Super Failure

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

So the Super Committee Failed?

Who’s surprised by this?

Not me. I predicted it. It wasn’t hard.

But I find it humorous the Democrats are the one saying that it was all the Republicans fault for being intransigent. But the fact that they were intransigent is not an issue to them.

But the ideological Grand Canyon IS THE PROBLEM! And neither side willing to compromise IS THE PROBLEM! Party Ideology is more important than the country. Their political ideology is more important than you and me.

$1.5 Trillion over 10 years is too tough for them. How do you solve $1.3 Trillion deficits PER YEAR!?

By the way, the automatic cuts start in 2013 AFTER THE ELECTION. How cowardly is that?

Democrats were coming to believe that Republicans were only interested in using the debt panel to cut taxes, not deficits.

Republicans, meanwhile, say they were becoming exasperated with Democratic refusal to consider any meaningful cuts to welfare programs including Medicare, Medicaid – which provides health insurance to the poor – and Social Security, the government pension system.

Between them, the three programs are set to devour 100 percent of federal tax income by 2047.

“Our Democratic friends were never willing to do the entitlement reforms,” Republican John Kyl told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.

There were deals and talks and at every turn someone “leaked” the secret negotiations to their favorite media types to crush it.

What was meant to be a secretive debt panel was now being undone by leaks. By then, aides say, trust had evaporated, and the work of the super committee was essentially over.

At an early breakfast meeting of the panel, Democrat James Clyburn, a veteran of the Civil Rights movement, rebuked his fellow committee members when they kept saying how hard it would be to strike a deal.

“Do you want to know what’s hard?” Clyburn asked. “Desegregating South Carolina in the 1960s. I met my wife in jail.” (Reuters)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

But don’t worry, you’re just too lazy to care.

Congratulations, average American! It’s your turn to be blamed for President Obama’s — and America’s — problems.

This is the biggest honor you’ve won since Time magazine named “you” the Person of the Year.
Being the root cause of our dire national predicament puts you in some very august company indeed. You are joining the ranks of George W. Bush, the Japanese tsunami, the Arab Spring, Wall Street fat cats, and other luminaries, both living and merely anthropomorphized.

Last week at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, Obama explained, “We’ve been a little bit lazy over the last couple of decades. We’ve kind of taken for granted — ‘Well, people would want to come here’ — and we aren’t out there hungry, selling America and trying to attract new businesses into America.”

The White House and its proxies insist that Obama wasn’t talking about Americans per se. He just meant we’ve been lazy about attracting foreign investment.

We’ll come back to that in a minute. For now, let’s take him at his word.

Still, you can understand the confusion. In September, the president reflected in an interview that America is “a great, great country that has gotten a little soft, and we didn’t have that same competitive edge that we needed over the last couple of decades.”

Shortly after that, he told rich donors at a fundraiser that “we have lost our ambition, our imagination and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge and Hoover Dam.”

So, Obama thinks Americans lack ambition and are soft, but don’t you dare suggest that he also thinks they’re lazy.

The point of all this is pretty obvious. Obama has a long-standing habit of seeing failure to support his agenda as a failure of character. The Democratic voters of western Pennsylvania refused to vote for him, he explained, because they were “bitter.” He told black Democrats lacking sufficient enthusiasm for his reelection to “Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’.”

And in the context of the country’s economic doldrums, Obama sees a lack of ambition, softness, laziness, etc., in anyone who doesn’t support his agenda. He has spent several years now exhorting Americans about how we have to “win the future” by doing what he says. He has told us repeatedly that this is our “Sputnik moment” when all Americans must drop their selfish, cynical, or foolish objections to his program. People who disagree aren’t putting their “country first.”

He’s constantly stoking nationalistic and quasi-paranoid fears of China to goad Americans into supporting ever more “investments” in green energy and high-speed white elephants.(Jonah Goldberg)

Now some humor:

A sheriff’s deputy was dispatched last week to a Florida elementary school after a girl kissed a boy during a physical education class.

HORROR!

School brass actually reported the impromptu buss as a possible sex crime, according to the Lee County Sheriff’s Office.

The assistant principal of Orange River Elementary School called in the cops after a teacher spotted the smooch Wednesday at the Fort Myers school. In fact, Margaret Ann Haring, 56, initially called child welfare officials, who directed her to contact the sheriff.

The kiss apparently occurred after two girls debated over whom the boy liked more. That’s when one of the girls “went over and kissed” the boy. The redacted sheriff’s report notes that Haring “stated there were no new allegations of sexual abuse as far as she knew.”

Deputies do not appear to be further probing the preteen kiss.

Maybe they should just pepper spray them!!! 🙂
Occupy Orange River Elementary!! 🙂
It has to be a Republican plot!
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 Political Cartoons by Dana Summers
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Rhetoric Uber Alles

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

“Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions,” Palin wrote in an early morning post on her Facebook account on Wednesday. “But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

“There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently,” Palin wrote on Facebook. “But when was it less heated? Back in those ‘calm days’ when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols?”

The ‘calm days’ where when the Liberal were in complete control and could do anything they wanted and could ignore you’re ignorant, racist, moronic opinions to the contrary. 🙂

The fact that isn’t the reality anymore just makes them mad.

And they will never give up their hunt for what they perceive as political advantage.

“Whether [political rhetoric] caused what happened in Tucson or not, it’ll cause the next tragedy,” Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) predicts on FOX News.

So even if this one isn’t caused by heated political rhetoric (though that’s all we, the left, have been saying for 5 days now) it WILL cause the next one so we have to stamp out the hateful rhetoric of the right before it’s too late!!

Sadly, shamefully, within just minutes, a nasty political spin was kicking in without any brake for decency or evidence. Conservatives were to blame.

CNN broke in with this horrible news at about 1:30 Eastern time, and within an hour, CNN put on the local political cartoonist, David Fitzsimmons, who announced that the shooting was “inevitable” considering “The Right in Arizona, and I’m speaking very broadly, has been stoking the fires of a heated anger and rage successfully in this state.” The state also had a conservative “fetish” for guns that added to the inevitability, he claimed. (Brent Bozell)

Rep. Jim Clyburn wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine – a move aimed directly at talk radio – while Media Matters CEO David Brock asked Rupert Murdoch to rein in or possibly even fire Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.

There has been no shortage of individuals and institutions that have sought to capitalize on the shootings in Tucson. Add Vermont senator Bernie Sanders to that list.

This afternoon Sanders sent out a fundraising appeal, seeking to raise money to fight Republicans and other “right-wing reactionaries” responsible for the climate that led to the shooting.

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!!

Meanwhile, many proud liberals, not to mention dedicated journalists, see no problem with fueling a mass panic over our “political discourse.” The fact that liberal rhetoric and images are often just as “extreme” is irrelevant. Also irrelevant is any violence that might be linked to such rhetoric. And the fact that the shooting suspect’s motivations may lay in a reality of his own design? That’s irrelevant too.

These critics’ aim is simply to exploit this horror as an opportunity to yell “shut up” at their political opponents. (Jonah Goldberg)

“Every time you listen to them, they are furious. Furious at the left. With anger that just builds and builds in their voice and by the time they go to commercial they are just in some rage every night with some ugly talk. Ugly sounding talk and it never changes,”< MSNBC’s Chris> Matthews said.

So the vitriol and hatred 24/7 on his own show and his own network, MSDNC are exempted, of course. they are as pure and virtuous as the snow covering 49 states right now (go global warming!!)

I guess that was the “tingle” up his leg this time. 😦

And then there’s the hatefest called the Westboro Baptist Church:

WBC WILL PICKET THE FAG-INFESTED, PERVERT-RUN TUCSON HIGH MAGNET SCHOOL (aka 9 year old Christina Taylor Green’s School). KILLED FOR YOUR REBELLION WHEN GOD SENT THE SHOOTER TO DEAL WITH IDOLATROUS AMERICA. (directly from their website by the way)

You know, she was Catholic! Now that’s Just Evil!  And “better off dead

And that’s hardly it. Just the most disgusting.

But don’t worry, it was FOX News and Talk Radio that cause the vitriolic political rhetoric! 🙂

This flood of slanderous sludge is designed for nakedly political benefit: to paint a permanent black mark on conservatives as accessories to murder, and criminalize any expression of conservatism as a dangerous anti-government conspiracy.

Then we need to ban Jodie Foster, after all she was the reason that President Reagan was shot in 1981.

And we need to ban Fan Club groupies because that who killed the Tejano superstar singer Selena.

Mark David Chapman killed John Lennon over “Catcher in the Rye” by J.D. Salinger

And Trenchcoats, as in The “trenchcoat mafia” of the two sick kids who shot up Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado.

BUT NOT Major Hassan who shot up Fort Hood Army base yelling “Allah Ackbar!” as he kills people!

Oh no! That would be “jumping to conclusions”!!!! (according to the President, the media and the left for months afterwards)

A guy who is a radicalized muslim is just a lone nutjob but a marijuana-toking mentally unstable kid who shoots up a Tucson strip mall is doing it because of right winger extremists!

<<barf bag please>>

It’s apparent from evidence found by the authorities and from interviews with the alleged killer’s friends and acquaintances that Loughner has fixated on Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords since 2007, long before anyone heard of the “tea parties” or, in most cases, Palin. Moreover, his grievance with Giffords appears to be unrelated to any coherent — or even incoherent — ideological platform. Rather, it drew on the bilious stew of resentments this young man cultivated as he lost his grip on reality. (Jonah Goldberg)

But that matters not a whit to the Left. It’s irrelevant.

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!

Then there’s the Pima County Sherriff:

Political Cartoon

The sheriff is widely known for calling Arizona’s tough immigration law “racist” because he said it required local law enforcement to engage in racial profiling. He refused to enforce it.

To date, there is no public evidence that accused shooter Jared Loughner was in any way motivated by the national rancor over illegal immigration and the Arizona law (though open-borders extremists from the Justice Department on down most certainly wish it were so). When he complained about non-English speakers, Loughner’s nonsensical diatribes were aimed at illiterates in general — not illegal aliens — and “grammar control” by the government.

No matter. Dupnik vehemently singled out “people in the radio business and some people in the TV business” like Rush Limbaugh for creating the New York Times-patented “Climate of Hate.” Sounding more like an MSNBC groupie (which, surprise, he confesses to be) than a responsible law enforcement official, Dupnik baselessly suggested that the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy and railed against “vitriol” from limited-government activists who are stoking “anger against elected officials.”

Dupnik’s mouth has done more to stoke self-inflicted ire against elected government clowns than anything the right could muster against him. Had the hyper-partisan Democrat been more in tune with his job than the media airwaves, the murderous, maniacal gunman might have been stopped.

As Dupnik himself has now admitted, Loughner leveled death threats against others that were investigated by law enforcement — and then apparently shrugged off. Locals note that Loughner’s mother worked for the county and may have had some pull. Pima County College campus police reported five serious confrontations with the mentally unstable young man before he was kicked out of the school, which he decried as an unconstitutional “torture facility.” Classmates said they feared for their lives. His friends say he was a pothead, a 9/11 Truther and a UFO conspiracist so kooky that even flying-objects adherents spurned him.

Dupnik is now following the same ill-gotten path. But decent Americans understand that he and his civilian counterparts have traveled a smear too far. Despite desperate attempts by the progressive left to pin the massacre on the “harsh tone” of its political opponents, a vast majority of Americans reject the cynical campaign to criminalize conservatism, suppress political free speech and capitalize on violent crime for electoral gain.

At the risk of being accused of inciting violence, you might say they’ve done gone and shot themselves in the foot. (Michelle Malkin)

The Left just doesn’t care. They are going to take their shots no matter what. Sensitivity, compassion, and intellectual honesty are far too low on their priority list for them to care.

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

It’s all About Me

Political Cartoon by Robert Ariail

YES WE CAN! 🙂

Political Cartoon by Steve Kelley
Jonah Goldberg: Most theories for why the president came unglued like a papier-mache doll in a steam bath during his press conference this week center on the fact that he can’t stand having his liberal bona fides questioned.

When Iran unveils its nuclear program or slaughters dissidents in the streets of Tehran, Barack Obama keeps a steadier hand than G. Gordon Liddy’s over a candle. Question his citizenship, his patriotism, even his jump shot, and he’s all Vulcan poise. But if you doubt his commitment to The Cause, he turns into Charlie Sheen without his Ritalin.

There are other theories, of course. He was just pretending to be mad so he could seem more moderate as he preps his 2012 bid for re-election. He hates giving Republicans what they want. Obama’s “political immaturity,” as South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said in an interview with National Review Online, leads to “whining” when he can’t have his way.

All of these theories are possible, and none of them are mutually exclusive. But there’s one more possible reason for his dyspepsia. This week Obama lost his argument with Hillary Clinton.

It’s largely forgotten now, but during their lengthy primary battle, the two committed liberals’ greatest disagreement wasn’t over policy or their shared disdain for George W. Bush. It was over their different visions of the presidency.

For example, in a Nevada debate, Obama admitted that he wasn’t a particularly organized person. But that was OK because the core role of the president shouldn’t be organizational but inspirational. “It involves having a vision for where the country needs to go … and then being able to mobilize and inspire the American people to get behind that agenda for change.”

Pshaw, responded Hillary, the president is really a “chief executive officer” who must be “able to manage and run the bureaucracy.”

This disagreement was symbolized by their respective role models. Obama likened himself to Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy, inspirational leaders who led through rhetoric. Clinton sided with Lyndon Johnson, the guy who spun the shining words into actual legislation and got it passed, often on a bipartisan basis.

The debate played itself out by proxy in liberal magazines and in snippets of speeches and short outbursts on the stump, with most liberals siding with Obama over Clinton. Some even suggested she was a racist — or at least race-baiting — for daring to suggest that all he offered was the ability to give a good speech.
But even some of Obama’s biggest fans admitted that his devotion to the magical power of words stemmed from the fact that he had little else going for him. “Barack Obama could not run his campaign for the presidency based on political accomplishment or on the heroic service of his youth,” David Remnick wrote in the New Yorker after Obama won the general election. “His record was too slight. His Democratic and Republican opponents were right: he ran largely on language, on the expression of a country’s potential and the self-expression of a complicated man who could reflect and lead that country.”

Fast-forward to this week. Obama’s undisciplined diatribe against the “purists” in his own party who oppose compromise amounted to an abject admission that Hillary was right all along.

“Measuring success” by the no-compromise standard, Obama declared, means “we will never get anything done. People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are.” But, he suggested, liberals will make little progress.

Obama then went on a stem-winder about how “this is a big, diverse country. Not everybody agrees with us. I know that shocks people. The New York Times editorial page does not permeate across all of America.”

All true. And the Democrats are being foolishly purist, as we saw Thursday when House Democrats voted to reject the tax compromise.

But denouncing purists and accepting that significant swaths of America aren’t going to be persuaded by your rhetoric is an admission that the Obama vision of the presidency either doesn’t work or that Obama isn’t up to the job of making it work.

Indeed, even on health-care reform, his signature accomplishment, Obama failed to mobilize and inspire the American people to his side. He got that passed with LBJ-like legislative skullduggery and sleight of hand, not “yes we can!” rhetoric.

Admitting you’re wrong is part of growing up, and growing up can be painful. At least it certainly looked painful watching it on TV.

So you bring in the smoothest talker you know, even if you’ve dissed him in the past — Bill Clinton. Then you make a poor excuse and go off to the White House Christmas Party (where it’s all about you) and leave Billy boy there to do your job for you because you have “communication” issues.
Political Cartoon by Ken Catalino
GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE
Mother nature kicked the Global Warming nuts in the gonads yet again.
They met in London, it’s a record snowfall. The meet in Copenhagen, it’s a record snowfall.
They meet in Cancun.
As negotiators from nearly 200 countries met in Cancun to strategize ways to keep the planet from getting hotter, the temperature in the seaside Mexican city plunged to a 100-year record low of 54° F. Climate-change skeptics are gleefully calling Cancun’s weather the latest example of the “Gore Effect” — a plunge in temperature they say occurs wherever former Vice President Al Gore, now a Nobel Prize-winning environmental activist, makes a speech about the climate. Although Gore is not scheduled to speak in Cancun, “it could be that the Gore Effect has announced his secret arrival,” jokes former NASA scientist Roy W. Spencer.
The reaction:
ClimateGate was “bad enough,” says Duncan Davidson in Wall Street Pit, but Cancun’s weather is particularly “inconvenient” for global-warming alarmists.
The Inconvenient Truth and Mother nature Strikes Again. But don’t worry, the Left is completely deaf to these signs.

Bolivian President Evo Morales called Thursday to save the Kyoto Protocol and to create an international climate justice tribunal.

‘The planet is wounded,’ Morales, Bolivia’s first president of indigenous descent, said in Mexico’s Caribbean resort city of Cancun.

‘We have an enormous responsibility with life and with humanity,’ he told the UN Climate Conference in a 20-minute speech.

Morales asked industrialized nations to approve a second round of commitments to the Kyoto Protocol, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions after 2012.

‘If we send the Kyoto Protocol to the bin, we will be responsible for ‘ecocide,’ and thus for genocide, because we would be attacking humanity as a whole,’ he said.

A World Court of Global Warming. Gee, I wonder who they’d go after?
The biggest polluter on the planet, China?
Or the the most politically advantageous? –US.
Hmmm… 🙂

(CNN) — Delegates at the United Nations climate change conference in Cancun, Mexico, approved an agreement early Saturday morning, despite objections from Bolivia.

The agreement includes plans to create a $100 billion fund to help developing nations deal with global warming and increase efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation.

Criminal Courts, taxes, and redistribution of funds….Sounds familiar somehow. 🙂

Bolivia’s government, meanwhile, claimed rich nations “bullied and cajoled” other countries into accepting a deal on their terms.

Anyone seeing the contradictions yet?

“For us, this is not a step forward. It is a step back, because what is being done here is postponing without limit the discussion on the Kyoto Protocol,” Bolivian Ambassador Pablo Solon told delegates early Saturday.

The agreement does not specify what will happen once the Kyoto Protocol expires, postponing the debate until the next scheduled climate talks in South Africa in 2011.

“It is less than what is needed, but it represents a significant step in the right direction,” <Mexican President> Calderon told delegates.

Sounds oddly familiar somehow? 🙂


The Fundamentals of Nov 2nd, 2010

Newsweek’s Ben Adler was aghast at the clause in the GOP’s Pledge to America that Republicans will provide a “citation of constitutional authority” for every proposed piece of legislation. “We have a mechanism for assessing the constitutionality of legislation, which is the independent judiciary,” Adler wrote. “An extraconstitutional attempt to limit the powers of Congress is dangerous even as a mere suggestion, and it constitutes an encroachment on the judiciary.”

A progressive blogger, meanwhile, writes in U.S. News & World Report that such talk of requiring constitutionality is “just plain wacky.”

Before we get to the historical niceties, a question:

Does anyone, anywhere, think legislators should vote for legislation they think is unconstitutional? Anyone? Anyone?

How about presidents? Should they sign such legislation into law?

Yet, according to this creepy logic, there’s no reason for congressmen to pass, obey or even consider the supreme law of the land. Re-impose slavery? Sure! Let’s see if we can catch the Supreme Court asleep at the switch. Nationalize the TV stations? Establish a king? Kill every first-born child? Why not? It ain’t unconstitutional until the Supreme Court says so!

Nationalize Health Care, sure, why not. Mandate that all citizens will have health care or else they will pay a fine (that is actually a tax but we don’t call it that except in court when we have to) or possibly go to jail.

Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Mandate that Companies must provide Health care or pay a fine (that is actually a tax but we don’t call it that except in court when we have to).

Whoops!, sorry the Democrats ALREADY DID THAT. 🙂

And of course, that means the president can’t veto legislation because it’s unconstitutional, because that’s apparently not his job. Wouldn’t want to “encroach” on the judiciary!

Especially, the judiciary we’ve been packing with Liberals for a generation or two.

Like suing a State of The Union, Arizona.

Get a Liberal judge to rule that if we want to ignore Border Security you can’t do anything about it! :)~  <sticks tongue out>

Oh, and you’re a “racist” if you disagree with us. 🙂

Of course, reasonable people understand how absurd all of this is.

There’s nothing in the Constitution — nothing! — that says the Supreme Court is the final or sole arbiter of what is or is not constitutional.

But for Liberals, let’s just pass whatever the hell we want, when we want it, and if we can get a Liberal enough judge to agree we can do it, Go for it!

Nor is there anything in Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court case that famously established judicial review. Nor is there in Cooper v. Aaron, the 1958 case in which the court ruled that its findings are the law of the land.

George Washington vetoed an apportionment bill in 1792 because it was unconstitutional. What was he thinking? If only he had a Ben Adler around to tell him what a fool he was.

Andrew Jackson vetoed the reauthorization of the national bank in 1832 because he believed it was unconstitutional. He added at the time that, “It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision.”

“Even the Supreme Court has never claimed that it is the only branch with the power or duty to interpret the Constitution,” says Jeff Sikkenga, a constitutional historian at Ashland University’s Ashbrook Center. “In fact, it has said that certain constitutional questions like war and peace are left to the political branches to decide.”

The debate over whether the courts are the final word on the Constitution is more than 200 years old. The debate over whether they are the sole arbiter of constitutionality is extremely recent and extremely silly.

But it’s also necessary because too many politicians — in both parties — have abdicated their most solemn duty: to support and defend the U.S. Constitution. George W. Bush signed campaign finance reform even though he thought much of it was unconstitutional. Nancy Pelosi thinks the Constitution has as much relevance as a pet rock. When asked if the health-care bill was Constitutional, her perpetually wide-open eyes grew perceptibly wider as she incredulously asked, “Are you serious?”

The real issue is quite simple. If more politicians were faithful to the Constitution, the government would be restrained. And restraining government is “weird,” “wacky” and “dangerous” to so many liberals today. (Jonah Goldberg).

And people who propose it, The Tea Party Movement, are “racists”, “stupid”, “morons” ,”idiots” ,”dumb”,”ignorant”,”fools”.

Fascinating. 🙂

A Reminder:

Unless something totally unforeseen occurs, Democrats are poised to take a real beating in November. Their response to the impending disaster has run the gamut. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is in denial: “One thing I know for sure is that Democrats will retain their majority in the House of Representatives.” Massachusetts Senator John Kerry is condescending: “We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on, so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening.” President Obama is angry: “It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election.” Why is the electorate ready to kick Democrats to the curb? Here’s why:

* An “unstimulated” economy. The original Mother of All Stimulus packages, $787 billion dollars, quickly grew to an astounding $865 billion. It wasn’t enough. Congress pumped out another $26 billion in “supplemental” stimulus in August. The results? Unemployment in the private sector remains well above the eight percent Democrats promised, even as public sector workers who support Democrats were rewarded; our Democratically-controlled Congress has amassed more debt in the last four years than nearly the previous two hundred and thirty combined; the Keynesian economic model Democrats stand by is a colossal failure; the Summer of Recovery was a propaganda fiasco.

* The health care bill. The absolute epitome of ideological, public-be-damned arrogance. A horrendous compendium of bribes, exploding bureaucracy, runaway costs, written in secret and unread by those who passed it. It includes a mandate, likely un-Constitutional, forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a fine. The same administration which originally claimed the commerce clause of the Constitution made such a fine possible is now saying that the federal governments’s “power to tax” justifies it. Irrelevant. 60% of Americans want this monstrosity repealed, ASAP.

* The federal lawsuit against the state of Arizona. Again, it’s the arrogance, stupid. Despite all the hectoring from Democrats and the Obama administration about racist this, and xenophobic that, fair-minded Americans recognized four things: people have a right to protect their life and property, and if the federal government can’t or won’t do it, they have a right to do it themselves; the idea that anyone opposing the “rights” of illegal aliens is a bigot is nonsense on stilts; the ruling class in Washington, D.C. is holding genuine border control hostage to “comprehensive reform;” the glaring double-standard of suing Arizona for violating federal immigration statues, even as the feds turn a blind eye to hundreds of “sanctuary cities” with illegal protection directives unquestionably in conflict with federal law.

* The demonization of the Tea Party movement. Take your pick: teabaggers, racists, angry white men, fringe elements, bigots, Astro-turfers, etc. etc. Democrats and the media have tried every one, and every one has been a miserable failure for one overwhelmingly simple reason: decent Americans know they’re decent, and getting insulted by Democrats running the country into the ground has only stiffened their resolve. Progressives want to demonize people who believe in smaller government, fiscal responsibility and a desire to return to Constitutional principles? Why not attack people who believe in guns, and religion too? Oh wait. The president already did that as well.

* A hopelessly compromised media. Air America tanked, CNN is tanking, and ABC, NBC and CBS news programs have been shedding viewers at historically unprecedented rates—even as Fox and the Wall Street Journal prosper. Americans don’t mind people in the media expressing their opinions, as long as they’re characterized as opinions, but they seethe when such opinions are portrayed as “hard news.” They get even angrier when certain stories are “omitted” by those same organizations, especially when Americans recognize such omissions are calculated to protect the progressive agenda. I wonder if it occurs to either Democrats or their media water-carriers that a majority Americans may savor whacking both groups in November. Depressed looks on the faces of Nancy Pelosi and Katie Couric? In theater circles, that’s known as a “two-fer.”

* The Ground Zero mosque. Yet another reminder of the contempt progressives and their media enablers have for ordinary Americans who had the “temerity” to allow their feelings to be known. Despite every attempt to characterize these Americans as Islamo-phobic bigots, the public wasn’t buying, again for one overwhelmingly simple reason: decent Americans once again demonstrated their decency by separating the legality of the project from the appropriateness of it.

* The complete disconnect between the First Family and ordinary Americans. The golfing, the soirees, and the high-priced vacations have created the perception that we are living through another “let them eat cake” moment in history. On Tuesday, the president called the public schools in Washington, D.C. a “‘struggling’ system that doesn’t measure up to the needs of first daughters, Sasha and Malia.” Those would be the same public schools Congressional Democrats tossed 3,300 low-income kids back into when they killed funding for vouchers that had freed those kids from D.C.’s educational ghetto. The First Lady is hectoring Americans to eat healthier. Perhaps more Americans would if they could afford to: the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) stated in their Producer Price Index that the price of food increased 2.4% for March 2010. That’s the biggest increase in almost 30 years.

* The war on terror. A politically correct contingency operation against unnamed insurgents with a specific draw-down date? Democrats once again prove that all the talk about Afghanistan being the “good war” was complete rubbish. They want out, and victory—along with the heroic efforts of our men and women in harm’s way—be damned. Once again: has America ever fought another war where they knew the exact location of the enemy, had the ability to inflict possibly irreparable damage on them—and decided to split the difference instead? If you answered “Vietnam,” another progressively-instigated catastrophe resulting in the deaths of fifty-eight thousand American soldiers and three million innocent Asians, go to the head of the class. And when is that civilian trial of the 9/11 perpetrators scheduled to begin?

* Czars and nationalization. The Obama administration and Congressional Democrats may bristle when Americans call them socialists, but the nationalization of banks, car and insurance companies, student loans and healthcare sure isn’t free-market capitalism. Neither is wiping out oil jobs in Louisiana with a government-mandated ban on offshore drilling—after the feds completely bungled their role in cleaning up the spill which engendered it. Unelected czars who answer to no one but the president, along with out-of-control government agencies such as the EPA have made it clear to many Americans that this administration often considers Congress a completely unnecessary component of governance, especially if they don’t kowtow to the president’s agenda.

* “Unexceptional” America. Progressive contempt for the values and traditions which make this the greatest country on earth can no longer be disguised. An American president who “believe(s) in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism” has made it plain that this is not a great nation which needs tweaking, but a fundamentally flawed one needing a complete progressive make-over. Once one understands this basic premise, everything this administration and Democratically-controlled Congress does makes sense. All of it centers around the ridiculous premise that America owes the world an apology for any number of shortcomings, many of which can only be alleviated by government-mandated “social justice.” That would be the same social justice which demanded—and still demands—that Americans manifestly unqualified to own homes be given mortgages, regardless.

Unknown to the majority of Americans, this precise mindset was part of the financial “reform” bill which also requires banks to lend a certain percentage of capital to minority-owned businesses, even if it means lowering their lending standards. Apparently progressives won’t be satisfied with their odious social-engineering schemes until every sector of the American economy bears a striking resemblance to the housing sector. So far, Americans support financial reform because it’s been framed as “Main Street versus “Wall Street.” It’s not. Like every other initiative undertaken by this Congress and this administration, it’s the elevation of irresponsible and dishonest Americans over those willing to accept the consequences of their own behavior.

There you have it. Democratic control for four years in Congress, and two in the White House has been exactly what many predicted: an ideologically-driven disaster of epic proportions. For years, progressives obfuscated their true intentions, because even they knew most Americans couldn’t stomach them. The elections of 2006 and 2008 changed everything. Progressives bought into their own hype, believing they had pulled off a multi-generational transformation of the American mindset. As a result, they showed Americans their true colors: unbridled arrogance, utter contempt for the average citizen’s intellect, and a ham-fisted, never let a crisis go to waste determination to bend the electorate to their will, using government as a club.

That’s why they’re going down in November. And the most satisfying aspect of the whole scenario is this: despite every attempt they’ve made to blame anyone and everyone else for their problems, they brought it on themselves. (Arnold Ahlert)

And don’t forget the LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN AMERICAN HISTORY during a recession (or “jobless recovery”) that Congress was too chicken to vote on stopping.

But don’t worry, it’s all those damn Republican’s fault!!

And George W. Bush.

The Banks.

CEOs

Corporate America.

Wall Street.

Teabaggers.

The Right Wingers.

Christians.

“The Rich”

FOX News

Rupert Murdoch (who owns Fox)

Talk Radio

Did I leave anyone out?

Oh, yeah, DEMOCRATS! 🙂