you a U.S. citizen?” agents asked one recent morning, moving through a Rochester-bound train full of dozing passengers at a station outside Buffalo. “What country were you born in?”

And since all the leftist think those kind of questions are racist, except when they are doing it of course.

When the answer came back, “the U.S.,” they moved on.

So if you are an illegal, all you have to do is lie and the liberals will just move on.

It’s not like if they arrest you and you have no criminal record that they will deport you. The ICE policy detailed in an earlier blog details that you’re not a “priority” so they will just let you go EVEN IF you are arrested for being here illegally. They don’t really care.

So this is just a game. They can claim they caught X number of illegals. They just don’t mention they let most of them go afterwards. Details…Details…Details….

The deportation of criminals is up. The dismissal of cases against “non-criminal” (which is laughable on it’s face since it IS A CRIME to be here illegally to begin with) is also up. But we just won’t talk about that one.

But Ruth Fernandez, 60, a naturalized citizen born in Ecuador, was asked for identification. And though she was only traveling home to New York City from her sister’s in Ohio, she had made sure to carry her American passport. On earlier trips, she said, agents had photographed her, and taken away a nervous Hispanic man.

RACIAL PROFILING!!! 🙂

He was one of hundreds of passengers taken to detention each year from domestic trains and buses along the nation’s northern border. The little-publicized transportation checks are the result of the Border Patrol’s growth since 9/11, fueled by Congressional antiterrorism spending and an expanding definition of border jurisdiction. In the Rochester area, where the border is miles away in the middle of Lake Ontario, the patrol arrested 2,788 passengers from October 2005 through last September.

The checks are “a vital component to our overall border security efforts” to prevent terrorism and illegal entry, said Rafael Lemaitre, a spokesman for United States Customs and Border Protection. He said that the patrol had jurisdiction to enforce immigration laws within 100 miles of the border, and that one mission was preventing smugglers and human traffickers from exploiting inland transit hubs.

In New York yes, In Arizona. Hell No! Too Dangerous. Let’s just put up signs warning people to stay away instead!

The patrol says that answering agents’ questions is voluntary, part of a “consensual and nonintrusive conversation” Some passengers agree, though they are not told that they can keep silent. But others, from immigration lawyers and university officials to American-born travelers startled by an agent’s flashlight in their eyes, say the practice is coercive, unconstitutional and tainted by racial profiling.

Well, if it’s done on the Mexican Border it sure is, according to Liberals.

The Lake Shore Limited route is a journey across the spectrum of public attitudes toward illegal immigrants — from cities where they have been accepted and often treated as future citizens, to places where they are seen as lawbreakers the federal government is doing too little to expel.

The journey also highlights conflicting enforcement policies. Immigration authorities, vowing to concentrate resources on deporting immigrants with serious criminal convictions, have recently been halting the deportation of students who were brought to the country as children without papers — a group the Obama administration favors for legalization.

But some of the same kinds of students are being jailed by the patrol, like a Taiwan-born Ph.D. candidate who had excelled in New York City public schools since age 11. Two days after he gave a paper on Chaucer at a conference in Chicago last year, he was taken from his train seat and strip-searched at a detention center in Batavia, N.Y., facing deportation for an expired visa.

Where’s La Raza!? the ACLU!? Rev. Al?  This is an outrage! 🙂

For some, the patrol’s practices evoke the same fears as a new immigration law in Arizona — that anyone, anytime, can be interrogated without cause.

Don’t you love the mischaracterization and overgeneralization fallacies of that statement.

The federal government is authorized to do just that at places where people enter and leave the country, and at a “reasonable distance” from the border.

But doing it 40 Miles south of Phoenix and hundreds of miles from the border is “racial Profiling” and could lead to human rights abuse!

But as the patrol expands and tries to raise falling arrest numbers, critics say, the concept of the border is becoming more fluid, eroding Constitutional limits on search and seizure. And unlike Arizona’s law, the change is happening without public debate.

“It’s turned into a police state on the northern border,” said Cary M. Jensen, director of international services for the University of Rochester, whose foreign students, scholars and parents have been questioned and jailed, often because the patrol did not recognize their legal status. “It’s essentially become an internal document check.”

YOUR PAPERS PLEASE! 🙂

Domestic transportation checks are not mentioned in a report on the northern border strategy that Customs and Border Protection delivered last year to Congress, which has more than doubled the patrol since 2006, to 2,212 agents, with plans to double it again soon. The data available suggests that such stops account for as many as half the reported 6,000 arrests a year.

In Rochester, the Border Patrol station opened in 2004, with four agents to screen passengers of a new ferry from Toronto. The ferry went bankrupt, but the unit has since grown tenfold; its agents have one of the highest arrest rates on the northern border — 1,040 people in the 2008 fiscal year, 95 percent of them from buses and trains — though officials say numbers have fallen as word of the patrols reached immigrant communities.

“Our mission is to defend the homeland, primarily against terrorists and terrorist weapons,” said Thomas Pocorobba Jr., the agent in charge of the Rochester station, one of 55 between Washington State and Maine. “We still do our traditional mission, which is to enforce the nation’s immigration laws.”

Just Not in Arizona! That’s racist!

Legal scholars say the government’s border authority, which extends to fixed checkpoints intercepting cross-border traffic, cannot be broadly applied to roving patrols in a swath of territory. But such authority is not needed to ask questions if people can refuse to answer. The patrol does not track how many people decline, Mr. Pocorobba said.

Asked if agents could question people in Times Square, which like most of the nation’s population centers is within 100 miles of international waters, Mr. Pocorobba replied, “Technically, we can, but we don’t.” He added, “Our job is strictly cross-border.”

So as long as you lie, they move on and don’t feel any need to do more.

Note to terrorists: Just Lie. They won’t notice. 🙂

Lawyers challenging the stops in several deportation cases questioned the rationale that they were aimed at border traffic. Government data obtained in litigation shows that at least three-quarters of those arrested since 2006 had been in the country more than a year.

Though many Americans may welcome such arrests, the patrol’s costly expansion was based on a bipartisan consensus about border security, not interior enforcement to sweep up farm workers and students, said Nancy Morawetz, who directs the immigration rights clinic at New York University.

One case she is challenging involves a Nassau County high school graduate taken from the Lake Shore Limited in Rochester in 2007. The government says the graduate, then 21, voluntarily produced a Guatemalan passport and could not prove she was in the country legally. A database later showed she had an expired visitor’s visa.

Unlike a criminal arrest, such detentions come with few due process protections. The woman was held at a county jail, then transferred across the country while her mother, a house cleaner, and a high school teacher tried to reach her. The woman first saw an immigration judge more than three weeks after her arrest. He halved the $10,000 bail set by the patrol, and she was eventually released at night at a rural Texas gas station.

“I was shocked,” said the teacher, Susanne Marcus, who said her former student had been awarded a $2,000 college scholarship.

Another challenge is pending in the 2009 train arrest of the Taiwan-born doctoral student, who had to answer the agent after being singled out for intense questioning because of his “Asian appearance,” he said. His account was corroborated in an affidavit filed this month by another passenger.

OOH!!! MORE RACIAL PROFILING!

Similar complaints have been made by others, including a Chicago couple who encountered the patrol on a train to Poughkeepsie, N.Y., for the woman’s graduation from Vassar College.

“At least in Arizona, you have to be doing something wrong to be stopped,” said the woman, a citizen of Chinese-American descent who said her Mexican boyfriend was sleeping when an agent started questioning him. “Here, you’re sitting on the train asleep and if you don’t look like a U.S. citizen, it’s ‘Wake up!’ ”

Mr. Pocorobba denied that agents used racial profiling; the proof, he said, was that those arrested had come from 96 countries.

So how’s that different from Arizona? 43% of illegals are from other countries other than Mexico. OTM= Other Than Mexican to use Customs parlance.

So we have another liberal hypocrisy. It’s not racial profiling when they do it, but it is if the State does it or it’s the Mexican Border. I see… 😦

Agents say they often act on suspicion, prompted by a passenger’s demeanor. Of those detained, most were in the country illegally — including the Mexican, 24, who admitted that he had sneaked across the southern border at 16 to find his father. Others were supposed to be carrying their papers, like a Pakistani college student detained for two weeks before authorities confirmed that he was a legal resident.

Some American-born passengers welcome the patrol. “It makes me feel safe,” volunteered Katie Miller, 34, who was riding Amtrak to New York from Ohio. “I don’t mind being monitored.” 🙂

To others, it evokes travel through the old Communist bloc. “I was actually woken up with a flashlight in my face,” recalled Mike Santomauro, 27, a law student who encountered the patrol in April, at 2 a.m. on a train in Rochester.

Across the aisle, he said, six agents grilled a student with a computer who had only an electronic version of his immigration documents. Through the window, Mr. Santomauro said, he could see three black passengers, standing with arms raised beside a Border Patrol van.

“As a citizen I’m offended,” he said. But he added, “To say I didn’t want to answer didn’t seem a viable option.”

Don’t do as I do, Do as I say!

I’m Sorry We’re Evil!

Moral Equivalence: This fallacy compares minor misdeeds with major atrocities.

Move over Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria. The State Department has made it official: The United States violates human rights. In an unprecedented move, the Obama administration submitted a report to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights detailing the progress and problems in dealing with human rights issues in this country. The document is a strange combination of left-wing history and White House talking points.

It describes how the United States discriminates against the disabled, homosexuals, women, Native Americans, blacks, Hispanics and those who don’t speak English. There is the expected pandering to Muslims, noting that the government is committed to “challenge misperceptions and discriminatory stereotypes, to prevent acts of vandalism and to combat hate crimes,” offenses that the American people evidently keep committing. And the current economic woes are blamed on the housing crisis, which itself was the result of “discriminatory lending practices.” The implication is that if Americans had only been less racist, they would be enjoying prosperity today.

The report notes that until recently, the U.S. engaged in torture, unlawfully detained terrorist suspects and illegally spied on Americans communicating with terrorists – but the report assures readers that Mr. Obama has been putting a stop to all that.

The main impact of the document will be to confirm critiques of the United States as a haven for hatred and rights abuses. It turns the Obama administration’s domestic political agenda into an international scorecard by which other countries can judge American “progress.” And it makes it that much more difficult for those abroad who have held up the United States as a model for the kind of liberal, capitalistic democracy they would like to see in their own countries.

“Progress is our goal,” the report proclaims, “and our expectation thereof is justified by the proven ability of our system of government to deliver the progress our people demand and deserve.” This reflects the general tone of a report that sees the state, not the people, as the source of American progress. All the problems discussed have a corresponding federal solution, whether health care, nutrition, housing or any other issue. To read the report, one could conclude that, to the Obama administration, big government is not just everything – it is the only thing.

The authors claim that the United States does not, by filing the report, “acknowledge commonality with states that systematically abuse human rights,” but of course it does. Dictatorships, authoritarian regimes and theocracies competing for legitimacy on the world stage have been handed a potent new weapon, the kind of assessment they would never offer about their own governments. The report also cautions that it should not be read to reflect “doubt in the ability of the American political system to deliver progress for its citizens.” The authors of the report should understand that the doubts in the Obama administration to deliver progress are already well-established. And they come from the American people, who don’t need the United Nations telling them to shape up. (Washington Post)

The First chair of the Commission in 2006 was Mexico. MEXICO!? 😦

Gee, I guess that’s the kettle deciding the pot is black and then you’re not suppose to notice that the kettle is even black.

Because in an international social justice world where everyone is equally evil the good guys are bad guys and the bad guys just need more understanding! 😦

Take Radical Islam for instance, or Iran or North Korea….

“The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” AZ Governor Brewer wrote.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state’s controversial immigration law be removed from a State Department report to the United Nations’ human rights commissioner.

The U.S. included its legal challenge to the law on a list of ways the federal government is protecting human rights.

Imagine that, wanting to secure our border and deal with people coming here illegally is a Human Rights Abuse!

Can’t imagine what this commission thinks of it’s former Chair-County Mexico and their immigration laws… 🙂

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer says it is “downright offensive” that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years.

According to the ACLU, the U.S. report correctly acknowledges the need for improvement in several key areas, including racial justice, women’s rights, LGBT rights and discrimination against Muslims and Americans of South Asian and Arab descent. However, the report neglects to address other key areas where the U.S. has failed to meet its human rights obligations, including felon disfranchisement, inhumane prison conditions, racial disparities in the death penalty system and deaths and abuse in immigration detention. The report also defends the use of military commissions to try terrorism suspects, despite the fact that military commissions pose significant human and civil rights violations.

Oh, goody, The American Communist Liberals Union approves. Well, that settles it. We’re evil incarnate.

We are all equally evil.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4322918/controversy-as-us-admits-human-rights-shortcomings

While it’s not on the UN report, this ditty from Rachael “Mad Cow” Maddow on the “end” of combat in Iraq is telling:

“The history of Iraq for the last generation is, Saddam taking power, a decade of the war with Iran, where we took Iraq’s side, then the first American war, then a decade of sanctions, then the second American war, toppling Saddam, presiding over a civil war, and now there’s us leaving. After all that, good luck! Hope it all works out for you guys!”

But don’t worry, they are the Insufferably Superior Moral Left!

They are better than you.

So you should just bow down to their greatness and not question their infinitely superior wisdom. 🙂

Irony Lost

President Obama requests a meeting with Republicans.

They have a chin wag.

They talk about immigration, but there’s nothing agreed.

Just after the meeting, Obama puts out a press release saying he is going to send 1200 troops to the border.

He didn’t say anything about it in the meeting. He doesn’t say anything through official channels. He just throws it out there through a press release.

As if the meeting was  just a pretense and he sat in the meeting the whole time just getting his jollies off, “I’ve a got secret and boy wouldn’t you like to know, but I’m not telling!” <<stick tongue out>>

Then there’s this:

The Department of Homeland Security is alerting Texas authorities to be on the lookout for a suspected member of the Somalia-based Al Shabaab terrorist group who might be attempting to travel to the U.S. through Mexico, a security expert who has seen the memo tells FOXNews.com.

The warning follows an indictment unsealed this month in Texas federal court that accuses a Somali man in Texas of running a “large-scale smuggling enterprise” responsible for bringing hundreds of Somalis from Brazil through South America and eventually across the Mexican border. Many of the illegal immigrants, who court records say were given fake IDs, are alleged to have ties to other now-defunct Somalian terror organizations that have merged with active organizations like Al Shabaab, al-Barakat and Al-Ittihad Al-Islami.

In 2008, the U.S. government designated Al Shabaab a terrorist organization. Al Shabaab has said its priority is to impose Sharia, or Islamic law, on Somalia; the group has aligned itself with Al Qaeda and has made statements about its intent to harm the United States.

In recent years, American Somalis have been recruited by Al Shabaab to travel to Somalia, where they are often radicalized by more extremist or operational anti-American terror groups, which Al Shabaab supports. The recruiters coming through the Mexican border are the ones who could be the most dangerous, according to law enforcement officials.

Somalis are classified by border and immigration officials as “special interest” — illegal immigrants who get caught trying to cross the Mexican border into the U.S. who come from countries that are considered a high threat to the U.S., Neuhaus Schaan explained.

DHS did not respond to multiple e-mail and phone requests for comment.

In addition to the Somali immigration issue, Mexican smugglers are coaching some Middle Eastern immigrants before they cross the border – schooling them on how to dress and giving them phrases to help them look and sound like Latinos, law enforcement sources told FoxNews.com.

“There have been a number of certain communities that have noticed this, villages in northern Mexico where Middle Easterners try to move into town and learn Spanish,” Neuhaus Schaan said. “People were changing there names from Middle Eastern names to Hispanic names.”
Security experts say the push by illegal immigrants to try to fit in also could be the realization of what officials have feared for years: Latin American drug cartels are helping jihadist groups bring terrorists across the Mexican border.

J. Peter Pham, senior fellow and director of the Africa Project at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, said that for the past ten years there’s been suspicion by U.S. law enforcement that drug cartels could align with international terrorist organizations to bring would-be-jihadists into the U.S.

That kind of collaboration is already being seen in Africa, said Dr. Walid Phares, director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

“Al Qaeda could easily say, “Ok, now we want your help getting these guys into the United States,” Phares said. “Eventually the federal government will pay more attention, but there is a window of time now where they can get anyone they want to get in already.”

Experts also say the DHS alert and recent court case highlights the threat of terrorists penetrating the Mexican/Texas border — and the growing threat of Somali recruitment efforts to bring Americans of Somali descent back to Somalia for jihadist training, creating homegrown terrorists.
Pham says the DHS alert comes too late. “They’re just covering themselves for the fact that DHS has been failing to date to deal effectively with this,” he said. “They’re already here.”

We’ll tell you to look out for terrorists coming into the country but we won’t secure the border!!

Instead, we’ll bash people who ARE trying to.

“It’s something that certainly has to be watched, but I don’t think it’s an imminent threat,” he said. “This has to be put in context with people smuggling — everybody and their brother is getting into the United States through Mexico; I read last week that some Chinese were crossing, it’s just a big market.”

We’ll call them “racists”, “nazi” and claim they violate “human rights” and have massive lying hate fests.

Oh, the Irony.

It will be lost on the Pro-Illegal Liberal crowd through.

And those 1,200 troops??

US National Guard troops being sent to the Mexican border will be used to stem the flow of guns and drugs across the frontier and not to enforce US immigration laws, the State Department said Wednesday.

The clarification came after the Mexican government urged Washington not to use the additional troops to go after illegal immigrants.

President Barack Obama on Tuesday authorized the deployment of up to 1,200 additional troops to border areas but State Department spokesman Philip Crowley told reporters, “It’s not about immigration.”

He said the move was “fully consistent with our efforts to do our part to stem, you know, violence, to interdict the flow of dangerous people and dangerous goods — drugs, guns, people.”

He said the extra troops would be used to free up civilians engaged in support functions so that law enforcement personnel can be increased along the 2,000-mile-long (3,200 kilometer) border.

I wonder if he got this idea from Big Sis, Janet Napalitano, after all when she was Governor here she sent National Guard troops to the border to look like she was doing something (and to poke Bush in the political eye) but they were there for “administrative” purposes and were actually unarmed!!

And the fact that Obama went around Congress straight to a press release is obviously a political eye poke in of itself.

Oh, Look he’s doing something!

He cares!

He hears you!

Hope and Change!

yes We Can

Si Se Puede! 🙂

When, the truth is, he’s just looking for political advantage.

Nothing else.

Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, whose jurisdiction includes about 80 miles of the Arizona-Mexico border, said 1,200 soldiers might make a difference in a smaller portion of the border. “But if you spread it across the border, it’s like spitting into the wind,” Dever said.

Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat who has prosecuted rings of drug and immigrant smugglers, said the planned deployment was a good first step, but believes that the president’s plan should evolve to include more troops and more authority for the soldiers.

“I’ll take what we can get,” Goddard said. “Again, I don’t think this is the final response.”

But he’s been openly basing SB 1070!

Goddard said Tuesday that the bill “does nothing to improve border security or address the core issues of illegal immigration.” He also said it would “take law enforcement resources away from stopping more serious crimes.”

The irony…

Oh, and he’s running against Gov. Brewer for Governor. But I’m sure that has nothing to do with it! 🙂

And I’m sure the Ministry of Truth/Mainstream Media will gush all over Obama for his
compromise” with the racists!.

That is when they aren’t savaging him for the Oil Spill (which is hilarious in it’s own irony).

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all…”

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Dissing The Tomb

President Obama has decided that this Memorial Day weekend is much better spent with his marxist peeps in Chicago and doing a photo ops at cemetery in Illinois rather than the modern tradition of going to the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington Cemetery.

Well, Obama does have disdain for American traditions, after all.

Working hard to achieve success, rather than having it handed to you by the government from someone else’s labor, for instance.

Free enterprise, for another.

He has to takeover everything first.

And you can bash George W. Bush, even now for Katrina, but you can’t say boo about Obama and his passive aggressive disinterest in the biggest ecological disaster in this part of the planet.

Nope, can’t do it.

But what is funny, is that the Ministry of Truth/Mainstream media is starting to hammer him.

Even Mr. “tingle up my leg” Chris Matthews was heard to be criticizing his God.

Chris Matthews argued during a “Tonight Show” appearance that the President was “acting a little like a Vatican Observer.”

“The President scares me,” he said. “When is he actually going to do something? And I worry; I know he doesn’t want to take ownership of it. I know politics. He said the minute he says, ‘I’m in charge,’ he takes the blame, but somebody has to. It’s in our interest.”

Even super-lib mastermind James Carville is annoyed.

Democratic strategist James Carville and MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews, two reliable supporters of President Barack Obama, have issued withering critiques of the administration’s handling of the Gulf oil spill.

Carville, the famously outspoken Louisianian who was a chief political aide to Bill and Hillary Clinton, told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Thursday that the administration’s response to the spill has been “lackadaisical” and that Obama was “naive” to trust BP to manage the massive clean-up effort.

“I think they actually believe that BP has some kind of a good motivation here,” he said. “They’re naive! BP is trying to save money, save everything they can… They won’t tell us anything, and oddly enough, the government seems to be going along with it! Somebody has got to, like shake them and say, ‘These people don’t wish you well! They’re going to take you down!'”

Carville also accused the White House of going along with what he called the “let BP handle it” strategy.

“I’m as good a Democrat as most people, and I think this administration has done some good things. They are risking everything by this ‘go along with BP’ strategy they have that seems like, lackadaisical on this, and Doug is right, they seem like they’re inconvenienced by this, this is some giant thing getting in their way and somehow or another, if you let BP handle it, it’ll all go away. It’s not going away. It’s growing out there. It is a disaster of the first magnitude, and they’ve got to go to Plan B.”

Imagine that.

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

Now, on to the Pro-Illegal crowd being hoist by their own petard.

The City of Seattle voted sanctimoniously to join in on the hatefest directed at Arizona.

But then I saw this on a local Seattle TV Station’s Website:

EDMONDS, Wash. – The KING 5 Investigators have learned that an illegal immigrant accused of raping a woman in Edmonds Sunday has been deported nine times. That’s much more than previously reported.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement won’t comment on the case of Jose Lopez Madrigal. But KING 5 got the information through confidential sources and documents.

Larry Klein was the man who heard the alleged victim’s cries for help. Police say the suspect pulled the woman off the street to a dumpster and raped her.

“I could see the back of his head. I could see his pants were down. I could see her lying on the ground. I could hear her crying, but I couldn’t really see her face,” said Klein.

Klein called police, who quickly arrested the suspect. But learning his identity took much longer because of some 30 aliases. It was only through fingerprints that they identified him as Madrigal, a Mexican citizen.

Madrigal’s arrest and immigration record includes a staggering number of contacts with law enforcement since 1989. That’s the year he was convicted of theft using a firearm in California.

He was deported a couple of times after that. Then in 1999, he was arrested for drug sales in both San Diego and San Francisco. Records show that he was deported three times that year between April and August.

He was arrested for drugs again in Stockton, Calif. in 2000. In 2002, he pleaded to third degree sexual assault in Denver. Later that year, he was deported again. And in 2003, records show he was deported three more times.

People who live near the scene of Sunday’s alleged rape wonder how it could keep happening.

“Makes you wonder, what are we doing wrong? How is he getting back in here?” said Kirby Aumick.

“It’s troubling. I mean, if this man should not have been in this country, he should have been behind bars then, really, this is a senseless tragedy,” said Klein.

According to our sources, Madrigal’s last contact before Sunday was around 2003. So, it’s not clear how much of that time Madrigal was in this country.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has refused to comment on the case which started making national headlines when it was learned that Madrigal had been deported several times prior to the Edmonds case.

In reviewing records and talking with confidential sources, the KING 5 Investigators learned just how extensive Madrigal’s immigration and arrest record is.

They found he was first deported in California in 1989 and since then he’s returned from his Mexican homeland and been arrested for drug crimes, a sex assault in Colorado and other offenses.

One criminal justice source says Madrigal is a “poster boy” for the federal governments ineffectiveness at keeping the most serious “criminal aliens” – illegals who commit crimes – out of the  United States.

Do they honestly have no idea how he was deported 9 times and came back every time? Really? 😦

I feel sorry for the victims, actually.

If the border had been secured to begin with, they wouldn’t be victims.

But don’t worry, the La Raza protests this weekend in Phoenix will get 1000 times more air play than this will.

*****

From the horrible to the ridiculous courtesy of the Washington Post:

The new Arizona law will intimidate crime victims and witnesses who are illegal immigrants and divert police from investigating more serious crimes, chiefs from Los Angeles, Houston and Philadelphia said. They will join their counterparts from Montgomery County and a half-dozen other U.S. cities in meeting Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Wednesday morning to discuss the measure.

Wonder if he’s read it yet? 😦

“This is not a law that increases public safety. This is a bill that makes it much harder for us to do our jobs,” Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said. “Crime will go up if this becomes law in Arizona or in any other state.”

The delegation, organized by the Police Executive Research Forum, an independent think tank in Washington, comes as 15 states are considering their own versions of the Arizona law. That statute defines illegal immigration as criminal trespassing and requires police to request documents of anyone they stop and have a “reasonable suspicion” is in the country illegally.

Several recent public opinion polls indicate that as many as 70 percent of Americans surveyed support such a police requirement.

******

And finally from USATODAY:

TULTITLN, Mexico — Arizona’s new law forcing local police to take a greater role in enforcing immigration law has caused a lot of criticism from Mexico, the largest single source of illegal immigrants in the United States.

But in Mexico, illegal immigrants receive terrible treatment from corrupt Mexican authorities, say people involved in the system.

And Mexico has a law that is no different from Arizona’s that empowers local police to check the immigration documents of people suspected of not being in the country legally.

“There (in the United States), they’ll deport you,” Hector Vázquez, an illegal immigrant from Honduras, said as he rested in a makeshift camp with other migrants under a highway bridge in Tultitlán. “In Mexico they’ll probably let you go, but they’ll beat you up and steal everything you’ve got first.”

Mexican authorities have harshly criticized Arizona’s SB1070, a law that requires local police to check the status of persons suspected of being illegal immigrants. The law provides that a check be done in connection with another law enforcement event, such as a traffic stop, and also permits Arizona citizens to file lawsuits against local authorities for not fully enforcing immigration laws.

Mexico’s Foreign Ministry said the law “violates inalienable human rights” and Democrats in Congress applauded Mexican President Felipe Calderón’s criticisms of the law in a speech he gave on Capitol Hill last week.

Yet Mexico’s Arizona-style law requires local police to check IDs. And Mexican police freely engage in racial profiling and routinely harass Central American migrants, say immigration activists.

“The Mexican government should probably clean up its own house before looking at someone else’s,” said Melissa Vertíz, spokeswoman for the Fray Matías de Córdova Human Rights Center in Tapachula, Mexico.

In one six-month period from September 2008 through February 2009, at least 9,758 migrants were kidnapped and held for ransom in Mexico — 91 of them with the direct participation of Mexican police, a report by the National Human Rights Commission said. Other migrants are routinely stopped and shaken down for bribes, it said.

A separate survey conducted during one month in 2008 at 10 migrant shelters showed Mexican authorities were behind migrant attacks in 35 of 240 cases, or 15%.

Most migrants in Mexico are Central Americans who are simply passing through on their way to the United States, human rights groups say. Others are Guatemalans who live and work along Mexico’s southern border, mainly as farm workers, as maids, or in bars and restaurants.

The Central American migrants headed to the United States travel mainly on freight trains, stopping to rest and beg for food at rail crossings like the one in Tultitlán, an industrial suburb of Mexico City.

On a recent afternoon, Victor Manuel Beltrán Rodríguez of Managua, Nicaragua, trudged between the cars at a stop light, his hand outstretched.

“Can you give me a peso? I’m from Nicaragua,” he said. Every 10 cars or so, a motorist would roll down the window and hand him a few coins. In a half-hour he had collected 10 pesos, about 80 U.S. cents, enough for a taco.

Beltrán Rodríguez had arrived in Mexico with 950 pesos, about $76, enough to last him to the U.S. border. But near Tierra Blanca, Veracruz, he says municipal police had detained him, driven him to a deserted road and taken his money. He had been surviving since then by begging.

Abuses by Mexican authorities have persisted even as Mexico has relaxed its rules against illegal immigrants in recent years, according to the National Human Rights Commission.

In 2008, Mexico softened the punishment for illegal immigrants, from a maximum 10 years in prison to a maximum fine of $461. Most detainees are taken to detention centers and put on buses for home.

Mexican law calls for six to 12 years of prison and up to $46,000 in fines for anyone who shelters or transports illegal immigrants. The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the law applies only to people who do it for money.

For years, the Mexican government has allowed charity groups to openly operate migrant shelters, where travelers can rest for a few days on their journey north. The government also has a special unit of immigration agents, known as Grupo Beta, who patrol the countryside in orange pickups, helping immigrants who are in trouble.

At the same time, Article 67 of Mexico’s immigration law requires that all authorities “whether federal, local or municipal” demand to see visas if approached by a foreigner and to hand over migrants to immigration authorities.

“In effect, this means that migrants who suffer crimes, including kidnapping, prefer not to report them to avoid … being detained by immigration authorities and returned to their country,” the National Human Rights Commission said in a report last year.

As a result, the clause has strengthened gangs who abuse migrants, rights activists say.

“That Article 67 is an obstacle that urgently has to be removed,” said Alberto Herrera, executive director of Amnesty International Mexico. “It has worsened this vicious cycle of abuse and impunity, and the same thing could happen (in Arizona).”

A bill passed by the Mexican Senate on Oct. 6 would eliminate the ID requirement in Article 67 and replace it with language saying “No attention in matters of human rights or the provision of justice shall be denied or restricted on any level (of government) to foreigners who require it, regardless of their migration status.”

The Mexican House of Representatives approved a similar measure on March 16, but added a clause requiring the government to set aside funds to take care of foreigners during times of disaster. The revised bill has been stuck in the Senate’s Population and Development Committee since then.

To discourage migrants from speaking out about abuse, Mexican authorities often tell detainees they will have to stay longer in detention centers if they file a complaint, Vertíz said.

A March 2007 order allows Mexican immigration agents to give “humanitarian visas” to migrants who have suffered crimes in Mexico. But the amnesty is not automatic, and most migrants don’t know to ask for it, the commission said.

Hawley is Latin America correspondent for USA TODAY and The Arizona Republic

Wonder if the Ministry of Truth will pick up on this, or will screaming La Raza maniacs dominate the news in the coming days.

Hmmm….You be the Judge.

The honor of the people who have died for this country is being dissed.

And the country divided for political advantage and done with such sanctimony and false morality.

We are the victims.

We need to stand up and be counted.

WTF! China?!

If I wrote this as a joke, I’d catch crap for falsely depicting Barry & Co. as a bunch of pinkos. Associated Press:

The United States and China reported no major breakthroughs Friday after only their second round of talks about human rights since 2002…

Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state, told reporters that another round will happen some time next year in Beijing…

Posner said in addition to talks on freedom of religion and expression, labor rights and rule of law, officials also discussed Chinese complaints about problems with U.S. human rights, which have included crime, poverty, homelessness and racial discrimination.

He said U.S. officials did not whitewash the American record and in fact raised on its own a new immigration law in Arizona that requires police to ask about a person’s immigration status if there is suspicion the person is in the country illegally.

That’s right: We said “sorry” to China for violating human rights by enforcing our own immigration laws.

Jay Nordlinger at the Corner asks: “Did we, the United States, talking to a government that maintains a gulag, that denies people their basic rights, that in all probability harvests organs, apologize for the new immigration law in Arizona?” Yep! And John Hinderaker at Powerline wants to know: “Is it unfair to say that the Obama administration consists of a bunch of anti-American ignoramuses? If so, why?” Ya got me! (Daily Caller)

Yes, folks! The people who brought you forced abortions, gulags, repression and Tienanmen Square are now official not as bad as Arizona!

You’re Bad, but we’re bad too, Kumbuya!  can’t we all just get along.

<<<BARF>>>

<<<BARF>>>

<<<BARF>>>

MICHAEL POSNER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination, of potential discrimination. And that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.

<<<BARF>>>

<<<BARF>>>

<<<BARF>>>

The Chinese, who incarcerate people for political opinion, who have brutalized the nation of Tibet, who have no protections for freedom of speech, the press or anything else, are being asked to discuss the new Arizona law? Is this “The Twilight Zone”? Why would the Obama administration even bring it up?

Once again, this Chinese thing is stunning. If you sneak into China, you’ll wind up in a concentration camp or with a bullet in your head, and the Obama administration is discussing Arizona with these people? Totally beyond the pale.

“Talking Points” will remind you that more than 60 percent of Americans support the Arizona law, fully realizing that the federal government will not secure the border and the state had to do something.

Later this week, President Obama will meet with the Mexican president, and the Arizona law is sure to come up there as well. We will watch that very closely. (Bill O’Reilly)

And he will no doubt apologize again.

<<BARF>>

After all, Mexico and Latin American are quite literally throwing these people at us, but we are going to apologize to THEM for some of US  getting upset over the murders, the shoot-outs, the drugs, violence and civil unrest.

Damn, there must be something in that Harvard Law School water…

But don’t worry, dear seekers of truth, you won’t find it anywhere on The Ministry of Truth.

They are crusaders for justice,fairness, and the Liberal Socialist Way!

And Arizona is definitely on a moral relative par with China. 😦