Cozy

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) – Chris Stigall talked to former CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson this morning on Talk Radio 1210 WPHT about the trouble reporters have to deal with while covering politicians and the government, as well as the current state of investigative reporting.

Responding to comments regarding a Phoenix television reporter yesterday who initially claimed that the White House pre-screens questions from reporters, Attkisson said, “I wouldn’t surprised if sometimes there is that level of cooperation with some questions. If I need something answered from the White House and they won’t tell me, I’ll call our White House Correspondent. They’re friendlier with the White House Correspondents in general. So the White House Correspondent may ask Jay Carney or one of his folks about an issue and they will be told ‘ask that at the briefing and we’ll answer it.’ They want to answer it in front of everybody. They do know it’s coming and they’ll call on you. There’s that kind of coordination sometimes. I wouldn’t be shocked if there’s sometimes more coordination. I don’t think it’s everybody on every briefing, every day. I’m pretty sure it’s not. But I think people would be surprised at the level of cooperation reporters have in general with politicians.”

Listen to full podcast here…

She also said it is more and more difficult for investigative reporters to get their stories published or on the air because of the trouble it may cause.

“Nobody was interested in the stories. It didn’t seem to matter what the topic was. There’s sort of a problem all over, I talk to my colleagues in different mediums. There’s just a lot of pressure. Investigative reporting gets a lot of backlash. They don’t quite know how to deal with it. Why not just put on stories that don’t draw that kind of response?”

Attkisson also confirmed she’s working on a book about how stories are reported in the media.

“I’ve been wanting to write about the unseen influences on the media by coordinated, paid factions, whether they’re from political, corporate or other special interests, the tactics they use to manipulate the images we see, not just in the news but on Facebook, Wikipedia, or fake Twitter accounts. It’s become a way of life and I don’t think the public is aware of how much nearly everything you see today may be influenced, in some fashion, by a paid interest that wants you to think something,” Attkisson said. (CBS)

During her time at CBS, Attkisson broke significant aspects of the Operation Fast and Furious scandal and about the Benghazi terror attacks. She is keeping up her investigative reporting on her website, SharylAttkisson.com.

And now we have a Pro-ObamaCare Bumper Sticker!  oooh…Now you’ll know who to laugh at in public!

 photo Screenshot2014-03-21at44215PM_zps6dfddfb8.png

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Commisars

Well, we won’t have the actual Ministry of Truth in full view just yet. But the fact that they were bold enough to even propose it and many “journalists” and other government and Congressional figures had no problem with it should a shiver down your spine.

The Federal Communications Commission will amend a proposed study of newsrooms in South Carolina after outcry over what some called “invasive questions,” the commission’s chairman said Friday.

The survey was meant to study how and if the media is meeting the public’s “critical information needs” on subjects like public health, politics, transportation and the environment. Now, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said questions about news philosophy and editorial judgment will be removed from the survey and media owners and reporters will no longer be questioned.

“Any suggestion the Commission intends to regulate the speech of news media is false,” FCC spokeswoman Shannon Gilson said Friday in a statement, adding that a revised study will be released within the next few weeks.

FOR NOW. We just have to work out a better way to approach it. The frog was thrown in the boiling water and he jumped out so we need a different approach to insure he won’t jump out before he’s boiled to death.

The Justice Department announced Friday it is revising its rules for obtaining records from the news media in leak investigations, promising that in most instances the government will notify news organizations beforehand of its intention to do so.

Because we’ve gotten so much for spying on the and persecuting them. We need a less invasive and less public way of spying on them and then persecuting the offenders.

And the fact that this was all started by “journalism” schools who were not happy with opposition news reporting should terrify you.

Journalism as it was practiced for 200+ years is dead. Now it’s just propaganda.

And, especially on the Left, the Freedom of Speech only extends to their Speech, not yours.

The move to police the newsrooms is an effort to bring back the now-defunct “Fairness Doctrine,” which forces station managers to air unpopular views outside the wishes of both owners and viewers.

Aka, get the opposition off the air. After all, would the FCC demand that MSNBC give equal treatment to conservatives? or would it just demand that FOX give equal time to The Far Left Administration cronies??

D’Oh!

Under the banner of minority representation (OF COURSE!), FCC’s plan to police America’s newsrooms was to dispatch politically connected contractors from a company called Social Solutions International to conduct a “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs.”

They would interrogate America’s editors and reporters in TV, radio and even newspapers about how they decide which stories to report, all to find bias in need of a government remedy.

After all, you’re all racists & sexists anyhow.

The FCC insists the study is just a quest for information to be given on a “voluntary” basis, but with its power to issue licenses swaying over the heads of editors and reporters, it’s anything but voluntary.

I will voluntarily hold a loaded gun to your head. Now you can say what you want or you can say what I want you to say, your choice. 🙂

The plan was so bad the FCC was forced to issue a statement Friday backtracking on the idea, claiming in its press release that it was “Setting the Record Straight On The Draft Study” (as if the problem was bad reporting rather than an atrocious idea).

It’s not out fault you got mad at us or misunderstood what we were trying to do. Oh, sorry, I’ll put that gun down for now…Until I come up with a better way to extort you, Like I did with ObamaCare.

“My staff has engaged in a careful and thorough review of the Research Design with the contractor to ensure that the inquiries closely hew to the mandate of Section 257. While the Research Design is a tool intended to help the Commission consider effective, pro-competitive policies that would encourage new entrants, its direction need not go beyond our responsibilities. We continue to work with the contractor to adapt the study in response to these concerns and expect to complete this work in the next few weeks.”

Well, that was a lot of smoke and mirrors BS that sounds a lot like the excuses for the ObamaCare Website failure, especially since this study first came to light over 6 months ago and no one on this “research design” team had no issues with the “design” until the opposition media firestormed them!

We didn’t know, we’re sorry. We’ll try again later.

We need to change our methodology and get better optics to successfully pitch the idea that New Rooms, and bloggers need to be monitored for their content.

Be Afraid, Be very Afraid.

Orwell: “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a
human face – forever.”

ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN??? 🙂

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Not the liberal Left’s version:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Any religion (and will mock the free exercise thereof); or abridging the freedom of LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE speech, or of the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to worship the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES, any assembly in opposition must therefore be “terrorism” or “racism” and must be considered sedition, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against Corporations and to seek “social justice” at all costs. 🙂

So be careful of pots of waters that may boil, The FCC is in the Kitchen with a recipe for Frog stew.

 

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

2016 Part 2

Now that a documentary warning that a re-elected Barack Obama would turn America into a Third World country is a box-office hit, the president’s media surrogates are trying to discredit it.

The film, aptly named “2016,” documents how Obama’s Kenyan father had a greater influence on him than the public has been told. In fact, he shaped the president’s intellectual development and world view.

So what? Barack Hussein Obama Sr., who died in 1982, was an African communist and anti-colonialist who hated the West. He wanted to see powers like Britain and what he viewed as its imperial successor, America, punished for oppressing peoples and exploiting their labor and resources.

Obama Jr. shares his father’s animosity and is doing his bitter bidding, according to “2016,” which is written and narrated by scholar Dinesh D’Souza and based on his book, “Roots of Obama’s Rage.”

The son, D’Souza warns, is on “a campaign of revenge” to bring down America as a “military and economic power.”

While hard to accept, the film answers what the media refuse to even question. That is, why the president of the United States would:

• Hold corporate America, Wall Street and the wealthy in contempt.

• Run against capitalism in a country run by capitalism.

• Deny America’s exceptionalism on the world stage and lead from behind.

• Apologize and bow, literally, to Third World leaders in a bizarre and unprecedented doctrine of mea culpa.

• Throw key Middle East ally Israel under the bus over Jewish settlements.

• Withdraw hastily from Afghanistan while refusing to talk about this key front in the War on Terror in terms of victory.

• Propose slashing the U.S. nuclear arsenal, while mothballing missile defense.

• Fail to guard national security secrets critical to protecting America from foreign threats.

• Curb domestic oil production and block the Keystone Pipeline, while underwriting exploration and drilling in South America.

• Compound America’s debt crisis with even more federal spending, risking more U.S. credit downgrading.

D’Souza notes that the thrust of Obama policy aims to either redistribute wealth at home or U.S. power abroad. He argues it’s strategic, designed to right past wrongs and delegitimize America as the world’s richest superpower.

Predictably, the Associated Press slammed his film as “entirely subjective” and “thin” on evidence. It scoffs that about the only evidence he came up with to support the assertion that Obama’s presidency is an expression of his father’s political beliefs is the title of his 1995 memoir, “Dreams From My Father.”

But this is the very least of the evidence D’Souza presents. AP leaves out key facts in its so-called “fact check.” Or it parrots White House denials that are no longer even operative.

For instance, D’Souza points out that London had gifted a bust of Churchill to the Oval Office only to have Obama, in a slap, return it as soon as he took office. The Brits made it clear Obama could keep the small statue in the Oval Office. Problem is, Churchill happened to be prime minister when Britain ruled Kenya and allegedly mistreated Obama’s grandfather. So Obama shipped it off.

AP claims there’s no truth to the story, even though an Obama aide recently had to retract a statement denying Obama sent the bust back to the Brits.

Obama’s father was so anti-West that British intelligence warned the U.S. not to grant him and a group of Kenyan students visas to study in the U.S. They were flagged in a 1959 diplomatic cable as radicals with an “anti-American and anti-white” political agenda.

When Obama Sr. returned to Kenya with a Harvard economics degree, he joined the newly independent Kenyan government as a Marxian economist. AP never mentions the July 1965 policy paper he wrote advising Nairobi to wring all vestiges of Western “neocolonialism” out of the Kenyan economy and replace them with Soviet-style communism, including industrial nationalization.

In the eight-page tract, he proposed economic tonics strikingly similar to ones now being pushed by his son, including: taxing the “rich” to “redistribute economic gains” and “economic power,” funding public works projects and other government “investments,” and forcing “people to do things they would not do otherwise,” such as joining government-run cooperatives to discourage “individual” choices not in the “public interest.” He railed against “free enterprise,” arguing it creates wealth “disparities” and benefits “only a few individuals.”

Though the Obama campaign has denied Obama Sr. was a communist, it has defended his paper’s proposals by citing a Kenyan professor’s recent opinion that they were “spot on.”

In fact, Obama’s father’s ideas were even more radical than those proposed by Kenyan labor leader Tom Mboya, who wanted to develop a socialist system independent of the USSR. Obama Sr. sided instead with the leader of the pro-Soviet group, Oginga Odinga.

This is key, because in August 2006, then-Sen. Obama traveled to Kenya to campaign for Odinga’s son, Raila Odinga, who was running for prime minister as a Marxist. Odinga, who studied in East Berlin during the Cold War and named his son Fidel, spent several years in jail for leading a bloody coup in 1982 against then-Kenyan President Daniel Arap Moi—a close U.S. ally.

With Obama’s help, Odinga became prime minister in 2008. The two sons of communists took power the same year, fulfilling their fathers’ dreams.

IBD has learned that Obama’s father adopted some of his ideas, namely nationalization of banking and other industries, from a Marxian economist from the University of Chicago. Obama Sr. was a fan of professor Martin Bronfenbrenner, a self-described “socialist,” and closely studied his 1955 paper, “The Appeal of Confiscation in Economic Development,” in which Bronfenbrenner argued for state control of banks.

“Confiscation of capital has not killed the goose that laid the golden eggs in the Soviet Union, in China, or in the other ‘people’s democracies.'” he said. “It seems rather to have been an important device permitting these countries to develop and industrialize rapidly.”

In 1964, a year before Obama’s father wrote his communist tract, Bronfenbrenner publicly complained that Japan was “foolhardy” to lower surtaxes on the rich, arguing that high tax rates and redistribution of income foster rapid economic growth.

The press insists Obama Sr. abandoned his son when he was two years old and remained absent from his life thereafter. In fact, he visited adolescent Obama in Hawaii, one time staying with him for a full month during which he spoke at his school.

It’s plain from Obama’s memoir that he worshipped his father. Obama devotes more than 130 pages, or roughly a third, of “Dreams” to covering his father’s life and his colonized ancestry in Kenya. This is purposeful. Obama sympathizes with the idea that “neocolonial wealth,” held even by Asian business owners in Nairobi, should be “redistributed to the people.” (Neocolonialism is the alleged economic exploitation that remains even after political independence.)

Obama says he realized who he is and what he really cares about when he visited his father’s grave. He describes breaking down and weeping, whereupon he reflects: “The pain that I felt was my father’s pain.”

D’Souza says Obama sought out paternal surrogates who shared his father’s anti-colonial, anti-capitalist beliefs, including:

Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party member investigated by the FBI for un-American activities. As a teenager, Obama sat at Davis’ knee in his Waikiki bungalow, where he was brainwashed into hating America while romanticizing Soviet Russia. Interestingly, Davis put Churchill at the center of Anglo-American “imperialism.”

Rev. Jeremiah Wright, moreover, baptized Obama into “liberation theology,” which emerged from the communist movement in Central America. Wright’s church “stood in solidarity” with the Sandinista dictators of Nicaragua while Obama attended there.

Not surprisingly, Obama protested U.S. support for the Contra rebels. Wright also lionized Hamas and called for divestment in Israel, which he accused of having “illegally occupied Palestinian territories” for decades.

Derrick Bell, the late Harvard law professor, taught Obama “critical race theory” and “postcolonial theory,” which argues that Western imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. Obama remained close to Bell until his death last year.

All three of these surrogate fathers of Obama, along with Obama Sr. himself, were heavily influenced by Frantz Fanon, a Marxist revolutionary who didn’t look or sound like one. Rarely seen without a suit and tie, the handsome and cerebral Fanon nonetheless described capitalists as “wretched” and the United States as “a monster.”

He called for “a planned economy, for outlawing profiteers,” and for wringing neocolonialism and capitalism out of every institution of society. In “The Wretched of the Earth,” the late Fanon wrote, “What matters today is the need for a redistribution of wealth,” adding “humanity will have to address this question, no matter how devastating the consequences may be.”

Fanon, who died in the 1960s, viewed Kenya through the same angry lens as Obama Sr., railing against “the British colonial authorities” and “their intimidation tactics” against the Mau-Mau rebels. He scolded America for its indifference to the “200,000 victims of repression in Kenya.” Later, he argued decolonized African governments had been “bought off” by imperialist profits.

Obama also idolized Fanon, devouring his works in college. “I distinctly remember Obama surprising me by bringing up Frantz Fanon and colonialism,” said John C. Drew, a Ph.D. political scientist who was a fellow “angry Marxist” and friend of Obama when he attended Occidental College. “He impressed me with his knowledge of these two topics, topics which were not among my strong points.”

Fanon’s anti-Western diatribes, including those contained in an earlier book, “Black Skin, White Masks,” influenced not only Obama’s intellectual development but his political aspirations.

“Fanon is the man who helped pave (his) transition” from community organizer to politician, D’Souza said. “He is the one who helped Obama to put on his mask,” he added, “the mask that would enable Obama to translate his anti-colonial ideas into the language and imagery of modern American politics.”

Americans might be surprised to know that Obama, like Fanon, believes much of America and its territories were illegally colonized. Obama wrote in 2006 that settling Indian lands and the Southwest, annexing Hawaii, and bringing Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines under U.S. control were “racist” conquests and “an exercise in raw power.”

Echoing Wright’s post-9/11 sermon that “America’s chickens have come home to roost,” Obama wrote in the preface to the 2004 edition of “Dreams” that “history returned that day with a vengeance.”

Obama also thinks that “blacks were forced into ghettos” after slavery by a founding capitalist system that favors whites. He sees a kind of apartheid existing in America today, in spite of civil-rights laws and affirmative action programs. “He sees capitalism as a form of neocolonialism,” D’Souza said, and Republicans as the neocolonial party.

Obama revealed in “Dreams” that more needs to be done to free people from “the white man’s empire,” and that this is why he went to law school — “to learn things that would help me bring about real change.”

In 2006, Obama wrote that soaking the rich will “restore some balance to the distribution of the nation’s wealth.” He is less concerned with how such surtaxes solve the budget crisis than how they bring about “economic justice.” For example, he thinks the capital-gains tax rate should be raised expressly “for the purposes of fairness.”

“Obama cannot bring himself to abandon his father’s anti-colonial ideology,” D’Souza explained. “That ideology calls for transfers of wealth from the colonizers to the colonized.”

Obama doesn’t just have a hidden ideological agenda, the filmmaker says. He’s also hiding a personal agenda — and using the power of the presidency to settle old scores.

America in 2008 had no idea it was electing a leader with such baggage. Now thanks to this compelling documentary, it knows better. (Paul Sperry)

Or at least it should. But it’s not like the Ministry of Truth will tell anyone…

Washington Post: One thing can be said for “2016.” It’s anything but crude. The best infomercials rarely are.

And, make no mistake, D’Souza’s documentary profile of President Obama — which is like his earlier writing attempts to portray its subject as not just anti-capitalist but anti-American — is just that: a slick infomercial.

Meanwhile, 2006’s Bush Assassination movie “Death of the President” gets a solidly different view. A movie depicting the assassination of a sitting President is an abomination. But not to the liberal left.

An unsettling and exceptionally skillful exercise in blurring the lines between appearance and reality, this fictional, documentary-style film uses the incendiary premise of the assassination of President George W. Bush in the not-too-distant future as a springboard for thinking about the practical and psychic toll of how America deals with terrorist threats.

Those who would condemn “DOAP” without seeing it should be made aware of one crucial fact: Range does not depict that event with glee or even a smirk. The shooting of Bush is indeed portrayed with solemnity and grief The ballast of “DOAP,” after the horrific event itself unfolds, becomes a true-crime procedural dedicated to the search for the assassin. It’s at this point that Range reveals his true agenda: Although a few suspects come under scrutiny, only one is finally railroaded into a kangaroo conviction, the result of a beefed-up Patriot Act, political expedience and a populace agog with paranoia and fear.

Now imagine a reboot remake of the movie starring Obama and what the Left would say now….

Exactly. 🙂

And that’s what we are up against.

I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.– Gov Huckabee 2009.

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Ponying Up

VP Biden: “Look at what they [Republicans] value, and look at their budget. And look what they’re proposing. [Romney] said in the first 100 days, he’s going to let the big banks write their own rules — unchain Wall Street,” Biden said a rally in Danville, Va. “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.” (Politico)

No hyperbole here… 🙂

Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul claims that “President Obama’s campaign keeps sinking lower.” What was the offense? Vice President Biden said the word “chains.”(WP)

No big deal.

Then Biden “clarified” his comments. And the “journalists” are ok with that.

No big deal.

But Ryan wants to kill your grandma! 🙂

I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.–Gov Huckabee

Biden’s Best though: “First mainstream African American who is articulate, bright, clean”

“Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago,” Romney said while campaigning in Ohio.

I’m sure that’s “racist” from a hateful, angry, rich white guy! 🙂

Sirius XM radio host Dave Rubin called Romney-Ryan “the whitest ticket since the KKK voted for their box social chairperson.” 🙂

Liberals have taken Chicago politics to a whole new level this campaign cycle with baseless accusations suggesting their opponents are unsympathetic, money-grubbing extremists who will feed your grandmother cat food and steal her Medicare benefits and Social Security check before they push her backwards off a cliff without a blindfold.

 

There’s a certain truth to the old nursery rhyme, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me,” but in the game of politics, names are like mud, and mud sticks. The Democratic Party is replete with lazy cowards who choose to sling mud rather than debate issues. Why waste one’s energy hurling sticks and stones when slander will do the job without lifting a finger?

 

The Obama administration has nothing to run on, save a campaign of character destruction, given its deplorable record of supersized governmental policies leading to high unemployment and an economy teetering on the brink of insolvency. As juvenile as it is, mudslinging is the only hand desperate liberals have left to play. They’ve got nothing.

 

According to Politico, Obama’s plan is to “destroy Romney” utilizing the same methods he’s used in previous races. Former White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said the campaign will focus on attacking Romney’s character to “portray him as “inauthentic, unprincipled and weird.” Here is weird: to date, liberals have painted presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney as a liar, a miser, a felon, a tax evader, an accomplice to a woman’s cancer death – without a shred of evidence.

 

Circumstances are no different for Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). Prior to being chosen as Romney’s running mate, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan was already a source of liberals’ angst and a target of their attacks simply because he is a freethinking financial genius who embraces the free market.

 

Liberals are already hollering Ryan doesn’t have enough private sector experience to be qualified to be Vice President. Prior to his public service, Ryan was employed at a variety of jobs, including a stint driving the Oscar Meyer Weinermobile, making him better qualified than our president was in 2008. And then we have as next in line, Vice President Biden. Biden has his mindless blundering, and Ryan has his arithmetic. You do the math.

Some label Ryan as a flip-flopper for his support of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and auto company bailouts Ryan justified as a way to halt the raging economic firestorm. Responding to the Daily Caller, Ryan said he believed the economy was “on the cusp of a deflationary spiral which would have created a Depression” and had that happened, we would have had “a big government agenda sweeping through this country so fast that we wouldn’t have recovered from it.”

With time ticking closer to the November elections, frantic and radical liberals will ramp up their attacks to paint a proven job creator and a budget hawk in the most unattractive light possible in hopes voters will be distracted from the real issues surrounding a failed and visionless presidency. (Susan Brown)

But you’re a pathetic racist for criticizing it.

 Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

It’s a Liberal Thing

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

And my own…FEAR IS HOPE!

More of the same:

On a special broadcast of MSNBC’s “Hardball” on Saturday, weekend morning host Melissa Harris-Perry expressed her displeasure with the selection of Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate.

In particular, Harris-Perry took issue with Ryan quoting Thomas Jefferson’s line in the Declaration of Independence, in which he declared rights come from God and nature and not from government.

“The thing I really have against him is actually how he and Gov. Romney have misused the Declaration of Independence,” she said. “I’m deeply irritated by their notion that the ‘pursuit of happiness’ means money for the richest and that we extricate the capacity of ordinary people to pursue happiness. When they say ‘God and nature give us our rights, not government,’ that is a lovely thing to say as a wealthy white man.”

“But we could not have them until there was a Civil War that allowed the federal government to impose those nature and God-given rights would actually be respected by our government. And I think that they cannot continue to go down this line on the Declaration of Independence.”

Should we mention the Wealthy White Slave owners in the South and the Freed Slaves in the North?
Probably not. She’d probably think we we were making it up.
Racism, it’s a Liberal Thing! 🙂
“There’s only one president that I know of in history that robbed Medicare, $716 billion to pay for a new risky program of his own that we call Obamacare,” Romney told Schieffer. “What Paul Ryan and I have talked about is saving Medicare, is providing people greater choice in Medicare, making sure it’s there for current seniors. No changes, by the way, for current seniors, or those nearing retirement. But looking for young people down the road and saying, ‘We’re going to give you a bigger choice.’ In America, the nature of this country has been giving people more freedom, more choices. That’s how we make Medicare work down the road.”

According to HotAir.com, the following remark by Ryan was cut and did not air but is crucial in explaining to viewers, especially Florida seniors, that his plan does not affect senior citizens and that his own mother is a Medicare senior.

“My mom is a Medicare senior in Florida,” Ryan said. “Our point is we need to preserve their benefits, because government made promises to them that they’ve organized their retirements around. In order to make sure we can do that, you must reform it for those of us who are younger. And we think these reforms are good reforms that have bipartisan origins. They started from the Clinton commission in the late ’90s.”

HotAir.com called the broadcast cut “journalistic malpractice.”

“Ryan’s plan doesn’t affect those already eligible for Medicare,” Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com wrote. “In fact, one of the conservative criticisms of the plan was that he didn’t give current Medicare recipients the option to choose a private-insurance plan, as younger Americans will get once they become eligible. That’s a pretty newsworthy detail, no?”

The Ryan budget proposes the partial privatization of Medicare by turning it into a premium-support system within a federal exchange, where insurance companies compete for business while meeting coverage requirements.  That’s really no different than Medicare Advantage, which puts market power into cost control and gets the government out of paying providers over a period of several years.  It’s not a perfect solution, as it maintains the third-party-payer system that interferes with pricing signals, which is the main problem driving the cost spiral.  However, it’s as close as we can get to a good political solution, since there is absolutely no support for dismantling Medicare entirely, and it at least lessens the problems of price-signal opacity.

This demonstrates the advantage that Romney gets in picking Ryan as his running mate.  Democrats would have hung the Ryan plan around his neck anyway.  Now Ryan himself gets to answer those attacks on the biggest stage, and the more people hear what Ryan actually proposes, the more apt they are to like it.

Update: The CBS broadcast transcript shows pretty clearly that none of this actually aired on 60 Minutes. (Hot air and Newsmax)

Journalistic “editing” it’s a Liberal Thing. 🙂
Medicare Advantage was scheduled to be destroyed by ObamaCare because the liberals didn’t like it’s cost containment success and beside they had some crony capitalism to dole out, TO AARP!!
It’s called Medi-Gap. It costs most and is less efficient, but politically, it’s a winner!
Now that’s definitely a Liberal thing.
And then there’s the debates:

Apparently, ABC News’s Brian Ross was busy, so the ABC moderator chosen for the vice presidential debate in Danville, Ky., on Oct. 11 of this year will be the network’s Chief Foreign Correspondent, Martha Raddatz.

Matt Drudge has the rest of the debate lineup: Jim Lehrer, of PBS, will ask the questions at the first presidential debate, which is Oct. 3 in Denver. Next comes CNN’s Candy Crowley, who will pick questioners at a town hall-style event in Hempstead, N.Y. on Oct. 16. Bringing up the rear will be veteran CBS reporter Bob Schieffer, who will host the final debate in Boca Raton, Fla., on Oct. 22, Boca Raton.

All moderated by Liberal Journalist who will be in gotcha mode looking for to destroy their evil opponents. Journalism will not be anywhere in sight.

The fix is in. “objectivity” is nigh.

So the side will be loaded and very heavily biased in the Liberals favor so it’s “fair”.

That’s a very liberal thing.

To believe that Ryan’s budget will somehow hurt the ticket is to buy deeply into the notion that U.S. Hispanics are pre-ordained to live as helpless wards of the State, unable to function without the benevolent guidance and assistance that can only come from the enlightened experts of our government Überklasse.

The fact is that Hispanics are just as exposed to debt and deficits as anyone else, and have as much of a stake in the coming debate over debt and deficits, if not more so.  For Hispanics (as well as other immigrants), this election presents a stark choice between a return to the promise of the America they emigrated to, or a continued march down the road to an America that more closely resembles the country they intended to leave behind. (Hot air)

But guilt,fear and self-editing is a very Liberal thing. And they want you to practice it every moment of your life.

You can’t possibly succeed in life without them.

Oh, and anyone who opposes them is an extremist!

Congressman Paul Ryan is the poster boy for the extreme Republican leadership in a Congress whose overall approval rating is 12 percent. His plan to dismantle Medicare is deeply unpopular with the general public, and especially undecided voters.

You might be wondering why the hell Romney picked this guy. But this is a strategic pick that carries real danger for us.

Here’s the calculation: Mitt Romney doesn’t need or expect Paul Ryan to convince even one undecided voter to cast their ballot for him. That’s not what he’s on the ticket for. He’s there to reassure and inspire ultraconservative ideologues and corporate interests that they will have one of their own a heartbeat from the presidency.

That means tens or even hundreds of millions more dollars for the Romney campaign and the array of outside groups supporting him — and if current trends hold, more than 90 percent of that money will be spent on TV ads — lying, distorting and trashing Barack Obama. Those ads will have more impact on undecided voters than anything Paul Ryan himself does or says.

Please donate $3 or more today:

<<website address deleted by me>> (it’s a conservative thing! 🙂 )

More soon.

Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

Its a Liberal thing. 🙂

So, why the hell did Romney choose Paul Ryan as his running mate? Because Ryan has a plan, he has a vision and he’s working. (Katie Pavlich)
And boy do they HATE that.
And HATE is a very Liberal Thing.
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

 Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Tragedy Strikes


Jessica Ghawi (Redfield)

I was reminded that we don’t know when or where our time on Earth will
end. When or where we will breathe our last breath. … I say all the
time that every moment we have to live our life is a blessing. So
often I have found myself taking it for granted.– Jessica Ghwai (aka Jessica Redfield) who blogged after missing a shooting in Toronto by minutes but was killed early Friday by the Aurora Killer at the Movie Theater.

And we really don’t know when the second will come. That split second that means you are here and now you’re not.

So we do need to appreciate what we have for as long as we have it.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/07/21/commemorating-the-victims-not-the-aurora-movie-theater-shooter/

BUT… Not on the Liberal Left. And for the record I don’t bring this up to politicize it. I bring it up so we can properly understand that many on the Left have no feelings about this other than false sympathy and political opportunism. And that’s sickening. And it needs to change. And the only way it changes is to shine a bright light on it so the snakes crawl back under there rocks never to be seen again. Now that is “Hope and Change” I would want to believe in.

“You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”- Rahm Emmanuel, former Chief od Staff for President Obama and now Mayor of Chicago.

And unfortunately, in recent times like this Liberals go all “unity” and “civility” on us, but they don’t really mean it ultimately. They are too political about everything and anything for it to be honest for very long.

There are already those on the Left talking about how to use this tragedy to promote their Gun Control agenda. And that’s sickening. But True.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, there isn’t anything wrong with showing sympathy, but there has to be more. “You have to question how genuine that sympathy is if it’s not accompanied by talk about solutions to the problem.”

But, Gross said, the “now is not the time” argument would only be genuine “if history showed that there ever is a time to discuss the role of gun policy in preventing these tragedies.”

I question their capacity if if not even 24 hrs later you are jumping on the political bandwagon.

Mayor Bloomberg of New York went on local radio just hours afterwards and was politicizing it. The man with the Soda and Salt bans.

What about the illegal guns sold to known Mexican Drug Cartel Gang members that have killed people?

Nothing.

Where is there outrage there? It’s a bit selective.

And the Left is all about “unity” and “civility” and “common sense” right now. But give them a very short time and they’ll be back to policies of hate, division, envy et al.

They talk one thing and do another.

And this really is the time to pull to together. But it won’t last.

One ABC report yesterday was already blaming The Tea Party. And another report (not ABC) blames Occupy Wall Street.

So it has already started.

On ABC’s Good Morning America, anchor George Stephanolpoulos took a “report” from ABC’s Chief Investigator Brian Ross who was supposedly investigating the crime. Here is what Ross said,

There’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.

First of all the name James Holmes is not a very exotic name. Many, many James Holmes live in the Aurora area. A quick search of the White Pages online finds at least five James Holmeses in Aurora and at least a half dozen in Denver and over thirty in the state.

Yet, Brian Ross immediately stampedes to a Colorado Tea Party webpage in hopes of finding the name James Holmes, then, finding one, he runs to the camera to blame the Tea party without taking even a second to ascertain if the James Holmes on the Tea Party website is, or even could be the Colorado theater murderer.

You go out, you lie about your enemies allowing the narrative to take hold in order to hurt your political opposites, then, when it inevitably turns out that your supposition is wrong, you put a “correction” somewhere in the back of a newspaper where no one will ever see it. Your lies are now out there and believed by many apparently to spite the truth. That is how Democrats and the left work.

A Tragedy is just another opportunity that shouldn’t be wasted. And the days when “journalist” checked their facts before blurting them out are long gone.

The Aurora Shooting: Sometimes There’s Nothing Wrong with Politicizing a Tragedy By Michael Grunwald (TIME)

(ARTICLE NOT INCLUDED)
As it happens, the James Holmes of the Colorado Tea Party site is a man in his fifties and the police released information that their suspect is a 24-year-old.
Using his airtime for a political attack when so many families were grieving the loss of their loved ones in this monstrous crime is not merely unseemly, it is a hateful act that should end his career.But Brian Ross will not find his career ended with this hateful lie. In fact, all his little journalist pals will slap him on the back and congratulate him for pushing the lie that the Tea Party supports mass murder.
They did it after Jared Loughner in Tucson, and that was false too.

So then came the corporate face-saving “apology” that has all the heart of dead neutron star.

An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.

But they did it in Tucson. The very same thing. They learned nothing. Taking the cheap shot and trying to score ideological points in a tragedy is more important to the Left.

Also, The Time Square bomber: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wondered if the attempted bomber was “a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something.”

It turned out to be radicalized Pakistani-American. But did you hear anything from the media about that, really. Barely. There was much more hope for an ideologically satisfying end.

A writer at the liberal Nation magazine wrote that “it seems far more likely to me that the perpetrator of the bungled Times Square bomb plot was either a lone nut job or a member of some squirrely branch of the Tea Party, anti-government far right.” (DC)

During the Health Care debate reports of “violence” at Tea Party rallies were rampant in the Liberal media. They were totally false, and proven so. But did that stop the Liberal Media from repeating it over and over again. They live in hope.

“What kind of idiot makes that kind of statement?” <52 yr old Tea Party Member Jim>Holmes told TheDC. “Really, seriously, how do we take a journalist seriously when it’s pretty clear they really haven’t done any sort of check on their facts?”

They are liberals. They don’t need facts to always be right in their own heads. And besides they live in hope. Give them enough time and everyone will agree they are always right. 🙂

Then there’s Opportunity.

In an early afternoon posting to its SignOn.org website, a site where like-minded activists can join MoveOn’s campaigns and sign Internet petitions, MoveOn urged supporters to “stand with the Aurora, Colorado shooting victims and their families.”

The site features a petition that MoveOn activists can sign. Names and emails are required which in turn go into the MoveOn database so that fundraising emails can then be sent to the mourners of the Colorado victims.

Once again, MoveOn sees a crime as a way to raise money for its activism. Pretty cold blooded, really. (Chicago Now)

“You never let a serious crisis go to waste.

The definition of a “nano-second,” says Mark Steyn subbing for Rush Limbaugh, “is the time between a mass shooting and some guy from the left blaming it on talk radio, or Sarah Palin, or Fox News.”

Or the Tea Party.

The problem is, ABC never had plans to vet the name, they were looking for the Tea Party “connection” since the words “massive shooting” came across the news wires. ABC didn’t bother to call the Colorado Tea Party Patriots, verify the man’s name, call James Holmes or engage in any other form of verification. Like squeezing toothpaste out of a tube, the entire goal was to plant a “the Tea Party is violent” seed back in the minds of viewers.

Tell a lie often enough and it become the truth.

And so how long before we get groped by the TSA at the Mutiplex?

And if accounts of the gunman’s activities are correct (and I stress IF)

He went out an emergency exit, it was held open so he could come back in 30 minutes later.

Why didn’t the alarms go off, it is an “emergency” exit is it not? And why did no one know  about this door being open??

That’s my question.

The question “Why did he do it?” is unknowable now and maybe unknowable forever. But there are plenty of other questions.

Many of them are about exploiting a deranged loonie’s act of sociopathic violence for your political agenda.

The Left will be silent about those questions and the “honest” debate will not appear because Liberals can’t be honest about anything.

 NOVEMBER IS COMING

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

 Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Getting Ahead

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Sign found in the toilet, Press here for your money… LOL! 🙂

Straining to find a way to excuse President Obama’s Friday remark that “the private sector is doing fine,” on Monday’s NBC Today, co-host Ann Curry did her best to spin for the White House: “He is right in saying that the private sector is doing better than the public sector, is he not? And so that was his point, that this comment was taken out of context.”

And she is a “journalist”. 🙂

CBS President Les Moonves: “ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.” (LA TIMES)

MSNBC Host Hayes on the same panel as Curry: “I also think the word ‘fine’ in that context is like if you fell and gashed your head and you were bleeding and your friend said, ‘Are you okay?’ And you said, ‘I’m fine.’ It means you don’t have to rush me to the emergency room.”

In other words, the economic problems facing the nation are merely a gushing head wound for America. (MRC)

Well, I know I feel better. And We can count on ObamaCare to take care of the gushing head wound right? 🙂

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

Given them an inch and they’ll want MORE!!

MYFOXNY.COM –The board hand-picked by Mayor Michael Bloomberg that must approve his ban of selling large sugar-filled drinks at restaurants might be looking at other targets.The New York City Board of Health showed support for limiting sizes of sugary drinks at a Tuesday meeting in Queens.  They agreed to start the process to formalize the large-drink ban by agreeing to start a six-week public comment period.

At the meeting, some of the members of board said they should be considering other limits on high-calorie foods.

One member, Bruce Vladeck, thinks limiting the sizes for movie theater popcorn should be considered.

“The popcorn isn’t a whole lot better than the soda,” Vladeck said.

Another board member thinks milk drinks should fall under the size limits.

“There are certainly milkshakes and milk-coffee beverages that have monstrous amounts of calories,” said board member Dr. Joel Forman.

Mayor Bloomberg says the drink rules are an attempt to fight obesity in the city.  It would limit food service establishments in the city from serving drinks bigger than 16 ounces but would allow refills.

The New York City Restaurant Association is fighting the proposal and is considering legal action of it goes into effect.

New York City voters oppose 51 – 46 percent Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposed ban on the sale of over-sized sugary soft drinks, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday.

Mind you, Popcorn by itself is actually GOOD for you, it’s the butter that isn’t. But don’t tell that to a do-gooder-now-that-the-nose-of-the-800-pound-mafia-gorilla-is-in-the-tent-lets-ban-or control-everything Liberal.
MSNBC’s Donny Deutsch: “We complain politicians don’t take stands, aren’t courageous. God bless this guy. To Nancy’s point, this is no different than tobacco. We solve obesity, we solve the health care problem. We’ve got to do something. So of course, every time you make a revolutionary move, there’s going to be some complaints, ‘Are they overstepping the boundaries?’ I applaud him.”
*********
In the DVD release for HBO’s Game of Thrones, episode 10, show-runners Dave Benioff and D.B. Weiss admit to using the severed head of former president George W. Bush in the scene below. The show-runners statement follows.

“The last head on the left is George Bush. George Bush’s head appears in a couple of beheading scenes. It’s not a choice, it’s not a political statement. We just had to use whatever head we had lying around.” – Dave Benioff & D.B. Weiss

Gee, I wonder if that would work with Obama? But I guess this is what happens after the Liberals assassinated him the last time (The 2006 Movie “Death of a President”) and that didn’t work. 🙂
********

41 percent of liberals don’t like Mormons, up  20 percent form 2007.American National Election Studies (ANES).

The Party of “tolerance” and “fairness” and blamers of “hate”. Got love it.

*****

How can you tell a Liberal is a Hypocrite/Self-Serving/Lying?

Are they still breathing!? 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

But anything non-Liberal is evil, racist, misogynistic and bad for you. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Juicy Bits

MR CAMPAIGN MODE

Barack Obama has already held more re-election fundraising events than every elected president since Richard Nixon combined, according to figures to be published in a new book.

Obama is also the only president in the past 35 years to visit every electoral battleground state in his first year of office. (on Taxpayer money not campaign money).

The figures, contained a in a new book called The Rise of the President’s Permanent Campaign , give statistical backing to the notion that Obama is more preoccupied with being re-elected than any other commander-in-chief of modern times.

Obama had held 104 fundraisers by March 6th this year, compared to 94 held by Presidents Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush Snr, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush combined.

 And still has 6 months to go!

Since then, Obama has held another 20 fundraisers, bringing his total to 124. Carter held four re-election fundraisers in the 1980 campaign, Reagan zero in 1984, Bush Snr 19 in 1992, Clinton 14 in 1996 and Bush Jnr 57 in 2004. (KFYI)

All Hail the Campaigner-In-Chief!
Alinsky Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.
So Obama makes it look like he has a chance in states he doesn’t just to make people think he does and waste time and money on it.
And besides, he’s going for the naive and the stupid anyhow.
WATCHING THE WATCHERS
Embarrassed by a prostitution scandal, the Secret Service will assign chaperones on some trips to enforce new rules of conduct that make clear that excessive drinking, entertaining foreigners in their hotel rooms and cavorting in disreputable establishments are no longer tolerated.

So these highly trained, professional adults need a “chaperone” because they are too immature to be professional on the job or mature enough off the job?
Wow!
“Mom, can I invite this hooker up to my hotel run fun of classified information!!?
“NO!”
“Ah, Mom, you never let me do anything!” 😦
It must be the Republicans
🙂
HOPE & CHANGE HOUSING
The Housing market is likely to remain weak and may take a generation or more to rebound, Yale economics professor Robert Shiller told Reuters Insider on Tuesday.Shiller, the co-creator of the Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller home price index, said a weak labor market, high gas prices and a general sense of unease among consumers was outweighing low mortgage rates and would likely keep a lid on prices for the foreseeable future.

“I worry that we might not see a really major turnaround in our lifetimes,” Shiller said.

The S&P/Case-Shiller composite index of 20 metropolitan areas gained 0.2 percent in February on a seasonally adjusted basis, the first uptick in prices in 10 months.

But Shiller called it “a very mixed bag.” Nine of the 20 cities recorded falling or flat prices on the month.

He said suburban areas in particular might endure further price declines as high gas prices increase demand for “walkable cities.”

MORE LIBERAL COMEDY
Jimmy Kimmel: “Democrats would like you to stick to your guns. And if you don’t have any guns, you can ask Eric Holder to get some for you.”
Liberal Bastion – Chicago Tribune: To the shock of most sentient beings, Facts died Wednesday, April 18, after a long battle for relevancy with the 24-hour news cycle, blogs and the Internet. Though few expected Facts to pull out of its years-long downward spiral, the official cause of death was from injuries suffered last week when Florida Republican Rep. Allen West steadfastly declared that as many as 81 of his fellow members of theU.S. House of Representatives are communists.
“It’s very depressing,” said Mary Poovey, a professor of English at New York University and author of “A History of the Modern Fact.” “I think the thing Americans ought to miss most about facts is the lack of agreement that there are facts. This means we will never reach consensus about anything. Tax policies, presidential candidates. We’ll never agree on anything.”
Liberal facts: Global Warming, Raising Taxes is good for everyone, Unemployment stimulates the economy….Oh, and the Republicans “obstruct” because they keep passing bills that the Democrats ignore.
Gov. Mike Huckabee 2009: I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.

Journalism once proudly patrolled our society and sought to tell us the stories that informed and sometimes inspired us.  They also presented the news that would irritate us—and the irritation was not over the delivery, but the content as corruption and misdeeds were revealed.

In recent years, journalism had grown increasingly dependent on spin-doctor spoonfeeding and the circular and insular quoting of other journalists instead of attempting to locate and quote actual first person sources.  I told you a couple of weeks ago about how the NY Times, Newsweek, Time, and other media outlets took words I said on my radio commentary and instead of quoting them, summarized them and then distributed them.  Bloggers and other supposedly professional journalists then took those already distorted interpretations, treated them as sources, and added their own spices.  Newsweek even had the audacity to use quote marks around a statement never even uttered as if it were my actual words.

While providing cover for President Obama and many of his contradictory statements, several practicing journalists broke their arms patting themselves on the back and broke their legs tripping over their own words.  The fall brought about serious head injuries rendering the profession with only a minimal brain function.  Despite heroic efforts at the White House to show tender and thoughtful love to friendly reporters, journalism has slipped from the news pages of major papers.
Survivors include the American people, who long ago stopped buying the ink-stained drivel that smeared the pages of paper and the people who attempted to read it.  No memorial is planned as the practitioners of propaganda seem to be unaware that they have passed away and continue to publish anyway.
Chicago Tribune: “Anybody can express an opinion on a blog or any other outlet and there’s no system of verification or double-checking, you just say whatever you want to and it gets magnified. It’s just kind of a bizarre world in which one person’s opinion counts as much as anybody else’s.”
MSNBC, NBC, Media Matters, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, anyone on the Left?
Anyone??
Sorry, those were “factual”… 🙂

In early February, Politico reported that the Obama campaign, hoping to rekindle enthusiasm among young voters, was “looking to revive the cool appeal.” Then, suddenly, news stories started popping up about Obama’s alleged coolness, in contrast to that drip Romney. A sampling:

• President Obama: The cool factor

• ‘Cool’ Obama Returns GOP Fire on Gas Prices

• Obama: The new King of Cool

• Barack Obama is cool. Mitt Romney is not. What does it mean for 2012?

• Campaigning for the ‘Cool’ Vote

• The Obama-Romney ‘Cool Gap’

• The Ned Flanders of Politics: Romney Isn’t Cool

• Obama On Late Night Too Cool For Cool?

• Obama, Jimmy Fallon and the race for cool

Nor did the press bother to mention how the left-wing Fallon was last seen sandbagging Michele Bachmann when he had his band play “Lyin’ Ass Bitch” as she walked on stage. Civility police, anyone?
Ah, but who has time to worry about such trivialities when you’re busy looking for new ways to advance Obama’s I’m-cool-and-Romney’s-not story line? (IBD)
Rep West: Responding to a question about his comments, the Florida Republican doubled down on his accusation, saying that instead of calling themselves “communist,” they now call themselves “progressive.”
“At the turn of the century American communists renamed themselves progressives,” West explained on Tuesday. “There’s a very thin line between communism, progressivism, Marxism, socialism or even as Mark Levin has said statism.”
“Calling fellow members of Congress ‘communists’ is reminiscent of the days when Joe McCarthy divided Americans with name-calling and modern-day witch hunts that don’t advance policies to benefit people’s lives,” Congressional Progressive Caucus co-Chairs Reps. Raúl M. Grijalva and Keith Ellison wrote in the statement.
(ABC News)
Rep. Grijalva 2010:There are new developments on the business front of the immigration debate including concerned contractors and a state official calling for a business boycott.

The surprising call for a boycott of Arizona came Tuesday from Representative Raul Grijalva, who represents southern Arizona in the United States Congress. He had some advice to businesses: “Refrain from using Arizona as a convention sight spending their dollars in Arizona until Arizona turns the clock forward instead of backwards.”

Boycott my constituents!
Now that’s “representing” at it’s finest.
Grijalva continued to denounce the law, calling it “racially motivated.”
So he’s the perfect person to talk about inflammatory statements!
And the media played it down.

DRESS

The family of a paralyzed Afghanistan veteran is going head-to-head with a Texas school district over pro-military t-shirts that apparently landed two their elementary school children in trouble.

The shirts, which have the logo of an organization that provides homes and support for wounded veterans, apparently violate Masters Elementary School’s dress code.

Josie Perez-Gorda, the mother of Savannah, a first-grader, and Taylor, a fourth-grader, said that her daughters were wearing shirts from the Homes For Our Troops organization. The family’s connection to the group is a very personal one.

The group, with a self-proclaimed mission of “helping those who have selflessly given to our country and have returned home with serious disabilities and injuries since September 11, 2001,” may be providing housing assistance to Perez-Gorda’s family. Her husband, Army Spc. Justin Perez-Gorda, was injured when he encountered a road-side bomb in Afghanistan.

The mother maintains that her girls should have been permitted to wear the shirts in honor of both their father and the organization without incident.

“These guys are fighting for our country and they should be able to wear something that honors their parents, especially if they are wounded,” she said.

The school district, though, claims that the girls have been in trouble for violating dress regulations numerous times before. Additionally, a spokesperson for the Judson Independent School District emphasized the need for continuity. Currently, the dress code requires that students, grades pre-K through eighth, wear a Polo-styled shirt (any color is permissible) or a shirt with a college or JISD campus spirit logo.

“We do have a standardized dress code,” proclaimed spokeswoman Aubrey Chancellor. “We certainly support the military, but we do have to be consistent across the board when it comes to following the dress code.”

Chancellor urged the family to attend a school board meeting if they wish to see the school’s dress code amended.

Wanna test that with Army, Navy or West Point College shirts?

Or maybe an American Flag on Cinco De Mayo. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

Snippets from the Frontier

In its quest to implement stealth amnesty, the Obama Administration is working behind the scenes to halt the deportation of certain illegal immigrants by granting them “unlawful presence waivers.”

The new measure would apply to illegal aliens who are relatives of American citizens. Here is how it would work, according to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announcement posted in today’s Federal Register, the daily journal of the U.S. government; the agency will grant “unlawful presence waivers” to illegal aliens who can prove they have a relative that’s a U.S. citizen.

Bottom of Form 1

Currently such aliens must return to their native country and request a waiver of inadmissibility in an existing overseas immigrant visa process. In other words, they must enter the U.S. legally as thousands of foreigners do on a yearly basis. Besides the obvious security issues, changing this would be like rewarding bad behavior in a child. It doesn’t make sense.

But the system often causes U.S. citizens to be separated for extended periods from their immediate relatives,” according to the DHS. The proposed changes, first announced in January, will significantly reduce the length of time U.S. citizens are separated from their loved ones while required to remain outside the United States during the current visa processing system.

The administration also claims that relaxing the rule will also “create efficiencies for both the U.S. government and most applicants.” How exactly is not listed in the Federal Register announcement, which gives the public 60 days to comment. That’s only a formality since the DHS has indicated that the change is pretty much a done deal. (KFYI)

Way to Go Janet. Gotta look out for those future Democrats and 2012 Votes!

Here’s a good one:

While President Obama reportedly was outraged at the lavish party and gift spending by the General Services Administration, a controversy that prompted agency chief Martha Johnson to resign, the same White House blocked the GSA from releasing records related to questionable spending by the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice.

Rice widely is reported to be on a short list to succeed Hillary Clinton as secretary of state in a second Obama administration.

At issue is the construction of the new office complex hosting the U.S. mission to the U.N., which sits directly opposite U.N. headquarters on Manhattan’s First Avenue.

Insiders allege almost $250,000 was squandered by the U.S.ambassador on cosmetic changes to her new suite of offices.

GSA confirmed that Rice ordered changes but needed State Department approval to publicly release the corresponding files.

The U.S. mission has refused comment on the move to block access to the records in question. Inquiries to the State Department were briefly responded to by the under secretary for management, Patrick Kennedy.

Kennedy confirmed that the decision to block access to the building records was his. (KFYI)

Ah, that liberal sense of selective “outrage”….

A Candidate for the Obama Administration

The Ann Arbor News crime column reported that a man walked into a Burger King in Ypsilanti , Michigan at 5 A.M.,   flashed a gun, and demanded cash.   The clerk turned him down because he said he couldn’t open the cash register without a food order.    When the man ordered onion rings, the clerk said they weren’t available for breakfast…   The frustrated gunman walked away.

If he was black maybe they could charge Burger King with racism. It might be an urban legend, but at the very least that level of incompetence must be rewarded with some Cabinet level position.

EDUCATION UPDATE

Santa Monica College students angry over a plan to offer high-priced courses tried to push their way into a trustees meeting, authorities said.

Raw video posted on the Internet Tuesday evening showed students chanting “Let us in, let us in” and “No cuts, no fees, education should be free.” (AP)

Ah the fruits of liberal socialists education labor. 🙂

Obama on the Paul Ryan budget: “We wouldn’t have the capacity to enforce the laws that protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, or the food that we eat. Cuts to the FAA would likely result in more flight cancellations, delays and the complete elimination of air traffic control services in parts of the country. Over time, our weather forecasts would become less accurate because we wouldn’t be able to afford to launch new satellites and that means governors and mayors would have to wait longer to order evacuations in the event of a hurricane. That’s just a partial sampling of the consequences of this budget.”

Is this from now, 2011,2010,2009? Can you tell? 🙂

2011: “My plan says we’re going to put teachers back in the classrooms, construction workers back to work,” President Obama said at a campaign event today. “Tax cuts for small businesses, tax cuts for hiring veterans, tax cuts if you give your workers a raise –- that’s my plan.”
The Republicans plan, Obama says, boils down to this: ‘Dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance.’

2012: “As all of you are doing your reporting, I think it’s important to remember that the positions that I am taking now on the budget and a host of other issues. if we had been having this discussion 20 years ago or even 15 years ago … would’ve been considered squarely centrist positions,” Obama said.

Whoa! someone has been smoking his own hubris! Yikes!!

“This is supposed to be paying down our deficit? It’s laughable. The bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission that I created, which the Republicans were for until I was for it, that was about paying down the deficit. I didn’t agree with all the details. I proposed about $600 billion more in revenue and $600 billion — I am sorry, it proposed about $600 billion more in revenue and $600 billion more in defense cuts than I proposed in my own budget. But Bowles-Simpson was a serious, honest, balanced effort between Democrats and Republicans to bring down the deficit.

That’s why I trashed it and ignored it because it was a sincere effort!! 🙂

WARREN BUFFETT: I think what happened with Simpson-Bowles was an absolute tragedy. I mean here are two extremely high-grade people. They have somewhat different ideas about government but they’re smart. They’re decent. They’ve got good senses of humor, too. They’re good at working with people.
They work like a devil for ten months or something like that. They compromise. They bring in people as far apart as Durbin and Coburn to get them to sign on and then they’re totally ignored. I think that’s a travesty.” (CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” 11/12/11)

Whoops! But remember liberals don’t have any standards so the contradictions are to be ignored and you are only to react to their new “outrage” and forget about what came before.

Ignore, the partisan behind the curtain!

OBAMACARE UPDATE

NEW YORK (Reuters) – In a move that threatens to further inflame concerns about the rationing of medical care, the nation’s leading association of cancer physicians issued a list on Wednesday of five common tests and treatments that doctors should stop offering to cancer patients.

The list emerged from a two-year effort, similar to a project other medical specialties are undertaking, to identify procedures that do not help patients live longer or better or that may even be harmful, yet are routinely prescribed.

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). The group of more than 200 oncologists released the list from a report in its Journal of Clinical Oncology.

“I think this is a great effort from ASCO,” said Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society. “They are putting their patients ahead of their own financial interests,” since in the existing fee-for-service health-care system physicians make money on every test and treatment they order.

Brawley does not see the effort as leading to health-care rationing. “This is the rational use of health-care, not rationing,” he said.

ASCO recommends against routine use of four other procedures: chemotherapy for patients with advanced cancers who are unlikely to benefit; advanced imaging technologies such as CT and PET or bone scans to determine the precise stage of both early breast and prostate cancers at low risk for metastasis; and drugs to stimulate white blood cell production in patients receiving chemotherapy if they have a risk of febrile neutropenia, an often-fatal condition marked by fever and abnormally low numbers of certain white blood cells.

One recommendation likely to stir controversy, and even revive charges of “death panels,” is to not use chemotherapy and other treatments in patients with advanced solid-tumor cancers such as colorectal or lung who are in poor health and did not benefit from previous chemo. (yahoo)

It’s a wild Socialist Frontier.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Cain and Able

Well, the Liberal dogpiled enough  “allegations” on Herman Cain to make him quit. Which, in my view, was the only goal. Evidence was never going to be a part of the equation.

The Liberal media just piled it on 24/7 until he quit. If this latest one hadn’t done it they would have another invented another one. It never matter if they were true. NEVER.

They just couldn’t have a black man running against their black man because then “you’re a racist for not voting for our guy” went right out the window.

But Mr. Cain did himself no favors by appearing unprepared for the onslaught, his poor response to it, and poorly handled foreign policy questions.

Too Bad.

And the precedent has been set. All you need is allegations, no proof is needed.

You’re Guilty until you quit annoying the liberal media with your presence.

Now for the Liberal media it’s onto the next targets of their scorn and ridicule disguised as “journalism”.

They still have 11 months of demonizing, dividing and destruction to wrought upon the GOP and the electorate and kissing up to do to Obama.

They’ve got more lies and distortions to spread. More dissension. More diseased partisanship. More Class envy and warfare to go before they sleep.

Ann Coulter: With the mainstream media giddily reporting on an alleged affair involving Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, how long can it be before they break the news that their 2004 vice presidential candidate conceived a “love child” with his mistress, Rielle Hunter?

The left is trying to destroy Cain with a miasma of hazy accusations leveled by three troubled women. Considered individually, the accusations are utterly unbelievable. They are even less credible taken together. This is how liberals destroy a man, out of nothing.

After the first round of baseless accusations against Cain, an endless stream of pundits rolled out the cliche — as if it were the height of originality — “This isn’t he-said, she-said; it’s he-said, she-said, she-said, she-said, she-said.”

Au contraire: We had two “shes” and only one “said.”

Remember? Only two women were willing to give their names. And as soon as they did, we discovered that they were highly suspicious accusers with nothing more than their personal honor to support the allegations. Only one of the two would even say what Cain allegedly did.

The first one was Sharon Bialek, who claimed that Cain grabbed her crotch in a car.

Then we found out Bialek was in constant financial trouble, had been involved in a paternity lawsuit, was known as a “gold digger,” had a string of debts and had twice filed for personal bankruptcy. Also, she admitted she knew Obama’s dirty tricks specialist, David Axelrod, from living in the same building with him.

Her personal history is relevant because she produced no evidence. We had to take her word. (Which was not helped by seeing her standing with Gloria Allred.)

The second one, Karen Kraushaar, made unspecified allegations of a “hostile environment” when she was working for Cain, but refuses to say what those allegations were. This despite the fact that the National Restaurant Association waived her confidentiality agreement, thus allowing her to go public.

That’s one “she,” but no “said.”

Cain said he had once told Kraushaar she was as tall as his wife — which would be one of the more worthy sexual harassment claims settled by an American company in recent years.

Why won’t she say? We’re not talking about rape. Kraushaar can’t say, “I don’t want to relive being told I was the same height as his wife!” With all the nonsense that passes for a “hostile environment,” either Kraushaar tells us what Cain allegedly did, or her blind accusation is worth less than nothing.

As if that weren’t enough, then it turned out that Kraushaar had also filed a complaint at her next job just three years later, charging that a manager had circulated a sexually explicit joke email comparing computers to men and women. She demanded a raise and the right to work at home.

Maybe Kraushaar is the most unlucky woman in the world. But the simpler explanation is that she is not a credible witness on the workplace atmosphere.

And now we have Ginger White stepping forward to claim that she had a 13-year affair with Cain. Cain admits he was friends with White, but he categorically, adamantly denies having an affair with her.

White has the whole combo-platter of questionable accuser attributes: She’s another financially troubled, twice-divorced, unemployed single mother, who has claimed sexual harassment in the past, declared bankruptcy once, was accused of stalking and had a libel judgment entered against her just this year. So far in 2011, she’s had nine liens put on her property.

But we’re supposed to ignore all of that because she’s the third woman of questionable character to make an implausible allegation. Liberals say there’s a pattern, but the only pattern is of their making far-fetched accusations of a sexual nature against Cain.

White’s proof that she had a 13-year affair is that she has two of Cain’s books signed by him — one with the incriminating inscription, “Friends are forever! Everything else is a bonus,” and the other, “Miss G, you have already made a ‘big difference!’ Stay focused as you pursue your next destination.” (I know — filthy!)

If that’s proof of an affair, I’ve had thousands of them without even realizing it.

Also, White produced evidence that Cain had texted or called her cell phone 61 times during four non-consecutive months — but did not reveal what those texts said. (“Would you please return my lawn mower?”)

Again, if that’s proof of an affair, I’m having hundreds of them at this very moment.

This is the sort of evidence you get with an actual sexual predator: Bill Clinton’s accusers had gifts, taped phone conversations with him and a semen-stained dress.

Gennifer Flowers produced taped telephone calls with Clinton totaling thousands of words between them, with him counseling her on how to deny their affair: “If they ever hit you with it, just say no, and go on. There’s nothing they can do … But when they — if somebody contacts you, I need to know … All you got to do is deny it.”

Paula Jones had multiple same-day witnesses — including the state troopers who worked for Clinton and had already told the press about a “Paula” they brought to Clinton’s hotel room. And that was for a single incident.

Monica Lewinsky had lots of gifts from Clinton, including a hat pin, two brooches, a marble bear figurine, a T-shirt from Martha’s Vineyard and Walt Whitman’s “Leaves of Grass,” all of which she mysteriously placed with Clinton’s secretary, Betty Currie, during the investigation, as well as a semen-stained dress, which Monica kept.

Ginger White claims she had a 13-year affair with Cain — and all she has are two books with inscriptions that could have been written to an auto mechanic who waited in line at a Cain book signing. Even her business partner during the alleged affair says White never mentioned Cain’s name.

These women are like triple-A ball players with the stats being: number of bankruptcies, smallest bank account, number of liens, most false claims, number of children out of wedlock, degrees of separation from David Axelrod, total trips to human resources and so on.

That wouldn’t be dispositive — except for the fact that their only evidence is their word.

But this is how liberals dirty you up when they’ve got nothing: They launch a series of false accusations, knowing that Americans with busy lives won’t follow each story to the end and notice that they were all blind alleys.

The liberal media is an old story, but it’s still a big story when it comes to creating the impression of scandal out of thin air.

Most people say, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” I say, “Where there’s smoke around a conservative, there are journalists furiously rubbing two sticks together.”

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

The Devil You May Not Know

(ARLINGTON, Va.) – A draft executive order that would force government contractors to disclose all political contributions would make it too easy for political appointees to punish contractors for their political views or to coerce contributions from firms, officials with the Associated General Contractors of America warned today in testimony submitted to Congress.

“The process outlined in the draft executive order would make it much easier for government officials to use the political activities of government contractors as a factor when awarding contracts,” Stephen E. Sandherr, the association’s chief executive officer noted in testimony submitted today to a hearing held jointly between the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on Small Business. “This order actually introduces, instead of excludes, politics from government contracting.”

So you have if you give your political contributions to the wrong source (aka Republican or Tea Party) then you might not get that big fat government contract.

Be a toadie and and an apparatchik or else. Even if you hate me (a Liberal Democrat), give me money or else!!

Now that’s good for business…

“This rule makes it look like the Administration is more interested in punishing political opponents and propping up political allies than protecting public taxpayers.”–Stephen E. Sandherr, CEO Associated General Contractors of America.

It does indeed. Now ask them if they (the liberal progressives) care? 😦

My bet, Not even a little bit.

Oh, and the journalists covering the stories, well, they just might not be very impartial either.

Gov. Mike Huckabee (2010): I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004 (and millions getting Obama elected), has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press (see later story), NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists’ ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is http://www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

The ProPublica stories are thoroughly researched by top-notch staffers who used to work at some of the biggest news outlets in the nation. But the topics are almost laughably left-wing. The site’s proud list of  “Our Investigations” includes attacks on oil companies, gas companies, the health care industry, for-profit schools and more. More than 100 stories on the latest lefty cause: opposition to drilling for natural gas by hydraulic fracking. Another 100 on the evils of the foreclosure industry.

Throw in a couple investigations making the military look bad and another about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and you have almost the perfect journalism fantasy – a huge budget, lots of major media partners and a liberal agenda unconstrained by advertising.

One more thing: a 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:

• Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;

• Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;

• Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press. 

The Center for Public Integrity is another great example. Its board of directors is filled with working journalists like Amanpour from ABC, right along side blatant liberal media types like Arianna Huffington, of the Huffington Post and now AOL.

Like ProPublica, the CPI board is a veritable Who’s Who of journalism and top media organizations, including:

• Christiane Amanpour – Anchor of ABC’s Sunday morning political affairs program, “This Week with Christiane Amanpour.” A reliable lefty, she has called tax cuts “giveaways,” the Tea Party “extreme,” and Obama “very Reaganesque.” 

• Paula Madison – Executive vice president and chief diversity officer for NBC Universal, who leads NBC Universal’s corporate diversity initiatives, spanning all broadcast television, cable, digital, and film properties.

• Matt Thompson – Editorial product manager at National Public Radio and an adjunct faculty member at the prominent Poynter Institute.

The group’s advisory board features: 

• Ben Sherwood, ABC News president and former “Good Morning America” executive producer

Once again, like ProPublica, the Center for Public Integrity’s investigations are mostly liberal – attacks on the coal industry, payday loans and conservatives like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour. The Center for Public Integrity is also more open about its politics, including a detailed investigation into conservative funders David and Charles Koch and their “web of influence.”According to the center’s own 990 tax forms, the Open Society Institute gave it $651,650 in 2009 alone.

The well-known Center for Investigative Reporting follows the same template – important journalists on the board and a liberal editorial agenda. Both the board of directors and the advisory board contain journalists from major news outlets. The board features:

• Phil Bronstein (President), San Francisco Chronicle;

• David Boardman, The Seattle Times;

• Len Downie, former Executive Editor of the Washington Post, now VP;

• George Osterkamp, CBS News producer.

Readers of the site are greeted with numerous stories on climate change, illegal immigration and the evils of big companies. It counts among its media partners The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008.

Why does it all matter? Journalists, we are constantly told, are neutral in their reporting. In almost the same breath, many bemoan the influence of money in politics. It is a maxim of both the left and many in the media that conservatives are bought and paid for by business interests. Yet where are the concerns about where their money comes from?

Fred Brown, who recently revised the book “Journalism Ethics: A Casebook of Professional Conduct for News Media,” argues journalists need to be “transparent” about their connections and “be up front about your relationship” with those who fund you.

Unfortunately, that rarely happens. While the nonprofits list who sits on their boards, the news outlets they work for make little or no effort to connect those dots. Amanpour’s biography page, for instance, talks about her lengthy career, her time at CNN and her many awards. It makes no mention of her affiliation with the Center for Public Integrity.

If journalists were more up front, they would have to admit numerous uncomfortable connections with groups that push a liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently liberal George Soros. So don’t expect that transparency any time soon.

Oh and that polling data showing how Obama is now Mohammad Ali and is staging a miraculous comeback and people love him after he gave the order to Kill bin Laden like something out of a Video Game…

Well… IT JUST MIGHT BE RIGGED!!

Wow! The AP poll has Obama’s approval rating hitting 60 percent! And 53 percent say he deserves to be reelected!

And on the economy, 52 percent approve of the way Obama’s handling it, and only 47 percent disapprove! He’s up 54–46 on approval of how he’s handling health care! On unemployment, 52 percent approval, 47 percent disapproval! 57 percent approval on handling Libya! Even on the deficit, he’s at 47 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval!

It is a poll of adults, which isn’t surprising; as I mentioned yesterday, you don’t have to be a registered or likely voter to have an opinion on the president.

But then you get to the party ID: 46 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat, 29 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican, 4 percent identify as purely independent leaning towards neither party, and 20 percent answered, “I don’t know.”

With a poll sample that has a 17-percentage-point margin in favor of the Democrats, is anyone surprised that these results look like a David Axelrod dream?

(Interestingly, George W. Bush is at 50 percent approval, 49 percent disapproval, even in this sample wildly weighted in favor of the Democrats.)

AP response: Some conservatives criticized the AP-GfK poll as heavy with responses from Democrats that skewed the results. AP-GfK polls use a consistent methodology that draws a random sample of the population independent of party identification.

But the question isn’t really whether the sample changed too much from their poll in April; the question is whether the sample accurately reflects the American public at large, and whether we indeed have 1.63 Democrats in this country for every 1 Republican. If their sample had an unrealistic proportion of Democrats one month, it’s entirely possible they can get a similar unrealistic proportion the following month. (NRO)

Ya Think? 🙂

Naw, Liberals would never do that…

Lying, cheating, and stealing…Naw, never happen.

Dishonesty, disingenuous and pure self-interest…never happens… 🙂

So Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware!

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Extreme!

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The President in Pennsylvania, the state, instead of Pennsylvania Ave being a leader:  “If you’re complaining about the price of gas and you’re only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know,” Obama said laughingly. “You might want to think about a trade-in.”

There’s that liberal “compassion” and “sensitivity”. 🙂

So if you are struggling with inflation in gas prices, food prices and utility costs the best thing you can for yourself is to get a new car that will cost you even more money!!

So what if you can’t afford it!

But you’ll get better mileage. 🙂

Sounds like an Obama plan. When you are struggling economically, spend even more!! 😦

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/04/07/krauthammer_obamas_energy_plan_is_drill_in_brazil_and_windmills.html

Before Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget released yesterday, the Liberal Establishment was telling us that what was needed was an adult conversation on the budget and entitlements. Now that they have got their adult conversation, they can’t handle it.

Evidenced by one of our favourite radical leftists and now head of the DNC (while still a Congressman):

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) comments on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget proposal for FY 2012.

“Representing a large number of seniors in south Florida, I can tell you that this budget would be devastating for seniors and older Americans. This Republican path to poverty passes like a tornado through America’s nursing homes, where millions of America’s seniors receive long-term and end of life care,” Rep. Wasserman Schultz said.

And good “rich” Billionaire (because he’s a socialist): I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control otherwise they might get me into trouble. ‘I have always harboured an exaggerated view of my self-importance,’ he wrote. ‘To put it bluntly, I fancied myself as some kind of god or an economic reformer like Keynes, or, even better, like Einstein (“Alchemy of Finance”).-George Soros

“‘I’ve come to the conclusion,’ Soros told Fortune, ‘that one can do a lot more about the issues I care about by changing the government than by pushing the issues.’  In short, he has become the world’s angriest billionaire.”  (Mark Gimein, “George Soros Is Mad As Hell,” Fortune, 10/27/03).

Sounds a bit like Obama. 🙂

A fundraising appeal from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee warns supporters that “Tea Party Republicans are threatening to shut down the government on Friday unless we surrender to their outrageous demands.”

The fundraising email, penned by DCCC Chairman Steve Israel (N.Y.), went out late Wednesday and asks for small donations to the committee’s “GOP Accountability Fund,” setting a goal of raising $50,000 by Friday “so we can hold Speaker Boehner and his Tea Party fringe Republicans immediately accountable for shutting down the government.”

“The world is watching our next move,” Israel wrote. “Will we cave to the Tea Party’s disgraceful act of political extortion or will we fight back with the full force of our grassroots strength?”

Never let a Crisis go to waste!! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

“What if the president and your representative saw it coming and could have prevented it from happening?” Ryan said. “What would you think of them if they didn’t?” A hush came over the audience at the American Enterprise Institute. It was Ryan’s way of saying that the financial meltdown arrived largely without warning, while the impending fiscal crunch is like a runaway freight train. “This is the most predictable crisis in the history of our country,” he went on. “We are on our path to a debt crisis” like those we’ve seen recently in Europe, with the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product rising, under Barack Obama’s budget, past the 90 percent danger point on its way to 800 percent. (townhall.com)

So if it’s that predictable, even the Democrats would drop their partisanship and do what is best for the nation and it’s people….

Yes, that was cynical chuckle moment.

The Democrats have only 3 plays in their playbook and variations on it.

1. Class Warfare  2. Fear  3. Intimidation

That’s it.

And if you disagree with them at any level you are an “extremist” !!!!

Ryan’s budget is based on the idea that people are capable of making decisions for themselves.

EVIL!!!

1961: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you  can do for your country.

2011: And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what you can do for the country; ask what the government can do for you.

Karl Rove: In the White House Press Room on Tuesday, President Barack Obama did what comes naturally—scold others, in this case the Congress. Mr. Obama complained that a budget agreement “could have gotten done three months ago.”

What he didn’t say was that the budget should have “gotten done” six months ago, before the current fiscal year started last Oct. 1. Our government’s failure to have a budget in place halfway through the fiscal year is the president’s responsibility. He and his party dominated Congress by wide margins when the budget was supposed to be put in place.

Also on Tuesday, at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan did what the president has not. Demonstrating leadership and more than a little courage, Mr. Ryan laid out a thoughtful, ambitious blueprint for the next decade.

The Path to Prosperity would return discretionary spending to its 2008 levels and hold it flat for five years; reduce the federal government’s work force by 10%; slash corporate welfare; reform the tax code; and reduce the corporate and top personal rate to 25%. It would repeal ObamaCare, change Medicare so the government helps all seniors pay for an insurance policy they choose, and send states money for each person covered by Medicaid, plus the flexibility to spend that money as they see fit.

The Obama-Ryan budget battle foreshadows what Americans are likely to hear in the 2012 campaign: an unengaged, reactive chief executive versus a bold, reform-minded GOP.

In the short term, it’s obvious what Mr. Obama hopes to gain. Having watched his standing as “a strong and decisive leader” drop to 52% in last month’s Gallup poll from 60% last year, the president is looking to profit politically from a shutdown of the federal government.

When the government was twice shut down in 1995 and 1996, Congressional Republicans survived the controversy and kept their majorities in the 1996 election. At the same time, the shutdowns boosted Bill Clinton’s image. Only 37% viewed him as “a strong leader” in a June 1995 ABC News poll. In a January 1996 CBS News poll after the shutdowns, 53% said Mr. Clinton had “strong qualities of leadership.”

The president will instruct his party to demagogue the House Republican budget, labeling it as an assault on the poor and a windfall for the rich that will rip America’s social safety net to shreds.

Never mind that these charges are false and irresponsible. Mr. Ryan would have the government spend $40 trillion over the next 10 years, $6.2 trillion less than Mr. Obama’s budget plan of $46 trillion. This is an overall reduction in what the government plans to spend, not a cut from what it is spending today.

Under Mr. Ryan’s proposal, for example, health-care spending would still rise for both Medicaid, which serves the poor, and Medicare, which serves seniors. The $275 billion spent on Medicaid this year would grow to $305 billion in 2021 while the $563 billion spent on Medicare this year would grow to $953 billion in 2021. Nor would anyone 55 years or older be affected by any Medicare reforms.

Mr. Ryan and his colleagues want to act now to keep entitlement programs solvent. They want to keep Americans from experiencing the pain of the ­crisis that will come when the public debt has doubled by 2012 (from the level when Mr. Obama came into office) and nearly ­tripled by 2021, as it would under the president’s plan. Already mandatory spending, the part of the budget that’s automatic and not subject to approval each year by Congress, eats up all available revenue this year. Medicare goes broke in 2029, and Social Security is bankrupt in 2037.

The White House doesn’t care—it perceives a political path to victory in 2012. What makes this strategy doubly reckless and cynical is that the administration knows a debt crisis is coming and that its spending plans cannot continue.

But the Obama administration’s adults—Chief of Staff Bill Daley, Office of Management and Budget Director Jack Lew, and National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling—are clearly not in charge. The politicos—Senior Adviser David Plouffe (who managed Mr. Obama’s 2008 campaign) and Communications Director Daniel Pfeiffer (who had the same title in the 2008 campaign) have their hands on the wheel. The White House is in full re-election mode.

The House GOP budget will not become law this year, but it will smoke the president out on spending and provide a framework for Republicans to discuss the nation’s fiscal challenges. The contrast between the GOP’s boldness and the president’s cowardice is striking. The question is whether the president and his party will pay a political price for their abdication of leadership. We’re about to find out.

But rest assured the Liberal Press will be there to ignore it entirely and will tirelessly cheerlead for the Liberal progressive cause.

I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function. (Gov. Huckabee 2009)

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

 

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

A Sad Day

Before I get to the rant today, I found out something yesterday that made me very sad.

And it happened 4 1/2 months ago. But because I studiously ignore gossip and “celebrity” news sites and shows I didn’t know.

Stephen J Cannell, one of my favorite TV producer/writers passed away in October 2010. The man was a genius. He will be missed.

Now back to the show…

This bit of speculation by the media on who will succeed Sen. Jon Kyl in 2013 when he retires should chill you to the bone and make you wonder if their is any hope.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, former Arizona governor and state attorney general, has made calls over the past few weeks to gauge support for a Senate bid. She could emerge as the early frontrunner. Wealthy businessman Jim Pederson, who challenged Kyl in 2006, isn’t saying no, and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon could run.

I think the Democrats will be much more cynical than that and want Rep. Giffords to run, because who would be mean enough to vote against her! 🙂

But when the other choices are Big Sis, the corrupt former head of the Democratic Party, and Mayor “Flash” “Flip-flop” Phil the Peter Principle is alive and thriving in the Democrat Party.

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

Unemployment:  http://www.gallup.com/poll/125639/Gallup-Daily-Workforce.aspx

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

Now that Keith Olbermann has been banished to Al Gore TV we still have bomb throwing leftist Bill Maher who has no sense left: “I suppose people would say the Russian Revolution was hijacked by the left-wing,” Maher said. “I think when you go that far left – you’re really the right-wing. I consider Lenin and Stalin right-wingers. Don’t tell Rush Limbaugh.”

On the Super Bowl Interview of Obama by Evil Fox News Commentator, Bill O’Reilly:

“Well, actually he tried so hard. I mean, this man – I saw him with Bill O’Reilly as I’m sure a lot of people did in this country before the Super Bowl,” Maher said. “And all I could think of is – I would never be that way. I just do not have it in me to take that much, really, that much guff, shall we call it, since I’m not on HBO.”

Maher’s view on how presidents should be treated is curious given his public statements on former President George W. Bush (calling for his impeachment in 2006) and former Vice President Dick Cheney (lamenting a failed assassination attempt). Maher praised Obama for containing “the rage” he must feel from what Maher views as disrespect.

“I just feel like the most difficult part of his job must be to squelch the rage that somewhere must be inside him to say, ‘I’m the president of the United States. You don’t talk to me like this. I’m not some left – I’m not Al Sharpton, you know? I won this job,’” Maher said. “And Bill O’Reilly who claims he’s such a patriot, how unpatriotic in my view to treat a president that way. How does that look to other countries when you’re interrupting and belittling — I saw what you did, counting the number of times he was — he was interrupted. I just find it astounding.”

Good thing, unlike The Mainstream Media he’s not masquerading as a “Journalist”.

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

IPCC Disses Al Gore

Unfortunately for Gore and others who have claimed that the snow this winter is a global warming byproduct, their own authorities have said climate change will result in less snow.

Both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have predicted warmer, less snowy winters.

A sampling:

  • “Snow season length and snow depth are very likely to decrease in most of North America … except in the northernmost part of Canada where maximum snow depth is likely to increase (Christensen et al., 2007).” (EPA)
  • “Decreases in snowcover and increases in winter rain on bare soil will likely lengthen the erosion season and enhance erosion intensity.” (EPA)
  • “Rising temperatures have generally resulted in rain rather than snow in locations and seasons where climatological average temperatures for 1961 to 1990 were close to freezing (0 °C).” (EPA)
  • “As temperatures rise, the likelihood of precipitation falling as rain rather than snow increases, especially in autumn and spring at the beginning and end of the snow season, and in areas where temperatures are near freezing. Such changes are observed in many places, especially over land in middle and high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, leading to increased rains but reduced snowpacks.” (IPCC)

Some, such as University of East Anglia senior climate researcher, Dr. David Viner, have said that in a few years snow will be scarce, and “children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

So which global warming alarmists are we to believe?

According to skeptics of global warming, such rhetorical shifts show that predictions are not coming to fruition.

Lord Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, chief policy adviser to the Science and Public Policy Institute, told The Daily Caller that since the IPCC is considered the “holy writ” by a majority of global warming alarmists, the IPCC is the place to look to see if predictions sync with data. (Except for ClimateGate — where the politics met the data 🙂 )

“Al Gore is not a scientist … He’s made a lot of money by whipping up scares and frightening children, but he is no longer heeded by anyone who takes this matter seriously. The IPCC is the scientific authority of his side of the case, and it says very plainly you get fewer extreme cold and fewer heavy snow events. That’s what the IPCC says, and if that’s what the IPCC says, then Al Gore has no business trying to say the opposite.” (Caroline May)

So just remember, when it’s too hot, it’s global warming.

When it’s too cold it’s global warming.

When it’s too dry it’s global warming.

When it’s too wet, it’s global warming.

And when you stub your toe in the dark in the bathroom in the morning, it’s global warming. 🙂

Rejoice!

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

Feb 7th, at the US Chamber of Commerce, The President:

President Obama stated: “The benefits can’t just translate into greater bonuses and profits for those at the top. They have to be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standards of living, as well as your bottom line…”

“Share the profits” in 2011 sounds eerily like “spread the wealth around,” circa 2008. In both cases, the President was speaking the language of economic collectivism – “socialism” being the more loosely defined term of choice for this type of rhetoric – and it should be disturbing to every American.

Barack Obama is, of course, facing enormous pressure from the American electorate over the high unemployment rate. After all he’s done to try and “fix” the economy – an $800 billion economic “stimulus” bill, the “Making Home Affordable” mortgage fix, a credit card “reform” law, and of course his landmark healthcare “reform” law – unemployment still remains unacceptably high, even by his own assessment.

The President’s frustration with unemployment is understandable. But his contemptuous tone for American businesses is counterproductive, even for his own pursuits. “Start hiring, or else” is not the way to incentivize businesses to assume financial risks and liabilities (and hiring new workers entails risks and liabilities). It doesn’t incentivize anybody to “build stuff and invent stuff” either, yet President Obama seems not to understand this.

President Obama, however, seems to assume that those at the top of a business enterprise – the managers, the executives, the owners- have necessarily achieved their position of authority by unjust means and they need to be punished for their achievement. This, by the way, is very similar to the economic views of our President’s father, Barack Hussein Obama Senior, who while working in the communist government of Kenya once proposed a 100% taxation rate for the “richest” in his country.

But his “share your profits” and “start hiring or else” moment aside, just days before his speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce our President took the hostility towards business owners to an entirely new level. In what has been described as an “unprecedented” and “controversial” maneuver, the White House set up a program earlier this month with the U.S. Department of Labor and the American Bar Association, wherein workers who feel they have been treated wrongly by their employer can call a toll-free number, and get assistance from an attorney who will represent them against their employer on a contingency basis.

I wonder if it goes to the same people who set up the Illegal Alien Sue-Your-Boss Line last year??

Some people, including our President and Vice President, see this as a pathway to “justice” for middle class workers, yet to believe this one must assume that every “complaint” against an employer is legitimate. Interestingly, the Obama Administration does not appear prepared to offer this same kind of “free legal help” to business owners- which again takes us back to the President’s very hostile assumptions about business owners and leaders in the first place.

“Share your profits” and “sue your boss” are not policies for economic growth. As long as this kind of hostility continues to emanate from the White House, the President’s need for more hiring will likely go unfulfilled. (Austin Hill)

Overall, a disappointing start to the day…

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

The Silly News of the Week

What’s wrong with this picture? Illegal aliens and terrorists from Islamic countries are flooding into the United States on a daily basis, but a little boy in the UK has been denied a vacation to Disney World with his grandparents by US Immigration because he reportedly posed a “threat” of not leaving the country after his vacation.

Seriously. No Joke!

The story was in the UK Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8259484/Boy-9-has-Disney-World-trip-ruined-after-US-immigration-rules-him-a-threat.html

Way to go Janet! Yeah, we have to keep 9 year old British schoolkids out of the country, they are evil!

Mexican Drug Cartels, Coyotes, criminals, and gangs on the other hand, not so much…

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

TUSCON SHOOTING UPDATE: The Far Left at NPR are having a moment of “Brown Relief” over Jared Lee Loughner.

More brilliant insight coming from NPR.

Daisy Hernandez, former editor of ColorLines magazine, is relieved that Jared Loughner is a “gringo” or white man rather than a “brown” man after the shootings over the weekend.

From NPR:

I wasn’t the only person on Saturday who rushed to her Android when news came of the Tucson shooting.

What I wanted to know was the killer’s surname.

My eyes scanned the mobile papers. I held my breath. Finally, I saw it: Jared Loughner. Not a Ramirez, Gonzalez or Garcia. It’s safe to say there was a collective sigh of brown relief when the Tucson killer turned out to be a gringo.

I admit sadly that it was only after I saw the shooter’s gringo surname that I was able to go on and read the rest of the news about those who lost their lives on Saturday and those who, like Rep. Giffords, were severely wounded.

Which side is bringing up the race issue again? (Townhall.com)

But don’t worry, if you complain to NPR you’ll be the racist! 🙂

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

Illinois, ignoring the axiom that when you tax something you get less of it, expects economic activity to be unaffected by these disincentives and expects the added revenues to close a $15 billion budget shortfall. Ignoring another axiom — that when you’re in a hole, stop digging — the legislation that Gov. Pat Quinn signed allows a 2% increase in spending.

In addition to its budget shortfall, Illinois owes $6 billion to vendors and has unfunded pension liabilities estimated to be as high as $78 billion.

“It’s like living next door to ‘The Simpsons’ — you know, the dysfunctional family down the block,” Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, a possible 2012 GOP presidential candidate, said in an interview on Chicago’s WLS-AM. Daniels notes that Illinois-based Caterpillar recently chose to make a major investment in Indiana with a plant to build locomotives in Muncie.

According to the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, the tax hike would force Illinois businesses to pay the highest combined national-local corporate tax rate in the industrialized world.

And you know the liberals will be both surprised and angry (at business) when it falls flat on it face.

It was your fault!! 🙂

Americans for Tax Reform found that the average personal income-tax rate in states losing seats was a high 6.05%. The average rate in states gaining seats was a more modest 2.8%. Per capita government spending is also lower: $4,008 for the gainers, $5,117 for the losers. (IBD)

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

Tom Brokaw on MSDNC:

Gun control is too simple a phrase to define all the complications and nuances of it, frankly. In Arizona they have a wide open system. I would be nervous about going into a bar or restaurant in Arizona on a Saturday night where people can carry concealed without permits.

Gee, thanks Tom for your uninformed, hyberbolic, liberal BS. Don’t bother coming then.

Go to Illinois instead, they’ll need the cash.

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

<Bill> Maher said that Tea Party members are crude and poorly educated, people who the founding fathers would have wanted to keep far from political influence.

“The one thing they never argued about was that political power must stay in the hands of the smartest people,” said Maher, “and out of the hands of the dumbest loudmouths slowing down the checkout line at Home Depot.”

Gee, thanks Bill. I always value the opinion of a Liberal Marxist Elitist who things he’s funny.

Yeah, I’ll take that under advisement.

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

Chris “tingle up my leg” Matthews ‘Journalist’ at MSDNC:

“Sam, it seems to me it is a big question,” Matthews said. “So much of this attack on Obama has been ad hominem – directed at the person of the president, whether it’s somebody – some cracker out there on the right calling him — some birther-type who says he’s not an American or someone more sophisticated but basically saying he’s a socialist. Will this be on the merits of the bill? Will it stay off the personal? Is it your hunch coming into Wednesday’s vote?”

Ad hominem much, Chris?  hateful much?? And that softball question was squishy you have to squeeze Lake Michigan out of it!

So on that note, the culmination of this silliness with a compilation of sorts.

A shameful week for America’s liberal elites. The top 10 most ridiculous left-wing attacks on US conservatives following the Arizona shootings

By Nile Gardner, UK Telegraph

I have compiled below a list of some of the most egregious examples of Leftist hysteria over the past week. It is by no means an exhaustive list – this list could easily be expanded to 20 or 30 further instances, especially crude statements from liberal politicians. New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was among the very first to link the mass shooting to conservatives, and two of his hugely irresponsible pieces feature in the list below. The list also includes a major article from American Guardian writer Michael Tomasky, as an example of how the Left-wing vitriol of the last week emanated not only from the east and west coasts of the United States, but also in some cases from across the Atlantic.

So here is my top 10 list, which Telegraph readers will no doubt wish to add to in their comments.

1. Paul Krugman, The New York Times, January 8, 2011

We don’t have proof yet that this was political, but the odds are that it was. She’s been the target of violence before. And for those wondering why a Blue Dog Democrat, the kind Republicans might be able to work with, might be a target, the answer is that she’s a Democrat who survived what was otherwise a GOP sweep in Arizona, precisely because the Republicans nominated a Tea Party activist.

You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate.

2. Keith Olbermann, MSNBC, January 8, 2011

This morning in Arizona, this time of the ever-escalating, borderline-ecstatic invocation of violence in fact or in fantasy in our political discourse, closed. It is essential tonight not to demand revenge, but to demand justice; to insist not upon payback against those politicians and commentators who have so irresponsibly brought us to this time of domestic terrorism, but to work to change the minds of them and their supporters – or if those minds tonight are too closed, or if those minds tonight are too unmoved, or if those minds tonight are too triumphant, to make sure by peaceful means that those politicians and commentators and supporters have no further place in our system of government.

If Sarah Palin, whose website put and today scrubbed bullseye targets on 20 Representatives including Gabby Giffords, does not repudiate her own part in amplifying violence and violent imagery in politics, she must be dismissed from politics – she must be repudiated by the members of her own party, and if they fail to do so, each one of them must be judged to have silently defended this tactic that today proved so awfully foretelling, and they must in turn be dismissed by the responsible members of their own party.

3. Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, Press Conference, Tucson, January 8, 2011

When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.

4. Michael Tomasky, The Guardian, January 9, 2011

Republicans and even Tea Partiers will have the sense – again, for a while – to steer clear of directly gun-related rhetoric. We won’t be hearing much in the near term about “second amendment remedies” and insurrection and so forth. But this will be temporary. Guns are simply too central to the mythology of the American right, as is the idea of liberty being wrested from tyrants only at gunpoint. For the American right to stop talking about armed insurrection would be like American liberals dropping the subjects of race and gender. It’s too encoded in conservative DNA.

… Direct responsibility for what happened Saturday? No. Mentally ill people are mentally ill. The Beatles weren’t responsible for the messages that Charles Manson heard in their music. But there’s a difference. Paul McCartney had no earthly reason to think that an innocent song about a fairground ride (Helter Skelter) would lead a man to commit barbarous acts of murder. Today’s Republicans and conservative commentators, however, surely understand the fire they’re playing with. But they do it, and a tragedy like Saturday’s won’t stop them, as long as they can maintain a phoney plausible deniability and as long as hate continues to pay dividends at the ballot box.

5. Paul Krugman, The New York Times, January 9, 2011

it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.

Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.

And there’s a huge contrast in the media. Listen to Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, and you’ll hear a lot of caustic remarks and mockery aimed at Republicans. But you won’t hear jokes about shooting government officials or beheading a journalist at The Washington Post. Listen to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly, and you will.

… So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before? If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.

6. Michael Daly, The New York Daily News, January 9, 2011

But anyone with any sense at all knows that violent language can incite actual violence, that metaphor can incite murder. At the very least, Palin added to a climate of violence.

And, now that Palin may have the blood of more than some poor caribou on her hands, I wonder if she will continue putting people in cross hairs and calling on folks to RELOAD!

7. George Packer, The New Yorker, January 10, 2011

But it won’t do to dig up stray comments by Obama, Allen Grayson, or any other Democrat who used metaphors of combat over the past few years, and then try to claim some balance of responsibility in the implied violence of current American politics. (Most of the Obama quotes that appear in the comments were lame attempts to reassure his base that he can get mad and fight back, i.e., signs that he’s practically incapable of personal aggression in politics.)

In fact, there is no balance—none whatsoever. Only one side has made the rhetoric of armed revolt against an oppressive tyranny the guiding spirit of its grassroots movement and its midterm campaign. Only one side routinely invokes the Second Amendment as a form of swagger and intimidation, not-so-coyly conflating rights with threats.

Only one side’s activists bring guns to democratic political gatherings. Only one side has a popular national TV host who uses his platform to indoctrinate viewers in the conviction that the President is an alien, totalitarian menace to the country. Only one side fills the AM waves with rage and incendiary falsehoods. Only one side has an iconic leader, with a devoted grassroots following, who can’t stop using violent imagery and dividing her countrymen into us and them, real and fake. Any sentient American knows which side that is; to argue otherwise is disingenuous.

8. Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva, in an interview with The Huffington Post, January 8, 2011

“The climate has gotten so toxic in our political discourse, setting up for this kind of reaction for too long. It’s unfortunate to say that. I hate to say that,” Grijalva said in an interview with The Huffington Post. “If you’re an opponent, you’re a deadly enemy,” Grijalva said of the mindset among Arizona extremists. “Anybody who contributed to feeding this monster had better step back and realize they’re threatening our form of government.”

Grijalva said that Tea Party leader Sarah Palin should reflect on the rhetoric that she has employed. “She — as I mentioned, people contributing to this toxic climate — Ms. Palin needs to look at her own behavior, and if she wants to help the public discourse, the best thing she could do is to keep quiet.”

9. Harold Meyerson, The Washington Post, January 12, 2011

The primary problem with the political discourse of the right in today’s America isn’t that it incites violence per se. It’s that it implants and reinforces paranoid fears about the government and conservatism’s domestic adversaries.

Much of the culture and thinking of the American right – the mainstream as well as the fringe – has descended into paranoid suppositions about the government, the Democrats and the president. This is not to say that the left wing doesn’t have a paranoid fringe, too. But by every available measure, it’s the right where conspiracy theories have exploded. A fabricated specter of impending governmental totalitarianism haunts the right’s dreams.

… That doesn’t make Beck, Erickson, Rupert Murdoch and their ilk responsible for Tucson. It does make them responsible for promoting a paranoid culture that makes America a more divided and dangerous land.

10. Jane Fonda, Twitter, January 8, 2011

And finally, Oscar-winning actress and liberal darling Jane Fonda emerged from hibernation and delivered some of the most tasteless tweets in the brief history of Twitter, brazenly exploiting the shooting of a Congresswoman to make a monumentally shallow political attack. (hat tip: NewsBusters)

@SarahPalinUSA holds responsibility. As does the violence-provoking rhetoric of the Tea Party 2:51 PM Jan 8th via Echofon

@glenbeck guilty too. Shame. It must stop! 2:20 PM Jan 8th via Seesmic Web

Progressive Arizona Rep Gabrielle Giffords is shot. In her ads, Sarah Palin had her targeted in a gun site. Inciting to violence. 2:11 PM Jan 8th via Echofon

But don’t worry, according to the Left, they are the most tolerant, sensitive, rational, mature, caring, loving and Intellectually Superior beings on this planet.

Just ask them.

We’re doomed. 🙂

Political Cartoon

The Hypocrisy Manifesto

Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’ (June 14, 2008)

So much for those evil “gun metaphors” 🙂
“I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.”
Civilized discourse, anyone?

Political Cartoon

But the prize for insensitive slander, however, goes to Michael Daly of the New York Daily News. Under the headline “Rep. Gabriel Giffords’ blood is on Palin’s hands after putting cross hair over her district,” Daly wrote that Palin, by designating 20 congressmen as targets in 2010 for voting for ObamaCare, “added to a climate of violence.”

And then there’s the Democrat’s “target” map from 2004:

But don’t worry, I’m sure this is Sarah Palin’s or Bush’s fault too!
This kind of two-faced crap is very much the providence of the LEFT and they aren’t capable of owning up to it.
Then there’s the Left’s and The Media’s complete meltdown on  not “jumping to conclusions” over the Foot Hood Shooting for weeks on end ad nauseum.
But the media jumped so fast to conclusions on this one that it was practically before the bodies were in ambulance.
Again, the Left and Media are not intellectually honest to own up to their own duplicity.

When Palin’s map became an issue, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), rushed on MSNBC to denounce it, telling Chris Matthews:

I really think that that is crossing a line…In this particular environment I think it’s really dangerous to try and make your point in that particular way because there are people who are taking that kind of thing seriously.

Really, Chris? So what do you think about this map?

Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican” and the blue arrows are “Stimulus Money”.
You’ll never guess where I found this map. That’s right, it’s on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) website. (Verum Serum)
WHOOPS!
Giffords, a former Republican and self-proclaimed Blue Dog Democrat, participated in the reading of the U.S. Constitution on the House floor and voted against Nancy Pelosi for House speaker. She was a strong supporter of gun rights as enshrined in the Second Amendment and voted to lift the ban on guns in Washington, D.C. Palin and the Tea Party wish there were more Democrats like her.
Never mind that in 2008, Moulitsas (Daily Kos Founder), disappointed with Blue Dogs such as Giffords, had his own “target list” of “Democrats who sold out the Constitution.” Giffords was on the list in bold type. Moulitsas said: “Not all these people will get or even deserve primaries,” Moulitsas said, “but this certainly puts a bull’s-eye on their district.” Target? Bull’s-eye?
WHOOPS!
But again, the Left will not be honest enough to own up to it. I bet they don’t even remember it. And if you confronted them with it they’d tell you it was photoshopped and it was set-up and it was fake, et al. (because I have done that to liberals online and THAT IS the reaction I’d get!!).
Unfortunately, they’re too busy exploiting this tragedy.
Some even talk of the political bounce that Clinton got from the Oklahoma City Bombing and Bush got from 9/11 so NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!
And a tragedy is the perfect time to take political advantage.

Political Cartoon

There’s even a Democrat PAC (Founded by Iowa Senator Tom Harkin and The Daily KOS with the SEIU) that is fundraising through emails using Anti-Palin rhetoric.
Disgusting. Disrespectful. And just plain wrong.
But utterly predictable.

Then there’s this:  In a video message posted Monday on the Web site of the rabidly gay-hating cult Westboro Baptist Church, cult leader Fred Phelps announced that he and his followers will picket the upcoming funerals of the six victims who lost their lives in Saturday’s shooting rampage in Tucson — even targeting that of nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green. “That child was not innocent,” the cult said in a press release. “That child is better off dead, so the cup of her iniquity will not overflow!”

There are no words to express how disgusting this group of real life nutjobs are. I’m hoping they aren’t coming and are just stirring up the pot.

Their disrespect for the dead is beyond the pale.

There is already a movement by Liberals and Conservatives here that are going to band together against these disgusting people. Good for them. I wish I could be their to shield the families but I have to work.

Pima County Loon Sherriff (who is a leftist Democrat and pro-illegal):

“The kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment he is irresponsible, uses partial information, sometimes wrong information,” [Limbaugh] attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials and that kind of behavior in my opinion is not without consequences.”

Neither is your Sheriff, but I doubt you are intelligent enough to understand it.

But he tows the party line very well as always.

When liberals say we must civilize our discourse and watch what we say, they mean conservatives should shut up. We need not apologize for the Constitution or our free speech rights. Saying the Tea Party made him do it is not a rational explanation.

When Maj. Nidal Hassan shot up Fort Hood in 2009, everyone said don’t jump to conclusions and blame all Muslims. Yet they blame all conservatives for this shooting even though the alleged shooter is from their side of the aisle.

By all accounts so far he was a mentally unstable, pot smoking, leftist who worshiped skulls and whose favorite books were Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto. Not exactly Palin or Limbaugh material.

There were no liberal charges of inciting violence or creating a climate of hate in 2004 over Gabriel Range’s film “Death of a President” depicting the assassination of George W. Bush. In fact, it won an award at the Toronto Film Festival. Dissent is not hate, and demonizing your opponents is not democracy.

With all the Tea Party rallies and town hall meetings in 2009, there were no recorded acts of violence perpetrated by Tea Party members. It is they who are the targets of hate, venom and character assassination. Beck put half a million people on the Mall in Washington with not so much as a candy wrapper thrown in anger. (IBD)

But that doesn’t matter. Scoring cheap political “victories” with your base of nutjobs is all that really matters.

Even Hillary in Dubai talking to Muslim students, “We have extremists in our country,” Clinton said. “A wonderful and incredibly brave young woman Congress member was just shot by extremists in our country. We have the same kinds of problems.”

That’s you right-wingers and Tea-Partiers you’re moral equivalent to Middle Eastern Radical Muslim terrorists!

Not us Liberals though, we are as pure as the driven snow!

The political left is always prowling for ways to curb freedom and exert more government control over society. With six killed and 20 shot at a Tucson grocery store on Saturday, including the intended target, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the left now has a tragic event to help push its agenda.

“Sensitivity” and “Compassion” go right out the window when it’s time to score cheap, childish, soul-satisfying partisan political points and push the Agenda forward.

After all, “targeting” a politician, say who is for ObamaCare, will be outlawed as hate speech. Or maybe Global Warming, or Cap-and-Trade.

The right to disagree with your government will disappear in puff of political where-there’s-smoke-theirs-an-opportunity!

Who cares if it’s true or not, they surely don’t. Who cares if it’s unconstitutional. They surely don’t.

It just feels good to blame Palin, Bush, Limbaugh,Beck and every conservative who has ever gotten your Liberal dander up.

It has to be their fault, everything else in life is why not this.

And it feels so good to HATE THEM!! 🙂

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

The Ruling Class Propaganda Machine

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Did you hear the one about the 55 jobs that were saved or created by using $111,000,000?

No? Just ask Los Angeles.

More than a year after Congress approved $800 billion in stimulus funds, the Los Angeles city controller has released a 40-page report on how the city spent its share, and the results are not living up to expectations.

“I’m disappointed that we’ve only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million,” said Wendy Greuel, the city’s controller. “With our local unemployment rate over 12 percent we need to do a better job cutting red tape and putting Angelenos back to work.”

According to the audit, the Los Angeles Department of Public Works spent $70 million in stimulus funds — in return, it created seven private sector jobs and saved seven workers from layoffs. Taxpayer cost per job: $1.5 million.

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation created even fewer jobs per dollar, spending $40 million but netting just nine jobs. Taxpayer cost per job: $4.4 million.

Greuel blamed the dismal numbers on several factors:

1. Bureaucratic red tape: Four highway projects did not even go out to bid until seven months after they were authorized.

2. Projects that were supposed to be competitively bid in the private sector went instead went to city workers.

3. Stimulus money was not properly tracked within departments

4. Both departments could not report the jobs created and retained in a timely fashion..

And this bureaucrat went on to give themself a B- grade for their performance!!

And these are the bureaucrat types who are going to be in charge of your Health Care and whether you live or die?

God Help us All!!

But the Stimulus is a compete and glorious success. Just ask the Mainstream Media and Press…

And Now the Ministry Of Truth Cheerleading of The Week Story:

Diane Sawyer (Anchor, ABC News Tonight) announced the “President’s stimulus program” of $818 billion was “designated to create or save millions of jobs” and though “Republicans say it’s been largely unsuccessful,” the “White House is firing back, and our Jon Karl has a look at the top of the list, the ones that have worked the best.”  Previewing a report to be released Friday by the Vice President’s office, “100 Recovery Act Projects that Are Changing America” (AP dispatch), Karl trumpeted how “the White House will detail the top 100 stimulus programs in the country. We have an exclusive list at what they considered the greatest hits of the stimulus program.”

Karl began with a project in New Jersey “where a toxic area contaminated by an old electronics plant is being transformed into a new industrial park, thanks to $30 million stimulus dollars” and, he raved, “the project has already created 68 jobs.”

Showing the effort to which ABC went to produce the advertisement for President Obama, the Washington DC-based Karl showed himself at the site of his second example in New York City, to which he credited 120 jobs: “The White House is also touting the $175 million in stimulus funds being spent here at New York’s Staten Island ferry terminal, replacing nine bridges like this one that are in a dangerous state of disrepair.”

Next, after noting Senator John McCain’s claim the spending has been a waste, Karl cited “230 jobs created” by “$51 million for a new facility for injured veterans at Fort Bliss, Texas” and, finally, without any job creation claim, “$25 million in tax credits for GE to build a new plant for energy efficient appliances in Louisville, Kentucky.” That would be a little corporate welfare for MSNBC’s owner.

Karl concluded that adding up all the jobs in the 100 projects in the White House list, though he did not cite a total claimed number, “comes to $250,000 per job, but the White House says the actual cost per job is much lower, because each of these projects will have ripple effects, creating many more jobs in the future.”

Sawyer then reiterated the White House line: “So they say these are facts, too, and these are the facts that show it’s been working.”

And these are the facts that show there is no Journalism anymore in the Mainstream media, just Propaganda for Big Brother.

“I’m sad to report today a death of a good friend to all of us…..Journalism, the once esteemed 4th estate of our nation and the protector of our freedoms and a watchdog of our rights has passed away after a long struggle with a crippling and debilitating disease of acute dishonesty aggravated by advanced laziness and the loss of brain function.”–Former Gov. Mick Hucakbee (2009).

Just the Facts, Ma’am! 🙂

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

Our New Orwellian Phrase of the Week:

From the administration that brought you “man-caused disaster” (terrorist attack) and “overseas contingency operation,” (war) another terminology change is in the pipeline.

The White House wants the public to start using the term “global climate disruption” in place of “global warming” — fearing the latter term oversimplifies the problem and makes it sound less dangerous than it really is. (FOX)

So from Global Cooling…”inadvertent climate modification.”….to Global Warming…To Global Climate Change… to Climate Change…to Global Climate Disruption?….. 🙂

And when that fails to dull the minds of everyone to their fake threat then what?

But Republicans predicted that re-branding the issue would have limited effect on the legislative effort. GOP strategist Pete Snyder said he doubts the term is going to change hearts and minds. “Are they going to change the name of weathermen to disruption analysts?”

Especially, after Climate Gate it was very apparent that science was taking a back seat to Progressive Liberal Politics.

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

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) turned an already fractious midterm election cycle on its ear, defying her own party to launch a write-in campaign for her Senate seat after losing to Tea Party Republican Joe Miller in the primary.

I guess her Ego just couldn’t handle losing to an insignificant little dweeb in the Tea Party.

This is what’s wrong with the ruling political classes on BOTH sides. They are too comfortable with their Marie Antionette “Let Them Eat Cake” attitude that they are so much better than the little people.
Yes, even Republicans.
Remember, I am a registered Independent. I am also a Conservative, first.

“We cannot accept the extremist views of Joe Miller,” she said, admitting that she did not “swing back” when under attack in the primary, but promising to do so with relish now.

“The gloves are off,” she said.

Her Ego must have really been bruised. Now she sounds like MSDNC, or the NAACP or Huffington Post.

The ruling class has been hurt by the little people.

“The Peasants are revolting, sire”

“Yeah, I know, they stink on ice” (Mel Brooks History of the World Part 1) 🙂

Then there’s Chrisitine O’Donnell, the “kooky” candidate Tea party nominee in Delaware that upset the apple cart by taking out a RINO (Republican in  Name Only) who was well loved by the ruling class because he had an (R) next to his name but was in fact a Liberal. But he was one of “them”.

Karl Rove attacks her savagely, sounding like Chris Matthews  or Rachael “Madcow” Maddow on MSDNC.

Charles Krauthammer, who anyone who reads this blog will know I have great respect for, attacks her.

Why?

Because it’s a numbers game to them. Winning at any cost is just politics.

And that’s all that matters. The Power. Not the principles.

But if we happen to get conservatives in at the same time, that’s a bonus. Not the actual benefit.

And isn’t that ass backwards??

“The verdict is in,” O’Donnell proclaimed. “The small elite don’t get us. They call us wacky. They call us wing nuts. We call us ‘we the people.’” What is happening in America today, she said “is a love affair with liberty.”
“The constitution is making a comeback,” O’Donnell said. “Americans want our leaders to defend our values, our culture, our legacy of liberty and our way of life — not apologize … They have rejected the narrative that has been imposed on them by the D.C. cocktail crowd.”
Many voted for “Hope and Change” and what they got was a Hope of what the Progressive Liberal Democrats wanted to Change this country into.
“Yes We Can” meant the Democrats changing America into Europe.
And the ruling classes of politicians are ok with it, as long as they are the ones in power.
“I don’t want the majority back if we don’t believe anything,” Sen. DeMint said on Fox News. “So I think if we want the numbers, if we want the majority, then we’re going to have to stand on some principles that the American people believe in.”
And neither do I, because then you’re just trading one slave master for another.
The political animal has not changed his spots.
So we have to change them for him or her.
Simple.

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!

Channeling Your Inner Banana II: The Indoctri-NATION

June 26th I wrote a blog entitled, “Getting in Touch with your Inner Banana” (https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/) in which I espoused about the coming more than just leanings of Banana Republic Dictatorship that our current President seems to aspire to.

Well, it’s Time for a sequel.

But first a word about his friends in the Ministry of Truth (The Mainstream Media).

The TV networks have aggressively demonstrated their dislike of Arizona’s state law “cracking down on illegal immigrants,” a law that “pits neighbor against neighbor.” An MRC review of morning and evening news programs on ABC, CBS, and NBC from April 23 to July 25 found the networks have aired 120 stories with an almost ten-to-one tilt against the Arizona law (77 negative, 35 neutral, 8 positive).

The soundbite count was also tilted over the last three months — 216 to 107, or an almost exact two-to-one disparity. Network anchors and reporters sided against defenders of border control and championed sympathetic illegal aliens and their (usually American-born) children. In 120 stories, they never described “immigrants rights activists” as liberals or on the left.


Between them, the three networks described the Arizona law as “controversial” on 27 occasions, despite its popularity in opinion polls. The Obama administration’s decision to sue file a lawsuit against Arizona to crush the law was never described as “controversial.”

These are the Journo-Lists who profess to be “journalists” that are fair and objective. They are anything but.

They are toadies for their guy and their ideology. Nothing more, Nothing less than full on indoctrination.

The networks highlighted the “army” of protesters against the Arizona law and ignored their sometimes radical connections. As with sympathetic media coverage of large amnesty rallies in 2006, none of the stories allowed anyone to suggest it was improper for illegal aliens to petition the government whose laws they’re breaking or cancel out the votes of law-abiding citizens.

On May 30, ABC anchor David Muir asked, “Will an army of protesters be heard?” Reporter Jeremy Hubbard began his story for World News: “In their most massive numbers yet, a deluge of adversaries rally and rail against what could soon be the law of the land in Arizona.”

Network correspondents routinely mourned how illegal aliens didn’t feel welcome in Arizona, and felt they had to move back to Mexico or other friendlier states. On July 8, NBC reporter Lee Cowan sympathized with Marcial Bolanos, who didn’t think Arizona was a good place any more. “He took his 15-year-old son out of school and is headed back to Mexico, which brings Hugo to tears. But you’re really going to miss your friends?” Hugo said “Yeah.” The networks didn’t apply this blatant emotional appeal on behalf of families who’ve lost loved ones in crimes committed by illegal aliens.

You get one sob story after another, emotional appeals about heartless Arizonans who want to destroy “immigrant” (not illegal immigrant) families and friends.

Only Fox as far as I can see ever mentions Richard Krentz, the farmer who was murdered on his own land by drug smugglers as a victim. they even talked to his widow. If they do mention him, it is only in passing.

Take ABC News:  Ranchers have seen cattle slaughtered and pulled apart by hungry people stealing across the border, and one resident, Robert Krentz, may have been shot dead by an alleged illegal immigrant as he patrolled his land last month.

They tracked the killers all the way to the Mexican Border, by the way.

Then the media always follows up with their own lies, damn lies and statistics.

The U.S. Border Patrol says apprehensions along the Arizona-Mexico frontier are up 6 percent from October to April.

The Arizona Republic went on to report that, “according to the Border Patrol, Krentz is the only American murdered by a suspected illegal immigrant in at least a decade within the agency’s Tucson sector, the busiest smuggling route among the Border Patrol’s nine coverage regions along the U.S.-Mexican border.”

So it’s no big deal. Nothing to see here. But then again, he was white, so not much sympathy there. 😦

In 18 of 120 stories, the networks mentioned the public opinion polls, in which broad majorities favor the Arizona law. One poll question the networks didn’t ask was if it might seem odd for the Obama administration to sue Arizona for trying to enforce immigration laws, but would not sue cities that vowed to ignore immigration laws, which call themselves “sanctuary cities.”

A Rasmussen poll found 54 percent favored the Justice Department suing “sanctuary cities,” and 61 percent favored cutting off federal aid to them. But the three networks haven’t used the words “sanctuary city” since 2007, when it was a hot topic in the Republican primary debates. It was never mentioned, so was never described as “controversial.” (MRC)

So upwards of 70% of the American People are for Arizona, but the Ministry of Truth Mainstream Media is not. So they continue to hammer the propaganda home.

Just like the media of a dictator.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken after the judge’s Tuesday ruling, finds that 59% favor passage of an Arizona-like immigration law in their state, marking little change from earlier this month. Just 32% oppose such a law.

Support for the building of a fence along the Mexican border has reached a new high, and voters are more confident than ever that illegal immigration can be stopped.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of U.S. voters now believe the United States should continue to build a fence on the Mexican border. That’s up nine points from March when the Obama administration halted funding for the fence and the highest level of support ever.

Support for the fence is strong across all demographic groups. But while 76% of Mainstream voters think the United States should continue to build the fence, 67% of the Political Class are opposed to it.

So what you have is a Mainstream Media that reports the news the way they want to hear it and the way they want you to think about it.

It’s Propaganda.

********

AMNESTY II

With Congress gridlocked on an immigration bill, the Obama administration  is considering using a back door to stop deporting many illegal immigrants – what a draft government memo said could be “a non-legislative version of amnesty.”

“This memorandum offers administrative relief options to . . . reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization,” it reads. (see below)

The memo, addressed to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas and written by four agency staffers, lists tools it says the administration has to “reduce the threat of removal” for many illegal immigrants who have run afoul of immigration authorities.

“In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, USCIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations, exercising discretion with regard to parole-in-place, deferred action and the issuance of Notices to Appear,” the staffers wrote in the memo, which was obtained by Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican.

The memo suggests that in-depth discussions have occurred on how to keep many illegal immigrants in the country, which would be at least a temporary alternative to the proposals Democrats in Congress have made to legalize illegal immigrants.

Chris Bentley, a USCIS spokesman, said drafting the memo doesn’t mean the agency has embraced the policy and “nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions.”

“As a matter of good government, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will discuss just about every issue that comes within the purview of the immigration system,” he said in an e-mail statement. “We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation’s immigration challenges.”

He said the Homeland Security Department “will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation’s entire illegal immigrant population.”

The memo does talk about targeting specific groups of illegal immigrants.

Mr. Grassley said it confirms his fears that the administration is trying an end-run around Congress.

“This memo gives credence to our concerns that the administration will go to great lengths to circumvent Congress and unilaterally execute a backdoor amnesty plan,” Mr. Grassley said.
The memo acknowledges some of the tools could be costly and might even require asking Congress for more money.

At one point, the authors acknowledge that widespread use of “deferred action” – or using prosecutorial discretion not to deport someone – would be “a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty.’ ”

The authors noted several options for deferred action, including targeting it to students who would be covered by the DREAM Act, a bill that’s been introduced in Congress.

In testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 11, Mr. Mayorkas first said he was unaware of discussions to use these kinds of tools on a categorical basis, then later clarified that officials had talked about expanding the use of those powers.

“I don’t know of any plans. I think we have discussed, as we always do, the tools available to us and whether the deployment of any of those tools could achieve a more fair and efficient use or application of the immigration law,” he said.

He acknowledged, though, that he was not aware that those powers had ever been used before on a categorical basis.

Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who queried Mr. Mayorkas on the subject, warned him against pursuing that strategy.

“I think it would be a mistake for the administration to use administrative action, like deferred action on a categorical basis, to deal with a large number of people who are here without proper legal documents to regularize their status without Congress’ participation. I will just say that to you for what it’s worth,” Mr. Cornyn, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee, told Mr. Mayorkas.

“The American public’s confidence in the federal government’s ability and commitment to enforce our immigration laws is at an all-time low,” Mr. Cornyn said in a statement. “This apparent step to circumvent Congress – and avoid a transparent debate on how to fix our broken immigration system –  threatens to further erode public confidence in its government and makes it less likely we will ever reach consensus and pass credible border security and immigration reform.”

After reports earlier this year that the agency was working on these sorts of plans, Senate Republicans, led by Mr. Grassley, have sent letters to President Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano asking for details.

In recent weeks, Sen. Chuck Grassley and others in Congress have been pressing the administration to disavow rumors that a de facto amnesty is in the works, including in a letter to Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano. “Since the senators first wrote to the president more than a month ago, we have not been reassured that the plans are just rumors, and we have every reason to believe that the memo is legitimate,” a Grassley spokesman tells NR. (NR contacted DHS, but a spokesman did not have a comment on the record.)

Many of the memo’s proposals are technical and fine-grained; for example, it suggests clarifying the immigration laws for “unaccompanied minors, and for victims of human trafficking, domestic violence, and other criminal activities.” It also proposes extending the “grace period” H-1B visa holders have between the expiration of their visa and the date they’re expected to leave the country.

With other ideas, however, USCIS is aiming big. Perhaps the most egregious suggestion is to “Increase the Use of Deferred Action.” “Deferred action,” as the memo defines it, “is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to pursue removal from the U.S. of a particular individual for a specific period of time.” For example, after Hurricane Katrina, the government decided not to remove illegal immigrants who’d been affected by the disaster.

The memo claims that there are no limits to USCIS’s ability to use deferred action, but warns that using this power indiscriminately would be “controversial, not to mention expensive.” The memo suggests using deferred action to exempt “particular groups” from removal — such as the illegal-immigrant high-school graduates who would fall under the DREAM Act (a measure that has been shot down repeatedly in Congress). The memo claims that the DREAM Act would cover “an estimated 50,000” individuals, though as many as 65,000 illegal immigrants graduate high school every year in the U.S.

Mind you this Memo was 11 Pages long!

Grassley says it is “ridiculous” to think a memo containing this kind of detail was drawn up without specific direction from someone in the administration. “Bureaucrats don’t write memos like that for the fun of it,” he said.

This is not a school grade writing exercise, after all.

And the memo seeks to out ‘touchy-feely’ ’emotional’ exemptions. So if you want to object to them you’re just a heartless, mean and cruel, uncaring bastard.

Sound familiar? 🙂

UPDATE: USCIS has released a statement on the memo:

Internal draft memos do not and should not be equated with official action or policy of the Department. We will not comment on notional, pre-decisional memos. As a matter of good government, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will discuss just about every issue that comes within the purview of the immigration system. We continue to maintain that comprehensive bipartisan legislation, coupled with smart, effective enforcement, is the only solution to our nation’s immigration challenges.

Internal memoranda help us do the thinking that leads to important changes; some of them are adopted and others are rejected. Our goal is to implement policies wisely and well to strengthen all aspects of our mission. The choices we have made so far have strengthened both the enforcement and services sides of USCIS — nobody should mistake deliberation and exchange of ideas for final decisions. To be clear, DHS will not grant deferred action or humanitarian parole to the nation’s entire illegal immigrant population.

Don’t mind us, we just write 11-page detailed judicial memos as way of just chewing the fat, nothing to see here.

Given the backroom secrecy that has been “transparent” in this administration shouldn’t the fact that they are even discussing ways to circumvent Congress worry you?

Yes, they should.

Much like the “promises” made about Health Care reform which we know now from sworn testimony to be false.

So doesn’t that sound like he and his apparatchiks are getting in even more touch with their Inner Banana (Dictatorship)?

It does to me.

Beyond the confines of the courtroom, however, that question is all that the controversy over S.B. 1070 is about: Do we as a country want to enforce the immigration laws or not? It’s time to answer that question.

And is the Government of The People, By the People and For the The People going to perish under a propaganda and legal parsers onslaught with the willing compliance of the touchy-feely Fifth Column Ministry of Truth Media? 😦

That is the question.

It’s the Spin Zone

How you say something can effect how it’s perceived.

That is, if you can find it.

Take yesterday’s preliminary hearing on SB 1070.

The Los Angeles Times, which is an open borders pro-illegal newspaper opened with:

A federal judge on Thursday expressed skepticism about the constitutionality of a key part of Arizona’s controversial immigration law, but did not say whether she would prevent the measure from taking effect next week.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton said during a hearing that the provision that makes it a state crime to lack immigration documents apparently conflicts with a Supreme Court ruling that says states cannot create their own immigration registration systems.

John Bouma, a lawyer representing Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer in the seven lawsuits seeking to block implementation of the measure, tried to convince Bolton otherwise. Then he gave up.

“I didn’t have the feeling I persuaded you last week either,” he said, referring to similar arguments on another lawsuit.

Sounds bad doesn’t it? But consider the source.

But my favourite that I’ve seen is good ole’ Katie Couric, CBS NEWS:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

If those words were written in Arizona today, they might include a footnote: just make sure they have their papers.

No bias here. 🙂

They also have stories on Neo-Nazis patrolling the border and a puff piece on the violence at the border that says it isn’t so bad.

Diminish,distract,and destroy. Liberal “journalism” in action.

Then you read The AP story on The Daily Caller:

PHOENIX (AP) — The judge who will decide whether Arizona’s new immigration law is constitutional hasn’t indicated whether she’ll put the statute on hold before it takes effect next week and had some pointed questions Thursday for challengers at two court hearings.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also went beyond dry legal analysis to point out some of the everyday realities of illegal immigration and how that applies to the new law.

Without prodding from attorneys, the judge noted that the federal government erected signs in a wilderness area south of Phoenix that warn visitors about immigrant and drug smugglers passing through public lands. She said the stash houses where smugglers hide immigrants from Mexico before bringing them into the country’s interior have become a fixture on the news in Arizona.

“You can barely go a day without a location being found in Phoenix where there are numerous people being harbored,” said Bolton, who didn’t issue a ruling after the two hearings.

Notice the Difference? 🙂

Now that couldn’t be media bias now could it?

Perish the thought! 🙂

Especially after the “Journolist” releases. 🙂

But I will at least say  it was nice to see this buried down at the bottom of the Times article:

“I guess we have some explanation of why we have so many [smugglers] and aliens unlawfully here,” Bouma said. “The federal government doesn’t want them prosecuted and doesn’t think the state should.”

🙂

But then it followed immediately with this liberal lie: Government statistics show that the Obama administration has deported more illegal immigrants annually than the George W. Bush administration.

So what, he’s spent as much as Bush did in 8 years in 18 months. But you won’t here that from the Journo-List inspired liberal press.

But again, it’s the liberal Bush Derangement Syndrome coming back up like a bad case of acid reflux.

But then comes: Arizona is the favorite crossing point for illegal entrants from Mexico, and even though the numbers have dropped off during the recession, fears of violence from Mexican drug traffickers persist. Bouma noted a sign the federal Bureau of Land Management recently posted in the desert 30 miles south of Phoenix:

“Danger — Public Warning. Travel Not Recommended. Active Drug and Human Smuggling Area.”

Bolton said she had seen pictures of the sign, heavily publicized by Brewer, and that it was “awful.”

At the very end. Do you not think this was important?

Daily Caller:

Attorney John Bouma, who is defending the law on behalf of Gov. Jan Brewer, said the federal government wants to keep its authority while turning a blind eye to illegal immigrants.

“You can’t catch them if you don’t know about them. They don’t want to know about them,” he said.

Bouma told Bolton that those challenging the law haven’t demonstrated that anyone would suffer actual harm if it takes effect, and that facts — not mere speculation — must be shown.

“In Arizona we have a tremendous Hispanic heritage. To think that everybody that’s Hispanic is going to be stopped and questioned … defies reality,” Bouma said. “All this hypothetical that we’re going to go out and arrest everybody that’s Hispanic, look around. That’s impossible.”

Yeah, don’t tell the Ministry of Truth that there are Hispanics who are for SB1070, it will be another “Uncle Tom” moment, or is that “Uncle Jose”.

The New York Times opens with a picture of Hispanic Protesters…gee no bias there. 🙂

With just a week remaining before Arizona’s stringent new immigration law is set to take effect, a federal judge in Phoenix heard, for the first time, from Obama administration lawyers urging her to strike down the controversial legislation while dozens of demonstrators argued both sides outside the courthouse.

As protesters blocked traffic, chanted, sang, yelled and banged on bass drums, lawyers from the Justice Department and for the State of Arizona sparred over whether the law, known locally as SB1070, violates the United States Constitution’s supremacy clause, which says federal law generally trumps state law. The federal judge, Susan R. Bolton, asked pointed questions of both sides, but made no ruling from the bench before adjourning at 3 p.m.

So it’s all about the protesters.

Edwin S. Kneedler, the lawyer for the federal government, argued that the federal government has the sole authority to enforce immigration laws under the Constitution and that Arizona was, in essence, establishing its own immigration policy — which in some cases would be stricter than the federal law and does not take into account either humanitarian concerns or the government’s foreign policy goals.

<<Barf Bag on standby>>

Touchy-feely “feel good” Lies. Gee, the liberal press never does that… 🙂

“The regulation of immigration is unquestionably, exclusively, a federal power,” he said.

Buried in the middle of the article:  John J. Bouma, asserted that the state law actually mirrors the letter of the federal law, even if that federal law is not enforced fully in practice. He argued the state had every right to ask its peace officers to call up federal authorities and check on a person’s immigration status during routine traffic stops or other arrests, even if it created a headache for federal authorities.

“You can’t catch them if you don’t know about them, and they don’t want to know about them — that’s what they are saying,” Mr. Bouma said, gesturing to the Justice Department lawyers.

“What we get is the plaintiff over here saying we cannot do anything,” he added. “That it’s not Arizona’s problem, that we should just live with it.”

As Judge Bolton questioned the federal government’s counsel, she expressed skepticism that the state was indeed carrying out its own immigration enforcement policy. She asked several times whether the statute would actually take the decision about what to do with an illegal immigrant away from federal authorities.

“How does it become immigration enforcement policy? It’s an immigration status check,” she said. “Arizona cannot remove anybody, and they don’t purport they can.”

So the meat is buried, and the headlines are biased.

About 30 protesters blocked traffic, many wearing T-shirts that said “Stop the Hate.” Several unfurled a large, white banner that blared “Stop SB1070. We will not comply.” Others in the group held a banner in Spanish saying: “There is no problem with immigration; there is a problem with capitalism. Revolution is the solution.” After two hours, the police cleared the intersection and arrested seven people.

Ah, LA RAZA and MeCHA showed up… 🙂

Antoinette Murray, 45, said she feared the law would prompt police officers to stop citizens who look Hispanic and arrest them if they cannot produce the right documents. “If they look at someone and they are of Mexican descent, they are going to be guilty until proven innocent,” she said. “It makes you guilty for being brown.”

The a priori racism argument yet again.

Sound familiar:

“You can imagine, if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona …” the president said Tuesday at a campaign-style appearance in Iowa, “suddenly, if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed.”–President Obama April 29, 2010.

Outside the courthouse, people of all political stripes mounted noisy demonstrations. Charlene Greenwood, 46 and unemployed, described herself as a Tea Party member, wore a semiautomatic pistol on her hip and signs that read, “Illegal immigrants have better health care than I do” and, “Bank robbers, drug dealers and prostitutes are just trying to support their families too.”

So you go for the most extreme “loon” you can find and highlight them. No bias there.

In Sci-Fi Fandom this is known as “going for the guy in the spock ears” only. The most extreme element is normal to the person who wants to be condescending to begin with.

To confirm the stereotype.

“And it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” –Candidate Obama said. 4/12/2008

But the old grey lady had to end their piece with one more sob story:

Among the protesters were several illegal immigrants who were waiting for judges to decide their cases. Rudy Gomez, 37, said he came to the country illegally from Guatemala in 1997 and has been working as a roofer ever since.

He has four children and fears he may be caught and deported in the crackdown envisioned under the law, he said. “I’m not doing anything wrong,” he said. “This is my home. This is where I live.”

Boo Frickin’-Hoo!

Come here legally and people will welcome you.

But he’s been here 13 years. Has 4 kids that we are undoubtedly paying for (education, health care,etc) , and he’s taken a construction job from a legal american.

And we are supposed to look the other way.

Because it’s the federal government’s job to look the other way.

And if you dare look, the almighty OZ will crush you where you stand!

I don’t think so.

“A law that is unenforced is no law at all,” said John Bouma, the lawyer representing Arizona. “We have had repeated pleas … that have basically gone unheeded.”(Reuters)

“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Kneedler responded to her query about why Arizona authorities don’t have the right to be inhospitable to illegal immigrants by saying the law has given the state the power to enforce immigration law “in, frankly, an unprecedented and dramatic way.”(WP)

States’ Rights: A federal judge hears arguments over whether a state law that mirrors federal law on immigration should take effect next week. Can a state protect its borders when the federal government won’t?

Critics of Arizona’s enlisting local police to enforce federal immigration law fail to note the existence of the federal 287(g) program, which trains local police to do just that. The Department of Homeland Security has memoranda of agreements (MOAs) with some 70 state and local law enforcement agencies to participate in 287(g) partnerships to enforce federal law. Nine of these jurisdictions are in Arizona, and all of the agreements were inked while Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was Arizona governor.

Judge Bolton also heard arguments on whether the Arizona law should be put on hold for now and whether the federal lawsuit should be dismissed. Unfortunately, illegal immigration, a raging drug war in Mexico and an increasing presence by Hezbollah south of the border cannot be put on hold. As the case began, Mexican authorities fought raging gun battles in Nuevo Laredo, across the border from Laredo, Texas. Nuevo Laredo is among several northern cities under siege from a turf battle between the Gulf cartel and its former enforcers, the Zetas gang of hit men. Violence and kidnappings have spilled across our border. The case for border security and immigration enforcement have never been stronger.

A bid by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., to block the suit failed 55-43 with five Democrats voting with him and two Republicans siding with the Department of Justice. Sens. Mike Johanns of Nebraska and George Voinovich of Ohio voted against Arizona and in favor of open borders.

Rhode Island has a policy issued through an executive order identical to Arizona’s law. Rhode Island has not been sued, probably because its policy was not enacted in an election cycle. Nine other states have joined in a legal brief supporting Arizona in federal court, and a number of states are considering similar laws.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has declared the Wolverine State the lead state backing the Arizona law in court. It has filed a brief in federal court on behalf of Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia.

“Arizona, Michigan and every other state has the authority to enforce immigration laws, and it is appalling to see President Obama use taxpayer dollars to stop a state’s efforts to protect its own borders,” Cox said in a statement. We think so too.

The duty of this administration is to protect the borders of the United States and to enforce our laws, not to wage a legal war against Arizona for doing what the feds have failed to do.(IBD)

The power the Feds refuse to use and want bar anyone else from using.

Now that’s protecting your base and your base wanna-be’s, just not your citizens.

But what else would you expect from our “post-racial” President and his takeover-happy apparatchik-minded Liberals.

The Winning Strategy Part 1: The Media

November 2010.

The most important election in American History.

And the Democrats know it.

So, get ready for anything goes.

Because after all, the end justifies the means.

There will be all out Nuclear Race War.

Class Warfare.

Bush Derangement Syndrome will be epidemic.

You’ll up to the sky in kitchen sinks.

Nothing will actually be off limits.

Everyone of you who even hints at disagreeing with them is a Racist or an Uncle Tom.

You know who you are. 🙂

And The Mainstream Media will be right there in their propaganda roll as the Ministry of Truth.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history and change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Think how underplayed the greatest lie of the Obama administration is being ignored, That of the Health Care Mandate as a Tax then you get the idea.

Then it came out this week that many in the News Media (not just “commentators”) actively and with political forethought deliberately ignored, suppressed or actively worked against the Reverend Jeremiah Wright story when it broke and actively worked to get Obama elected in general by hook or by crook.

Absolutely no “objectivity” or “journalism” need apply.

Did you notice how fast it disappeared?  And anyone who brought it  after that was…<<drum roll>>…A RACIST! 🙂

And if you disagreed with Obama, you were de facto a Racist?

Then after he was elected the Tea Party sprung up, and guess what, they were Racists too!!

It was no accident. I was a calculated plan by the very journalists themselves.

Someone found a forum where “journalists” hung out and said what they really think.

But don’t expect to here it on the Mainstream Media, the very people who were saying it. 🙂

Daily Caller: It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign.

According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Specifically, “If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us,” Ackerman wrote on the Journolist listserv in April 2008. “Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”

ABC being the “tough questions” asked of the President about Rev. Wright in April 2008, just after it broke.

How dare they! That must be stopped!

The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

“Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.”

(In an interview Monday, Tomasky defended his position, calling the ABC debate an example of shoddy journalism.)

Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun as well as a political science professor, upped the ante from there. In a post with the subject header, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed coordinating a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the questions Gibson and Stephanopoulos had posed to Obama.

“It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote.

Tomasky approved. “YES. A thousand times yes,” he exclaimed.

The members began collaborating on their open letter. Jonathan Stein of Mother Jones rejected an early draft, saying, “I’d say too short. In my opinion, it doesn’t go far enough in highlighting the inanity of some of [Gibson’s] and [Stephanopoulos’s] questions. And it doesn’t point out their factual inaccuracies …Our friends at Media Matters probably have tons of experience with this sort of thing, if we want their input.”

Jared Bernstein, who would go on to be Vice President Joe Biden’s top economist when Obama took office, helped, too. The letter should be “Short, punchy and solely focused on vapidity of gotcha,” Bernstein wrote.

In the midst of this collaborative enterprise, Holly Yeager, now of the Columbia Journalism Review, dropped into the conversation to say “be sure to read” a column in that day’s Washington Post that attacked the debate.

Columnist Joe Conason weighed in with suggestions. So did Slate contributor David Greenberg, and David Roberts of the website Grist. Todd Gitlin, a professor of journalism at Columbia University, helped too.

Journolist members signed the statement and released it April 18, calling the debate “a revolting descent into tabloid journalism and a gross disservice to Americans concerned about the great issues facing the nation and the world.”

The letter caused a brief splash and won the attention of the New York Times. But only a week later, Obama – and the journalists who were helping him – were on the defensive once again.

Jeremiah Wright was back in the news after making a series of media appearances. At the National Press Club, Wright claimed Obama had only repudiated his beliefs for “political reasons.” Wright also reiterated his charge that the U.S. federal government had created AIDS as a means of committing genocide against African Americans.

It was another crisis, and members of Journolist again rose to help Obama.

Chris Hayes of the Nation posted on April 29, 2008, urging his colleagues to ignore Wright. Hayes directed his message to “particularly those in the ostensible mainstream media” who were members of the list.

The Wright controversy, Hayes argued, was not about Wright at all. Instead, “It has everything to do with the attempts of the right to maintain control of the country.”

Hayes castigated his fellow liberals for criticizing Wright. “All this hand wringing about just
how awful and odious Rev. Wright remarks are just keeps the hustle going.”

“Our country disappears people. It tortures people. It has the blood of as many as one million Iraqi civilians — men, women, children, the infirmed — on its hands. You’ll forgive me if I just can’t quite dredge up the requisite amount of outrage over Barack Obama’s pastor,” Hayes wrote.

Hayes urged his colleagues – especially the straight news reporters who were charged with covering the campaign in a neutral way – to bury the Wright scandal. “I’m not saying we should all rush en masse to defend Wright. If you don’t think he’s worthy of defense, don’t defend him! What I’m saying is that there is no earthly reason to use our various platforms to discuss what about Wright we find objectionable,” Hayes said.

(Reached by phone Monday, Hayes argued his words then fell on deaf ears. “I can say ‘hey I don’t think you guys should cover this,’ but no one listened to me.”)

Katha Pollitt – Hayes’s colleague at the Nation – didn’t disagree on principle, though she did sound weary of the propaganda. “I hear you. but I am really tired of defending the indefensible. The people who attacked Clinton on Monica were prissy and ridiculous, but let me tell you it was no fun, as a feminist and a woman, waving aside as politically irrelevant and part of the vast rightwing conspiracy Paula, Monica, Kathleen, Juanita,” Pollitt said.

“Part of me doesn’t like this shit either,” agreed Spencer Ackerman, then of the Washington Independent. “But what I like less is being governed by racists and warmongers and criminals.”

Ackerman went on:

I do not endorse a Popular Front, nor do I think you need to. It’s not necessary to jump to Wright-qua-Wright’s defense. What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.

Ackerman did allow there were some Republicans who weren’t racists. “We’ll know who doesn’t deserve this treatment — Ross Douthat, for instance — but the others need to get it.” He also said he had begun to implement his plan. “I previewed it a bit on my blog last week after Commentary wildly distorted a comment Joe Cirincione made to make him appear like (what else) an antisemite. So I said: why is it that so many on the right have such a problem with the first viable prospective African-American president?”

Several members of the list disagreed with Ackerman – but only on strategic grounds.

“Spencer, you’re wrong,” wrote Mark Schmitt, now an editor at the American Prospect. “Calling Fred Barnes a racist doesn’t further the argument, and not just because Juan Williams is his new black friend, but because that makes it all about character. The goal is to get to the point where you can contrast some _thing_ — Obama’s substantive agenda — with this crap.”

(In an interview Monday, Schmitt declined to say whether he thought Ackerman’s plan was wrong. “That is not a question I’m going to answer,” he said.)

Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, also disagreed with Ackerman’s strategy. “I think it’s worth keeping in mind that Obama is trying (or says he’s trying) to run a campaign that avoids precisely the kind of thing Spencer is talking about, and turning this into a gutter brawl would probably hurt the Obama brand pretty strongly. After all, why vote for him if it turns out he’s not going change the way politics works?”

But it was Ackerman who had the last word. “Kevin, I’m not saying OBAMA should do this. I’m saying WE should do this.”

Karl Rove played down the notion that members of the mainstream press agreed with Ackerman but he said he found it curious that such talk was tolerated within the group. It was important, he added, not to judge the motives of members who chose not to respond.

“I thought it was a revealing insight in the attitude of one minor player in the D.C. world of journalism,” Rove said of Ackerman’s comments. “It’s an even more important insight into a broader group of more prominent journalists that they seem to be willing to tolerate the suggestion that they should all tell a deliberate lie or that they should take somebody’s head and shove it through a plate glass window. I would hope that somebody would say, ‘Mr. Ackerman, do you really believe we ought to fabricate a lie about people just because we don’t agree with them?’”

Barnes added that even if there was an effort on the left to smear opponents as racists, the plan wouldn’t work.

“The charge has been made so often without any evidence that it has lost its sting,” he said. “It has become the last refuge of liberal scoundrels.”

Interview on FOX: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/publisher-neil-patel-chats-with-megyn-kelly-about-journolist/

And Now Part II: The Enemies List

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for National Public Radio, that isn’t what you’d do at all.

In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.

In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”

Spitz’s hatred for Limbaugh seems intemperate, even imbalanced. On Journolist, where conservatives are regarded not as opponents but as enemies, it barely raised an eyebrow.

In the summer of 2009, agitated citizens from across the country flocked to town hall meetings to berate lawmakers who had declared support for President Obama’s health care bill. For most people, the protests seemed like an exercise in participatory democracy, rowdy as some of them became.

On Journolist, the question was whether the protestors were garden-variety fascists or actual Nazis.

“You know, at the risk of violating Godwin’s law, is anyone starting to see parallels here between the teabaggers and their tactics and the rise of the Brownshirts?” asked Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer. “Esp. Now that it’s getting violent? Reminds me of the Beer Hall fracases of the 1920s.”

Richard Yeselson, a researcher for an organized labor group who also writes for liberal magazines, agreed. “They want a deficit driven militarist/heterosexist/herrenvolk state,” Yeselson wrote. “This is core of the Bush/Cheney base transmorgrified into an even more explicitly racialized/anti-cosmopolitan constituency. Why? Um, because the president is a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. But it’s all the same old nuts in the same old bins with some new labels: the gun nuts, the anti tax nuts, the religious nuts, the homophobes, the anti-feminists, the anti-abortion lunatics, the racist/confederate crackpots, the anti-immigration whackos (who feel Bush betrayed them) the pathological government haters (which subsumes some of the othercategories, like the gun nuts and the anti-tax nuts).”

“I’m not saying these guys are capital F-fascists,” added blogger Lindsay Beyerstein, “but they don’t want limited government. Their desired end looks more like a corporate state than a rugged individualist paradise. The rank and file wants a state that will reach into the intimate of citizens when it comes to sex, reproductive freedom, censorship, and rampant incarceration in the name of law and order.”

On Journolist, there was rarely such thing as an honorable political disagreement between the left and right, though there were many disagreements on the left. In the view of many who’ve posted to the list-serv, conservatives aren’t simply wrong, they are evil. And while journalists are trained never to presume motive, Journolist members tend to assume that the other side is acting out of the darkest and most dishonorable motives.

When the writer Victor Davis Hanson wrote an article about immigration for National Review, for example, blogger Ed Kilgore didn’t even bother to grapple with Hanson’s arguments. Instead Kilgore dismissed Hanson’s piece out of hand as “the kind of Old White Guy cultural reaction that is at the heart of the Tea Party Movement. It’s very close in spirit to the classic 1970s racist tome, The Camp of the Saints, where White Guys struggle to make up their minds whether to go out and murder brown people or just give up.”

The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down.

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?”

But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

Scherer seemed alarmed. “So we would have press briefings in which only media organizations that are deemed by the briefer to be acceptable are invited to attend?”

John Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, came down on Zasloff’s side, the side of censorship. “Pre-Fox,” he wrote, “I’d say Scherer’s questions made sense as a question of principle. Now it is only tactical.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air…

“If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

A comment on the website after the stories summed it up beautifully:

This expose simply confirms what many of us have known all along. Liberals in the MSM are rigid idealogues who write for each other. They passionately believe they are on the side the angels while conservatives are just plain evil. In their world the ends justify the means and advocacy journalism is their contribution to advancing the cause. They are no better than the “journalists” who wrote for TASS or PRAVDA and their mindset is as rigid and narrow as what you would find in areas where the Taliban has complete control.

Excerpts: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/21/a-few-excerpts-from-journolist-journalists/

Tomorrow, the question will be how do you fix voters…CHEAT like You have CHEATED before! 🙂
One Hint: The Electoral College is Evil and must be stopped! 🙂