BlackFace, Black Eye

A white Michigan middle school teacher remains suspended two weeks after he was placed an administrative leave. (Update farther down)

Wait for it… 🙂

His crime?

Teaching history.

According to parents whose children are in the eighth- grade class, the administrator thought the lesson plan was offensive and racist.

Read more at: http://www.monroenews.com/news/2014/may/30/monroe-teacher-alan-barron-suspended/

Alan Barron was teaching his eighth-grade class about the history of racial segregation when he showed a video featuring blackface.

OH NO! The Truth is the end of civilized society as The Liberals see it!

History prior to 1964 must be a real bitch to teach then. Imagine how hard it was in Ancient Rome. 🙂

Oh, right, Liberals only want to teach politically correct history so that you’re an easily manipulated moron.

The video was historical, showing how white Americans used blackface to mockingly imitate black people as part of a broader social scheme of repression — but a school administrator sitting in on the class found it inappropriate, and Barron was suspended the next day.

The district, through spokesman Bobb Vergiels, would not acknowledge that Mr. Barron was suspended and only stated that he is “on leave.”

Actually, he didn’t mention his name (according to Monroe news): “The teacher in question was placed on paid leave to give the district time to fully consider what occurred in this classroom,”

Even here, Liberal prevaricate. 🙂

He was only a month from retirement, having served 36 years with the school district.

According to parents whose children are in the eighth- grade class, the administrator thought the lesson plan was offensive and racist. Mr. Barron was suspended the next day Adrienne Aaron’s husband is African American, and their child was in the class. She said Mr. Barron simply was showing the students what occurred in history. She said her daughter was not offended and felt the subject needs to be discussed.

“(My child) was more offended that they stopped the video,” Adrienne Aaron, who is married to a black man and whose child was in Barron’s class, told the Monroe News. “It had nothing to do with racism. History is history. We need to educate our kids to see how far we’ve come in America. How is that racism?”

“Mr. Barron is a darn good teacher, people get offended over everything these days,” wrote one commenter. “Even history.”

Yep, that would par for the course with the Politically Correct Thought Police.

“Mr. Barron is one of the … great teachers we have in Monroe Public Schools,” one parent wrote in a letter that was distributed through Facebook. “ He has changed many children’s lives over the course of his career. If Mr. Barron felt that he was teaching something that was offensive, he would most definitely not have done it.”

During his suspension, Mr. Barron is not allowed to attend district functions, including an annual banquet where retiring teachers are honored.

“It’s so sad this has happened to him,” Mrs. Aaron said. “He’s one of the best teachers we’ve had. We can’t believe that this is happening.”

UPDATE AT 8:42 P.M. Sunday – The Monroe News has learned that Al Barron was reinstated Sunday evening (after about two weeks of embarrassment).

The hyperactive, sugar-rush, Hyper-ventilating judgmental “diversity”obsessed “tolerant” LEFTISTs got shamed into it no doubt.

Did they learn anything from it? HELL NO!

How do you know?

When he was reinstated the only person talking was the teacher’s lawyer. The Leftists had crawled under their PC rock waiting like a rattlesnake to strike again.

But in a recorded message sent to district employees Sunday night, Monroe Public Schools Supt. Dr. Barry Martin said the information that was reported was incorrect and that the district was not opposed to Mr. Barron’s teaching methods.

“As a result of incorrect information presented within the community, there is a perception that the district was opposed to a teacher providing students with information about the history of racial issues in this country,” Dr. Martin said in a phone message and through a posting on the Monroe Public Schools Facebook page. “This simply is not true and is a misinterpretation of the concern.”

Bwah hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha!  See what I mean… 🙂

But in a recorded message sent to district employees Sunday night, Monroe Public Schools Supt. Dr. Barry Martin said the information that was reported was incorrect and that the district was not opposed to Mr. Barron’s teaching methods. #“As a result of incorrect information presented within the community, there is a perception that the district was opposed to a teacher providing students with information about the history of racial issues in this country,” Dr. Martin said in a phone message and through a posting on the Monroe Public Schools Facebook page. “This simply is not true and is a misinterpretation of the concern.”

Read more at: http://www.monroenews.com/news/2014/jun/01/al-barron-reinstated-mps-teacher/

It appears the PC police was likely a recently promoted teacher (to Assistant Principal) according to Facebook sources (after she deactivated her page because she was fire-bombed by what I’m sure the left would call “rac*st” sympathizers) after all, The assistant principal also apparently ordered that Barron stop the video as it was being played.

see

 

A leftist with new found power, more dangerous than that rattlesnake.

Pity his students when the Politically Correct and more “sensitive” replacement comes in.

I hear Jay Carney needs a new job… 🙂

 

UPDATE AT 8:42 P.M. Sunday – The Monroe News has learned that Al Barron was reinstated Sunday evening.

Read more at: http://www.monroenews.com/news/2014/may/30/monroe-teacher-alan-barron-suspended/

The Monroe News has learned that Al Barron was reinstated Sunday evening.

Read more at: http://www.monroenews.com/news/2014/may/30/monroe-teacher-alan-barron-suspended/

Spin Cycle

Former White House National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor went on Fox News on Thursday, and after host Bret Baier grilled him over the issue of the talking points used after the attack, he finally responded with “Dude, this was like two years ago.”

Throughout the exchange, Vietor, who seemed annoyed at the line of questioning, wasn’t really able to answer Baier on various questions, telling him he “believes so” or that he didn’t remember.

“You don’t remember?” Baier asked, to which Vietor responded, “Dude, this was like two years ago. We’re still talking about the most mundane process … we’re talking about the process of editing talking points. That’s what bureaucrats do all day long.”

Carney argued the emails released by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch weren’t about Benghazi, but rather about the situation in the Middle East as a whole. 

“The emails and the talking points were not about Benghazi,” Carney told reporters Wednesday. “They were about the general situation in the Muslim world where you saw, as you might recall, it was explicitly not about Benghazi, it was about the overall situation in the region, the Muslim world, where we saw protests outside of embassy facilities across the region.”

“The fact is the connection between the attack and the video turned out not to be the case, but it was based on the best information that we had,” Carney said during a tense exchange with ABC reporter Jonathon Karl.

Carney added: “The overall issue of unrest in the Muslim world and the dangers posed by these protests to our embassies was very much a topic in the news.

“The implication is that we were somehow holding back information when it fact we were simply saying what we thought was right,” he said. “And when elements of that turned out not to be true, we were the first people to say so. It was based on what we knew at the time.”

Set Partisanship on SPIN!

Bet they could remember every single minute detail of the fake scandal of Valarie Plaime or the alleged Bush Drug Use in WWII though…!! 🙂

“For nearly two years the White House has sought to avoid answering those questions,” Cantor said in a statement. “Now we know why it required a court order to finally force the White House to respond to those inquiries. The email from Ben Rhodes demonstrates the Obama Administration from the beginning misled Congress, the media and most importantly, the American people.”

“It is increasingly clear that this Administration orchestrated an effort to deflect attention away from their failed Libya policy and the resurgence of al Qaeda and other terrorists,” Cantor added.

Mr Carney again: “There was a question-and-answer document prepared for Ambassador Rice that would recommended answers and anticipated question around the upheaval in the Middle East and Muslim world related to the inflammatory video that cause so much protest around the world.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Can’t say anything but the partisan line, now can we Mr. Propaganda Mouthpiece!

Let’s Just replace him with a Muppet, he has no will of his own so you might as well have someone pulling his strings to make his mouth move!

Probing coordinated lying on the 2012 terrorist killings of an ambassador and three other U.S. personnel is no “diversion,” as Nancy Pelosi claims. The legitimacy of a president’s re-election is at stake.

‘Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi!” complained top House Democrat Nancy Pelosi last week. “Why aren’t we talking about something else?” like “who is going to create jobs.” The rest “is a diversion.”

VALERIE PLAIME! VALERIE PLAIME! VALERIE PLAIME!  🙂

“I wish that rather than spending so much of their time … on this and on repealing the Affordable Care Act, Republicans actually got about the business of helping the economy grow and helping it create jobs,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said last week.

When the White House and congressional Democrats want to swerve the spotlight onto their economic record, you know they sense big danger on Benghazi.

“What difference does it make?” Hillary Clinton asked in Senate testimony 15 months ago. We know now the White House thought it made all the difference in the world — enough, perhaps, to decide the election.

Calling White House national security communications aide Ben Rhodes’ email a smoking gun is an understatement; obtained with great effort by Judicial Watch, it is pure 2012 election-year damage control.

Its recipients included David Plouffe, Dan Pfeiffer and Carney — all Obama spinmeisters. “Prep Call with Susan” was the subject line, and Rhodes sought to arm Susan Rice, who was the U.N. ambassador, with ways to protect the president before she appeared on all of the Sunday news shows a few days after the attack.

The second goal in prepping Rice was “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” That came just after conveying that the administration was “doing everything that we can” to protect U.S. personnel stationed abroad.

Rhodes also emphasized that Rice should say the president “provides leadership that is steady and statesmanlike.”

Now imagine if, after 9/11, the priority of President Bush’s White House was looking after the boss’ image, making sure no one thought there was a “failure of policy” and that people saw Bush as “statesmanlike.”

We know from ex-National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor that Obama wasn’t in the White House Situation Room while U.S. officials were being slaughtered in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012. Maybe he needed sleep for his Las Vegas campaign fundraiser the next day.

Channeling Jeff Spicoli from “Fast Times At Ridgemont High,” Vietor told Fox News’ Bret Baier, “Dude, this was two years ago. We’re still talking about the most mundane thing.”

No mundane questions will be directed later this month at Secretary of State John Kerry, who is being subpoenaed by Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee. And a new select committee with “robust authority” just announced to investigate Benghazi isn’t likely to bore the public either.

To borrow a familiar phrase from Watergate, it is perfectly clear what lies at the heart of the Benghazi scandal: coordinating the lie that there was no terrorist attack to assure Obama’s re-election. (IBD)

Photo: I hate to post such graphic pictures, but this needs to be said while were thinking about who to elect as our next President.

Perception

Democrats, led by the President, have resorted again and again to the rhetoric of class warfare — you know, “the party of the rich” and all that.

That’s why it’s ironic that Democratic Party is the actual party of the rich. Democrats represent the richest district in the country — and the richest Americans.

In shorthand, they represent the very rich and the very poor . . . those needing or wanting the benefits procured by a big, active, high-taxing government, and those who can pay those high taxes without even noticing (or find creative ways to prevent them from biting). They are also rich, powerful and connected enough to influence government policy in their favor, and often stand to benefit from government regulation that serves to stifle competition.

The GOP has become the party of the strivers, of the middle class, of small business, and of all those who have aspirations to prosperity. And sadly, they are the only ones who are serious about protecting what Paul Ryan has described as “the right to rise” — what used to be universally known and embraced as “the American Dream.” (Townhall)

(if they’d stop trying to get along and appease the bully that is)

But you’d never know it from The Ministry of Truth. 🙂

Yesterday, blogger Pundit Pete made his way into the the daily White House press briefing to ask Press Secretary Jay Carney about the broken promises of Obamacare and reminded him that the law has never been a popular one. Pete’s wife, who he calls Citizen Caryn, lost her previously held health insurance as a result of Obamacare and now their family is paying $3600 more for a new plan.

In order to avoid the security risks associated with the Obamacare exchanges, and find a plan in which she could still keep he doctor of many years, she now pays about double her previous premium.

 

Naturally, Carney stuck to his script by repeating talking points about “millions” of new people being covered as a result of Obamacare.

 

PETE: Why won’t he listen to the American people?
MR. CARNEY: You obviously haven’t seen the data because the majority of Americans do not in any poll want it repealed. The majority supports fixing it and improving it, not repealing it. I would ask you to check your data.
Secondly, the President made that pitch. Republicans in Congress fought it tooth and nail. It went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld it. It was the principal argument in a presidential election. The President won reelection.
And again, Republicans are free to make the repeal argument. My point was simply that when you go to individuals and you ask them, do you want quality, affordable health insurance, or do you want the insurance company to tell you that you’re not going to get coverage for that condition you have because the fine print says you can’t. In fact, your sister, we’re going to charge her double even though you have identical medical histories because she’s a woman —
PETE: Well, my wife is getting charged double now because she lost her insurance.
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I don’t know the circumstances with your wife. And what I can tell you is that the Affordable Care Act provides quality, affordable health insurance to millions of people. They are — million are —
PETE: But that’s not true. More people have lost their insurance because of the act right now than have been — didn’t have insurance and have signed up. That is a fact.
MR. CARNEY: Okay, well, you’re entitled to your facts, sir. (Townhall)

But he has no real facts, just ideological talking points that further the liberal delusion that they are superior and strong.

Link: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/03/10/Colorado-Reporter-Confronts-Flustered-Carney-Demands-Repeal-Of-ObamaCare

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

 

Trust Me 2

The Voice of the “Most Transparent” administration ever! 🙂

Jay Carney doesn’t have an answer for that. He hasn’t discussed that subject with the president. He will refer you to the Department of [insert agency here]. He refuses to speculate on that. He’ll have to get back to you.

But he appreciates the question.

A Yahoo News analysis of the 444 briefings that Carney has held since becoming White House press secretary has identified 13 distinct strains in the way he dodges a reporter’s question. Since Carney held his first daily briefing with reporters in the White House Brady Press Briefing Room on Feb. 16, 2011, for example, he’s used some variation of “I don’t have the answer” more than 1,900 times. In 1,383 cases he referred a question to someone else. But will he at least speculate on hypotheticals? No. In fact, he has refused to do so 525 times. (yahoo)

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/top-9-486-ways-jay-carney-won-t-104907191.html

The Gang of Eight says it has — presto! — fixed the big border security holes in their must-be-passed-yesterday amnesty package. After the 1986 fiasco, skeptics won’t settle for promises on paper.

Trust me, I know what I’m doing! 🙂

trust me trust-me-i-know-what-i-m-doing-2

The world will not come to an end if immigration reform with a so-called “path to citizenship” — i.e., phased-in amnesty for 11 million illegal aliens — doesn’t happen before the 2014 congressional elections. A number of Republican politicians have been terrified by their political enemies in both politics and the media into swallowing the dubious notion that the Grand Old Party’s long-term fortunes depend on an ethnic group totaling less than 9% of the electorate.

But the Republicans have been bullied into thinking it is the solution. When, in fact, it just benefits the bully.

But that group — Hispanics — actually gave a much bigger share of votes to Democrats in the election that took place after the last time Republicans got behind a big amnesty, the Reagan-backed ’86 immigration reform.

That was 3 million illegals. Now it’s at least 4 times that. Imagine what it’ll be the next time, and there will be a next time!

But the Democrats will have full autocratic control by then so it won’t matter what you think.

That fact should have taught the GOP a hard lesson: Democrats, the party of Big Government, always win when Republicans play on their turf by embracing the politics and policies of giving different groups favors.  The most politically effective way of doing favors, after all, is through promised government handouts.

And their is no more practiced at bribery than Democrats.

As of Thursday, the bill being pushed by the bipartisan Gang of Eight — which might more fittingly be called the Gang That Couldn’t Think Straight — is to feature a $3.2 billion “border surge” with promises of 20,000 more border police, 700 miles of new fencing and gadgetry ranging from video cameras, ground radar, lookout towers and even seismic monitors to more choppers, airplanes and even drones.

Well, that would be if the Democrats would actually build it. But they won’t. They’ll say they are, then thy won’t. Look at the Border Fence Act where BY LAW they have to build the fence and they don’t. What makes you think they’ll do it this time??

They promise that the Pentagon, the Homeland Security Department and the Government Accountability Office will have to validate the border as secure before illegals are let onto their path to American citizenship.

Bwah hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Well, how about this: You do all those things to beef up the border first, as a national security priority.  (The global war on terror demands it.) If after a couple of years we find the border really is permanently secure — and it’ll take such a passage of time to know for sure — then we can talk about what form of relief there should be for the millions of people whose first act in America was to break our laws by entering surreptitiously.

Immigration reform will happen only with “broad bipartisan support,” House Speaker John Boehner warned on Thursday, and only if the plan is to do it properly.  “First and foremost,” Boehner said, “that means confidence that our borders are secure.”

But will a paper promise give the speaker confidence our borders are secured?  Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., oozed confidence Thursday as he promised of the new security provisions in the Gang of Eight bill that, once skeptics “see what’s in this bill, it’s almost overkill.”

The hard reality, as demonstrated time and again, most infamously in recent years by ObamaCare, is that even the authors of these big complicated laws themselves don’t know whether they really work until they are in operation.

The 1986 immigration reform was supposed to solve illegal immigration with employer penalties and other measures, yet here we are 11 million illegals and 27 years later. As Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, likes to say comparing the Gang of Eight’s bill to the ’86 mess: “Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me.”

Amnesty is not an urgent priority; it can wait.  Fixing the border can’t. (IBD)

But Politics over the people reigns again…
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

brewer pelosi
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Giveaway

Still smarting from his “you didn’t build that” comment, President Obama opened another window into his far-left thinking. According to his world view, Americans keeping more of what’s theirs is a “giveaway.”

Speaking last Wednesday in New Orleans at a campaign event, Obama talked about “another trillion-dollar giveaway for millionaires” in reference to an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts.

A day later, White House spokesman Jay Carney did the same thing. He called the extension “another $1 trillion giveaway to the wealthiest Americans.”

What they are talking about is the House Republicans’ opposition to legislation approved in the Senate that would raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 a year, a sum less than the president makes yet is somehow considered to be the mark of wealth.

As a president who has done a good job of insulating himself from anyone who would challenge him, Obama wasn’t asked to explain his statement.

But Carney was.

ABC’s Jake Tapper wanted to know what he would “say to a small-business owner who says that’s not a giveaway, that’s my money, and by the way, I’m going to need some of that money in order to help pay the health care of individuals that I’m now mandated to do?”

Tapper further said, “It’s not giving anything away; it’s allowing me to keep my money.”

It’s a straightforward question that deserves a straightforward answer.

But it didn’t get one. Carney prattled on in response, but he would not address the point, which is:

How can government officials make a moral claim on money earned by others?

Jake Tapper:

TAPPER: You used the word “giveaway,” and President Obama, in his statement yesterday, used the word “giveaway,” referring to the extension of the Bush — lower — the lower Bush tax cut rates for the — I guess, the top 1 or 2 percent of the country, people making over $200,000 a year or couples making 250. What do you say to a small-business owner who says, that’s not a giveaway; that’s my money, and by the way, I’m going to need some of that money in order to help pay for health care of individuals that I’m now mandated to do; it’s not giving anything away; it’s allowing me to keep my money?

CARNEY: Well, the phrasing of the question leaves out a few things, which is, one, this tax cut that the Senate passed and that the president supports would go to 97 percent of small businesses in America, 97 percent. Further, this president has cut the taxes of small businesses in America 18 times, independent of this. So he’s — his focus on assisting small businesses, which he considers the engine of economic growth in this country, the engine of job creation in this country, has been intense and will continue to be.

The Earth’s rotation just stopped because of the Spin… But hey, if you tell a lie often enough it become the Truth. 🙂

TAPPER: Yes, I left out people I wasn’t talking about.

CARNEY: Well, no, but I mean, your — but your question framed it around the — so you’re talking about the 3 percent here. And as we’ve noted, under the definition of small businesses that Republicans trot out when they’re insisting on these tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires means that –

TAPPER: I wasn’t talking about millionaires and billionaires.

CARNEY: No, but it means –

TAPPER: I was talking about somebody making over $200,000 a year.

CARNEY: Sure. But I mean, again, that’s 97 percent of people who file — small businesses that file taxes under the individual tax code will receive this tax cut. Many of the remaining, you know, self-described small businesses that we’re talking about, we’re talking about hedge fund managers often, and law firm partners.

And addressing those small businesses that fall in the remaining category — this tax cut goes to everybody. This is an often- misunderstood fact in reporting and, I think, just in general that giving this tax cut — extending this tax cut to 98 percent of Americans, those who make up to $250,000, means that everyone gets it, even those who make millions and billions, up to the first $250,000 of income, so that for a family — that includes everyone, OK, and including small businesses that file in this manner.

Secondly, the president — the president believes that small businesses are so important that he has dedicated a lot of energy and focus on providing tax credits and tax incentives and tax cuts to small businesses throughout his three and a half years in office.

Beyond that, he believes that extending the high-end Bush tax cuts again is something we simply cannot afford. We — you know, we’re talking about a trillion dollars over a decade. We’ve seen what happened when these tax cuts, which you may recall — you and I were covering it — were sold initially as a payback from the budget surpluses that were achieved under the Clinton administration. And then when the economy ran into trouble and those surpluses were beginning to erode, it was sold as an economic stimulus measure. And what we got was middle-class income stagnating, the slowest expansion in 50 years and an economic crisis the likes of which we haven’t seen in more than 70 years. So –

TAPPER: I’m not — the question is this: Why is it a “giveaway”? Why are you guys using — you and President Obama — using the term “giveaway” when even if you support the Senate Democrats’ bill, it’s not technically a giveaway; it is allowing people to keep the tax cut that they got in 2001 and 2002?

CARNEY: Right, but these are tax cuts that we cannot afford, that do not, by — as — by the estimates of credible, independent economists do not measurably help the economy and do not — in the way that tax cuts to working and middle-class Americans help the economy.

And you know, we have to make choices. And it is a — it is a tax cut for the wealthiest Americans that we simply can’t afford.

And the — and those who say that, oh, well, it — you know, that it’s terrible for the economy — remember, again, you and I were there and covered it. There were proclamations of gloom and doom, of economic crisis and stagnation and recession that were promised by Republicans when President Clinton instituted the tax rates that existed throughout the ’90s. And instead of everything that Republicans predicted, we got the longest peacetime expansion — economic expansion in our history. We got 24 million jobs created, so — and plenty — as the president says, plenty of millionaires and billionaires created as well.

So it’s a matter –

TAPPER: You can feel free to run on President Clinton’s record, but that’s –

CARNEY: — it’s a matter of choices. I mean, that’s what the — I think the president makes clear. We can’t afford this tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. It is a giveaway that we cannot afford. Middle-class Americans need that tax cut. Our economy needs it for 98 percent of the country.

TAPPER: Okay, I’m going to change the subject. Vice President Biden issued a rather strong statement yesterday about an unattributed quote or unattributed quotes from unnamed Romney advisers in a British newspaper. The Romney campaign’s response was that unattributed quotes should not merit a response from the vice president of the United States. And I wondered if you had any response to that.

CARNEY: Well, I’ll leave specific campaign questions to the — for the campaign to answer. I find it a little ironic, given some of the attention paid to quotes from unnamed — alleged unnamed Obama campaign advisers that have been the focus of attention on the — of the Romney campaign.

What I can say is that the record here is what matters. When this president came into office, our alliances were under strain and frayed; our standing in the world had been diminished. In the three and a half years that President Obama has been in office, he has strengthened our alliances around the world, including and in particular with NATO countries and including and in particular with the United Kingdom, with whom we have a remarkably strong bond, a special relationship that has never been stronger. And you know, I’ll leave the back-and-forth to the campaign.

But let’s talk about policy and fact here. And I would note that in that article in question, again, as a matter of policy, the only difference that I could tell, aside from the quote that’s gotten a lot of attention that was focused on, was the need to — you know, that the only difference in policy proposals that seemed apparent were that we should move a bust from one room to another in the White House. And that was a principal policy difference, which is pretty preposterous.

This president has strengthened our alliances; he has built up American credibility around the globe; he has kept his commitments to end the war in Iraq, to take the fight to al-Qaida, to wind down our war in Afghanistan, to rebalance our focus towards Asia, which was neglected in the eight years prior to President Obama coming into office. And he is meeting all those commitments.

BS OVERLOAD!

The public needs to be clear about how this administration and many Democrats think. It’s more than a big-government mindset. It’s a government-is-god mentality.

The idea that government owns all and has the authority to manage everyone’s life is corrosive. The president doesn’t think that individuals should be recognized and compensated for their business success.

He wants to take them down a few notches and diminish and socialize their achievements. That’s neither a plan for prosperity nor an advancement of human dignity.

The language is as disturbing as it sounds. It is not consistent with deeply cherished ideals of American freedom. It is not democratic. It is not republican. It is primitive, tribal, backward, regressive. It hearkens back to an earlier age in which monarchs ruled absolutely and, as well, a more recent era of totalitarian governments.

The language itself is also dangerous. What kind of society would we have if the government indeed owned everything? What sort of economy would that produce? Imagine the quality of life under such an arrangement.

Actually, we don’t have to use our imaginations. All we have to do is look at Cuba. North Korea. The Soviet Union. East Germany. Maoist China. Murderous failures all.

No, we’re not saying that the administration wants to use those nations as models for a transformed U.S. We’re merely pointing out that, taken to its logical conclusion, the idea that government owns all will produce a totalitarian system.

It can’t be any other way.

Americans should be deeply offended that anyone would categorize the act of keeping one’s own money as a giveaway. And they should be profoundly alarmed when policymakers and their aides hold that view because they can turn their beliefs into oppressive law.

Remember, government creates neither wealth nor jobs. It has to take everything that it owns, and that requires force — real or implied.

Obama was elected in 2008 on a platform of hope and change. The promises sounded good to many even if they were not defined.

Now those terms have taken shape — unmistakably and unsettlingly so.

If a government that owns all is the change Obama promised in 2008, and it becomes the dominant governing philosophy of this country, then there’s not much hope left. (IBD)

Giveaway. That’s your Money. And you need to give it away to the government. After all, they are so vastly better and morally righteous in spending it than you are. 🙂

So give it up!

 

 

Lies, Damn Lies…and Liberals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wow.

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

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

Yeah, that was what I was thinking… 😦

SO Blige decides to cover her butt:

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

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

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

Since even You Tube buckled.

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

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

ERIC HOLDER SCOLDED

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

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

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

OBAMACARE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But this is false.

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

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

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

Also false.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We could go on, but you get the idea.

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

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

Ah, 2012 in America.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Doubletalk and Doublethink

Keystone Hilarity Update:White House press secretary Jay Carney first says Republicans “forced” President Obama to deny the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. Later in his press briefing, Carney says Obama didn’t turn down the pipeline.

“In terms of Keystone, as you all know, the history here is pretty clear. And the fact is because Republicans decided to play political with Keystone, their action essentially forced the administration to deny the permit process because they insisted on a time frame in which it was impossible to completely approve the pipeline,” Carney said when asked about the pipeline by ABC News’ Jake Tapper.

Later in the briefing, Carney says it is the Republicans’ fault.

Jake Tapper: “How can you say that you have an all the above on approach if the President turned down the Keystone pipeline? And you blame the Republicans for making it political.”

Carney: “But the President didn’t turn down the Keystone pipeline.”

“There are no magic solutions to rising oil prices,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “The rising gas prices clearly the effect of a variety of factors on the global price of oil,” he told reporters, citing geopolitical unrest and rapid growth in India and China.

President George W. Bush was mostly attacked for wanting to drill too much (or being “cozy” with the oil industry), while President Obama’s policies are rooted in unilaterally shutting down the domestic oil industry amidst rising prices and a struggling economy.

I guess the gas prices have forced the Democrats  to start  to squirm so they have to go to the 2 page playbook– Page 1- It’s the Republicans fault, Page 2- It’s someone else’s fault other than ours.

“It’s Bush’s Fault” Just doesn’t work anymore. Besides they are too busy with “It’s NOT Obama’s Fault” Now.

Bush drew gallons of coverage in 2008. Comparing a 20-day span of rising gas prices in 2008 to 24 days of rising prices in February 2011, the Business & Media Institute found the networks did more than 2 ½ times as many stories during the Bush years versus Obama.

Unrest in the Mideast has hit American consumers hard, driving up gas prices that had already been above $3-a-gallon since Dec. 23. The national average for gasoline hit $3.36 on Feb. 28, the highest ever for the month of February according to The Associated Press. But the amount of network news coverage of rising gas prices did not reflect it.

All three broadcast networks together averaged just one story about rising gas prices per day. In contrast, when gas prices rose similarly in 2008, the networks averaged more than one story, per network, per day.

It took 24 days, from Feb. 1, to Feb. 24 for the national average for unleaded gasoline to climb from $3.101 to 3.228. The last comparable period of “eye-popping” gas prices: the 20 days between Feb. 21, 2008, and March 11, 2008, when the national average climbed from $3.086 to $3.227.

Some 2008 reports including the March 6, 2008, “Early Show” exaggerated the already rising prices by emphasizing extremely high prices. That morning CBS showed viewers a California gas pump that was charging $5.19-a-gallon for regular unleaded before mentioning the national average for that day, which was $2.02 lower. Some 2011 reports have reversed that trend by downplaying the impact of currently high gas prices on consumers by using words like “inching” to describe rising prices, or calling U.S. prices “a bargain compared to Europe.”

The Business & Media Institute examined all the broadcast network news reports mentioning gas prices during each of those time periods and found ABC, CBS and NBC aired more than 2 ½ times more stories (63 stories to 24) in 2008 than they did in 2011. (Newsbusters)

See: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2011/03/01/networks-link-bush-skyrocketing-gas-prices-15-times-more-obama

The liberal fascination with developing expensive vehicles that run on electricity doesn’t change that: 1) Solar or wind powered vehicles don’t commercially exist; 2) The cars that do run on electricity, or even battery-powered hybrids still require gas  and 3) the high cost of the alternatively fueled vehicles makes them largely insignificant in the auto market and cost-prohibitive to the average consumer. (Heritage)

But as I said yesterday, the Ministry of Truth has a lot of work to do.

But Obama and Company figure if you’re given no choice ,by refusing to do anything about raising gas prices and actively working against oil companies, you’ll be herded into buy a hybrid or electric car. Exactly what they want you to buy and that it will work, eventually and it’s what “feels” good to them. So it must be better than something they accused Bush of being– “Pro-Oil”.

Just like if they spend even money and tax “the rich” enough it will eventually work.

Just give them more time. 🙂

Get out the Barf Bag Folks:

“We’ve got to have a return to some homespun American values of fair play, shared responsibility. That’s who we are as a people,” President Obama said during a press event on the payroll tax cut extension.

“You know, when times are tough, Americans don’t give up. They push ahead. They do whatever it takes to make their lives better, their communities better, and their countries better. With or without Congress every day I’m going to be continuing to fight with them. I do hope Congress joins me. Instead of spending the coming months in a lot of phony political debates (Like 15 months on ObamaCare Mr President?), focusing on the next election (He’s been doing nothing except that since 2009), I hope that we spend some time focusing on middle-class Americans and those are struggling to get in the middle class (and they are the ones paying $38,500 a person to kiss my ass at events). We have a lot more work to do. Let’s do it,” Obama said. (Yeah, socialism is hard work!) 🙂

And the Weirdest Moment of this year so far:

Today, an election lawyer tipped us off to a Federal Election Commission filing for a brand new super PAC: The Occupy Wall Street Political Action Committee.

The “eat the rich” and kill the Corporate people have the biggest Orwellian Doublethink in history, they are now a PAC, and will take money from “rich” people to defeat them because they are evil.

John Paul Thorton “Chief Principle Minister” of the PAC: We found it a little odd that Thornton, who decries corporate money in politics, is establishing a mechanism for raising unlimited corporate funds. “It does seem counterintuitive,” he said. “I am out to get the bloated amounts of money out of politics but to do that, we need to support candidates looking to do that.”

DOUBLETHINK: To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself — that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.

The world has truly gone insane but you aren’t supposed to notice.

So don’t tell anyone.

As always, should you or any of your I.M. Force be caught or killed, the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of your actions.

This Blog will self-destruct in five seconds. Good luck…

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez