The Partisan Bunker

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Mark Meckler, the co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, struck a similar note, saying that when the tea party protests first began, “we were ignored, mocked, and then attacked by the media” and “called ‘Astroturf,’ ‘fringe,’ ‘racists’ and ‘Nazis.’”

“Yet today, the leftist media seemingly cheers for a group of lawbreaking miscreants who have openly committed a variety of illegal acts,” Meckler said.

Said Brandon: “Of course, you hear about the guy who got arrested throwing a shoe at the White House. I heard they were pepper-spraying people down at the Smithsonian. I have yet to hear a story about a tea partier ever doing that.”

And Judson Phillips, the leader of the Tennessee-based group Tea Party Nation, said the “media’s coverage of Occupy Wall Street has been almost totally positive to the point of glossing over some serious issues.”

“While a number of people have been arrested and there is even a photo of a protester defecating on a police car, there still is no really negative coverage from the mainstream media,” Phillips said.

“Meanwhile, protesters in New York had a photoshopped image of the decapitated head of the chairman of Goldman Sachs on a pike and no one seems to be talking about that,” he said.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s strong statements in support of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement raise an interesting question: Does she, then, oppose the preferential treatment her son received at the hand of the financial industry?

Pelosi’s son, Paul Pelosi, Jr., was protected from a round of layoffs when he was a mortgage broker for Countrywide.

Of course not. Liberals are all about “Don’t Do as I do, do as I say” and corporate cronyism is only bad if it’s a conservative or Republican. Not a Democrat or Liberal.

Also, according to the Los Angeles Times, Pelosi’s son Paul also got about $1 million in loans for a condo from his politically-connected employer Countrywide.

Pelosi’s son’s special treatment contrasts with the top House Democrat’s support for Occupy Wall Street — a movement that appears to oppose corporate corruption and cronyism.

“Well, I support the message to the establishment — whether it’s Wall Street or the political establishment and the rest — that change has to happen,” Pelosi said on ABC News’ “This Week” on Sunday.

Pelosi’s office responded to an inquiry by TheDC by pointing to her record in Congress, instead of addressing her son’s apparent special treatment from the banking industry.

“Leader Pelosi spearheaded the passage of the strongest consumer protection legislation since the Great Depression, the Frank-Dodd Wall Street Reform Act,” Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami told The Daily Caller. “Her record is clear.”

Translation:  Stop looking at what I do and just do as I say!!

Now is that “transparent” enough for you??

When Obama accuses Republicans of standing in the way of his nearly $450 billion plan, he ignores the fact that his own party has struggled to unite behind the proposal.

When the president says Republicans haven’t explained what they oppose in the plan, he skips over the fact that Republicans who control the House actually have done that in detail.

And when he calls on Congress to “pass this bill now,” he slides past the point that Democrats control the Senate and were never prepared to move immediately, given other priorities. Senators are expected to vote Tuesday on opening debate on the bill, a month after the president unveiled it with a call for its immediate passage.

To be sure, Obama is not the only one engaging in rhetorical excesses. But he is the president, and as such, his constant remarks on the bill draw the most attention and scrutiny.

The disconnect between what Obama says about his jobs bill and what stands as the political reality flow from his broader aim: to rally the public behind his cause and get Congress to act, or, if not, to pin blame on Republicans.

He is waging a campaign, one in which nuance and context and competing responses don’t always fit in if they don’t help make the case.

For example, when Obama says his jobs plan is made up of ideas that have historically had bipartisan support, he stops the point there. Not mentioned is that Republicans have never embraced the tax increases that he is proposing to cover the cost of his plan.

Likewise, from city to city, Obama is demanding that Congress act (he means Republicans) while it has been clear for weeks that the GOP will not support all of his bill, to say the least. Individual elements of it may well pass, such as Obama’s proposal to extend and expand a payroll tax cut. But Republicans strongly oppose the president’s proposed new spending and his plan to raise taxes on millionaires to pay for the package.

The fight over the legislative proposal has become something much bigger: a critical test of the president’s powers of persuading the public heading into the 2012 presidential campaign, and of Republicans’ ability to deny him a win and reap victory for themselves.

“He knows it’s not going to pass. He’s betting that voters won’t pick up on it, or even if they do they will blame Congress and he can run against the `do-nothing Congress,'” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a senior fellow at the University of Southern California’s School of Policy, Planning and Development.

The new, combative Obama isn’t looking for compromise. He’s looking for a win. And if he can’t get the legislative victory he says he wants, he has made clear that he’s more than willing to take a political win.

It is, he acknowledges, a result his campaign for his jobs bill is designed to achieve.

Talking up the bill in an appearance last month with African-American news websites, Obama said: “I need people to be out there promoting this and pushing this and making sure that everybody understands the details of what this would mean, so that one of two things happen: Either Congress gets it done, or if Congress doesn’t get it done, people know exactly what’s holding it up.”

So is it now “transparent”?

Democrats won’t go for an agreement that doesn’t include lots of new tax revenue; Republicans are just as ardently anti-tax. The impasse over revenues means that Democrats won’t agree to cost curbs on popular entitlement programs like Medicare.

“Fairness has to be a prerequisite for it,” said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “We have just come through passing a bill that was (all spending) cuts, no revenue.” Pelosi was referring to the August debt limit bill, which set tight “caps” on agency budgets but didn’t contain revenue increases pressed by Democrats.

Democrats are more insistent on revenues now.

“There’s been no movement on revenues and I’m not sure the Democrats will agree to anything without revenues,” added a Democratic lobbyist who required anonymity to speak candidly.

“While the panel members aren’t doing much talking, other lawmakers, aides and lobbyists closely tracking the committee are increasingly skeptical, even pessimistic, that the panel will be able to meet its assigned goal of at least $1.2 trillion in deficit savings during the next 10 years.” (WP and others)

A mere 120 Billion a year, the current Congress spends that in a month!

So how’s that “transparency”? 🙂

And how’s the idea of cutting Trillions, especially on entitlements coming?

How do think. They desperately don’t want to and will do whatever they have to to do as little as possible.

And at 48% of Americans who are on the dole hope they don’t do anything.

So will it take being the bug splatting on the windshield before we have to do anything.

Think Greece. Think Italy. Then think you’re in deep bovine fecal matter.

Deep….Deep….Deep….

The Partisan Bunker is open and ready for you…

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler



I Aim to Misbehave

Mark Steyn: “In this case the government of the United States is the gunrunner,” Steyn said. “That is basically what is happening here. There would be no guns running to these Mexican cartels if the United States government hadn’t instituted a program to facilitate it.”

Steyn noted the lack of media outrage compared with other scandals in the past.

“Now real Mexicans are dead,” he continued. “Does the president of the United States, does his attorney general, does CNN, does The New York Times, does NPR — do they not care about dead Mexicans?

“I mean, forget the United States Border Patrol guys that were killed about these ‘Fast & Furious’ guns. Real-live, or previously live, citizens of third world countries — the kind of people that NPR, The New York Times claim to love — are dead because of this.”

“Why isn’t that a national scandal?” he pleaded. “This is absolutely a — Iran-Contra didn’t rack of that kind of body count. Watergate didn’t rack up that kind of body count. Sarah Palin’s daughter’s boyfriend’s mother, or whatever stupid story they were chasing around Wasilla for months, that didn’t rack up a body count. There were hundreds of dead Mexicans from a gun running program run by the United States.”

Precisely because it was done by Liberals. As I have said before, Liberals can do anything they want, it’s you who oppose them that have to live with moral grounds.

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: Rule 4:  Make opponents live up to their own book of rules.

But you don’t have to. And thus you handicap your opponent with morals and ethics when you don’t have any. Simple.

And then you have the media on your side willing to do your bidding. And judges who will rule for your ideology rather than the law.

What could be better. 🙂

PASS THE BILL

Here’s the real silliness of all this. The Obama plan would permanently raise tax rates in order to pay for a temporary tax cut.

Kinda like Obamacare’s 10 years of taxes for 6 years of service so as to pay “balance” games.

In other words, taxes are going up, not down, as far as the eye can see under Obama’s program.

And here’s more silliness. The White House and Senate Democrats want a 5.6 percent surtax on millionaires, which is supposed to pay for the entire stimulus package. And don’t forget: The Obama budget would raise the Bush tax rates for people making over $200,000, while the Obamacare budget would substantially increase payroll taxes that apply to investors. On top of that, the Obama budget would lower the value of numerous personal deductions.

So the top personal tax rate would move to nearly 50 percent under the Obama plan. Now do the incentive math. At a 50 percent tax rate, successful earners, investors, and small-business owners would keep only 50 cents on the extra dollar earned. Under current law, however, at the 35 percent top income-tax rate, they would keep 65 cents. So if the plan goes through, it would mean a 23 percent reduction in marginal incentives. This in a stalled economy where job creation doesn’t keep up with a rising population and is less than half the necessary level to shrink the unemployment rate.

Of course, the individuals and families who would suffer the greatest tax-penalty increases are the ones who are most likely to invest and run small businesses. In fact, Treasury data show that over 80 percent of millionaire tax filers reflect small-business income. Why demonize them? This is what Gov. Chris Christie meant when he said President Obama is sending a “demoralizing” message.

This tax attack is the latest assault from a White House that is making a sharp populist shift to the left. It coincides with a president who trashed Bank of America for raising debit-card fees in response to a Dodd-Frank price-control edict, and who suggests that banks do not have an inherent right to profit. It’s in league with a president who is throwing in with the Wall Street protesters. And it’s a sorry sign that the White House doesn’t understand that anti-capitalist nostrums will not solve our economic problems.

How about unleashing a wave of free-market capitalism, which has proven to be the best path to prosperity?

Unfortunately, Team Obama will have none of it. (Larry Kudlow)

Instead, we have communist anarchists “occupying” the news so no one has to talk about this but we can hear the incessant and incestuous drum beat of “corporate greed” and “evil millionaires” and “greedy capitalists”.

Vote for Team Obama, because they will fight “Corporate Greed”! 😦

<<barf bag on standby>>

September 12, 2011 — University of Wisconsin @ Stout

Oh, Mal. This is classic: tough, macho, but also Mal’s way of saying that he is a man who plays fair. It’s also funny, in context, because the character probably didn’t really mean it. In my perfect world, the UW-Stout campus would have been so overwhelmed with the memory of the super-awesomeness of Firefly that the administration would have canceled classes so every student could study the DVD box set.

But that’s not exactly how it worked.

Like overzealous Alliance officers, UW-Stout administration officials just could not let Mal be free. Instead, they called the cops on Professor Miller to tear down the poster. Miller was contacted by Lisa Walter, the chief of police/director of parking services, and informed that “it is unacceptable to have postings such as this that refer to killing.” She also warned the astounded professor that any future such posts would be removed and would cause him to be charged with disorderly conduct.

You don’t have to be a First Amendment lawyer to know that posting Mal’s quote or even that super-scary death-oriented quote from The Princess Bride is a far cry from any legal definition of disorderly conduct. And Miller, like a true browncoat, did not take this lying down. On September 16th he posted this:

2011-09-25-testfascism.JPG

Censor that, Alliance stooges!

Of course, that’s exactly what UW-Stout did. In a feat of intentional misunderstanding of the kind that is unfortunately all too common on campus, the university reinterpreted Professor Miller’s protest as being essentially pro-fascist and advocating violence. The police tore down this poster, too, with Chief Walter claiming this time that the problem was that the poster “depicts violence and mentions violence or death.” She went on to say that “it is believed that this posting also has a reasonable expectation that it will cause a material and/or substantial disruption of school activities and/or be constituted as a threat.” Seriously.

I am frequently impressed by the level of creativity people show in justifying their desire to quell criticism of themselves. This one deserves some kind of Rationalization of the Year award. Essentially, what Walter is saying is this: “I’ve chosen to understand your poster implying that my actions were reminiscent of evil governments that in the past have killed people to mean that you have announced your plan to kill people, as that interpretation works out well for me.”

These days, people are quick to uncritically evaluate any claim that someone else might be a threat for some reason and give leeway to the authorities accordingly.

No one was threatened by the Firefly poster, and no reasonable person would understand the second poster to be anything other than a rebuke of Walter’s heavy-handed action in the first place. The university overreacted to a poster and then decided to double down rather than admit error when the professor decided to make fun of that overreaction.

Professor Miller has twice been censored in a way that the Constitution would never allow, he has been threatened with punishment, and he’s being investigated by the university’s threat assessment team. My organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), has written to protest, but so far UW-Stout has refused to back down. Miller faces a meeting on Friday with the dean to discuss the threat assessment team’s “concerns.”

As Patrick Henry once more or less said: “Give Mal liberty or give me death!” Which would have, of course, made him guilty of disorderly conduct at UW-Stout.

Sept 27th: This was not an act of censorship.  This was an act of sensitivity to and care for our shared community, and was intended to maintain a campus climate in which everyone can feel welcome, safe and secure.

September 28, 2011: The chancellor of University of Wisconsin-Stout (UWS) has declared that he will not defend faculty First Amendment rights from censorship.

Oct. 4, 2011—Under pressure from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), national media, and actors Nathan Fillion and Adam Baldwin, the University of Wisconsin-Stout (Stout) has reversed its censorship of theater professor James Miller’s poster featuring a line from Fillion’s character in Joss Whedon’s television series Firefly. Campus police had threatened Miller with criminal disorderly conduct charges, and he was reported to the “threat assessment team.” After Stout censored his second poster, which stated, “Warning: Fascism,” Miller came to FIRE for help.

To understand the importance of this as a First Amendment issue, one needs to closely examine what happened.  A university’s Chief of Police/Parking Enforcement Officer, ignorant of the context of the quote, took it upon herself to remove not one but two posters without ever asking their context or purpose.  The professor honestly expected his First Amendment rights would not be infringed, but the school’s Chancellor cowered behind bureaucratic zero tolerance policies and did just that.

Whether or not you agree with how the professor responded, the police chief clearly overreacted to something she misinterpreted.  You can read the full exchange of those emails at FIRE.  Nothing about the poster of a fictional TV Space Captain is intended to “cause others to fear for their safety”; in fact, it is the opposite of a threat.

Dr. Miller sent the administration the relevant clip from Firefly’s pilot episode Serenity.  The context of the quote is an homage to fair play and a code of honor that obviously prefers non-violence.

Adam Baldwin (“Jayne”): This is precisely the issue with freedom of speech; words are subjective and can be interpreted differently by separate individuals.  Sometimes this is done unintentionally, sometimes with malice, which is why the act of deciding what’s NOT free speech is ripe for abuse.  The UWS administration’s stated desire to “promote a campus environment that is free from threats of any kind—both direct and implied” may be well-meaning, but its meaning amounts to nothing.  How does one set a universal standard to determine what is an implied threat or in what context speech may “refer to violence and/or harm”?  As Dr. Miller pointed out in his email response to police chief Lisa Walter, would this also apply to “a poster from Hamlet? Or a news clipping about Hockey players that commit violent murder?”

When asked if he knew of any other examples of such posters or signs on campus, Dr. Miller replied that while he wasn’t aware of any prior attempts at censorship, a “Kill Bill” poster from the popular Quentin Tarantino film was prevalent on campus earlier in the year.  Some quick research finds the poster was actually a parody of the Kill Bill movie, as part of a campus-wide protest held in February against Governor Scott Walker’s budget bill.

Oddly enough, police chief Walter was not at all concerned with the reference to killing or to the weapon of violence depicted in those posters.  In fact, she was quoted in this article at the time as being rather complimentary of the activities.

“The neat part of working in a university is that folks get to have their voices heard, and we try to make sure that it’s done in a manner that’s orderly and doesn’t disrupt the rest of the operations too much,” she said.

Walter also pointed out that the university’s union officers are not included in the exemption Walker provided to other law enforcement officers, firefighters and the State Patrol.

“He did not exempt UW police, Capitol police and, I believe, DNR wardens,” she said. “They will lose their ability to negotiate and have a union negotiate other work-related — other than salary. If the bill goes through, they will be without a contract — and without a union — on March 15.”

Is this because the police chief was not only overseeing security at the protest but also voicing her vested political interest in the highly controversial issue at hand? It seems clear that she was immersed in the context of that poster.

Words are subjective, indeed.

American Universities and colleges today are now, by design, overwhelmingly leftist in their belief systems and political activities.  Students and faculty alike frequently glorify monstrous leftists like Mao Tse-tung and Che Guevara.  To some, they are socialist revolutionary heroes, while to others their image alone is testimony of mass murder and oppression.

When Ward Churchill was fired from his job as Professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2007 for engaging in research misconduct, scholars insisted that Churchill was singled out for his political views, most notably his statements about 9/11 in which he “referred to the ‘technocrats’ working at the World Trade Center as ‘little Eichmanns.‘” There continues to be an outpouring of support for Churchill from the academic community, many of whom have stressed that Academic Freedom must be staunchly defended.

Whither tolerance and intellectual diversity?

The University of Wisconsin-Madison was recently ordered by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to pay nearly $500,000 in legal costs to a student group that claimed its First Amendment rights were violated when the student government rejected a portion of its funds because they were earmarked for religious worship. Badger Catholic, a student Catholic group that conducts various religious and spiritual activities on and off campus, sued the university, which claimed that funding some of the group’s activities would “amount to an illegal endorsement of religion.” The Appeals Court disagreed with the University and the Supreme Court recently declined to hear the case. It’s been hailed as a victory for freedom of speech and religious expression on college campuses.  $500K was lost because, rather than protecting the fundamental rights of its students, the school chose to discriminate against their activities purely because of the group’s religious beliefs.

While the flap over the Firefly poster may seem trivial, it is anything but.  This incident and UWS’s ego-driven, bureaucratic response provides a teachable moment.  It should make us pause and think about how easily our freedoms can erode, in the arbitrary name of protecting others’ feelings.

It’s one thing to ensure that students and faculty are physically safe, but when we surrender to the Wordsmiths what may or may not offend someone or make them uncomfortable, we are helping to pave our own Road to Hell.

“Sure as I know anything, I know this – they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They’ll swing back to the belief that they can make people… better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin’. I aim to misbehave.” – Mal Reynolds, Captain: Space Boat Serenity

The irony of a situation in which the character of Malcolm Reynolds–a man who risked life, limb, and loved ones to fight censorship in the movie Serenity–is at the center of a fight over whether or not something is censorship is not lost on this Firefly fan.

Just remember the Liberal Motto: Don’t do as I do, Do as I say. 🙂

You can’t stop the Signal, but you can try and muddy it up so bad no one can see it easily. That’s the Left in a nutshell.

Browncoats 1 Alliance 0  🙂

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&load=6090&mpid=105

It’s All Politics Folks!

The Obama campaign sent out an email today asking supporters to urge Congress to at least vote on the president’s jobs bill almost immediately after Democratic majority leader Harry Reid blocked a vote on the bill in the Senate.

On the Senate floor today, Republican leader Mitch McConnell asked for unanimous consent to proceed on voting on the bill. Reid, who has struggled to find enough votes for the bill in the Democratic caucus, objected to the motion and killed the opportunity for a vote. 

About ten minutes later, Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, emailed this message to supporters:

President Obama is in Dallas today urging Americans who support the American Jobs Act to demand that Congress pass it already.

Though it’s been nearly a month since he laid out this plan, House Republicans haven’t acted to pass it. And House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is out there actually bragging that they won’t even put the jobs package up for a vote — ever.

It’s not clear which part of the bill they now object to: building roads, hiring teachers, getting veterans back to work. They’re willing to block the American Jobs Act — and they think you won’t do anything about it.

But here’s something you can do: Find Republican members of Congress on Twitter, call them out, and demand they pass this bill.

So will the Obama campaign be asking its supporters to “call out” Harry Reid and “demand” he and Senate Democrats pass the bill?

So they want the bill passed now, they just don’t want the bill passed NOW!. Hilarious!

It just proves that the bill was not designed to be passed by Congress but to blame the Republicans for NOT passing it. A purely partisan political maneuver rather than an actual plan.

Fascinating. And very typical of the Left and Obama. Cheap political points and childish “gotcha” moments over anything that’s actually serious.

The legislative gambit will not bar a Senate vote on the bill later this month, but it blunts a Democratic effort to maneuver the GOP into accepting sole responsibility for blocking the package that includes provisions that are popular with voters.

McConnell noted that Obama has asked Congress for an immediate vote on the measure at least 12 separate times.

“I want to disabuse [Obama] of the notion that we are somehow unwilling to vote” on the bill, McConnell said.

Reid objected to McConnell’s request. He used a procedural tactic to block amendments to the bill. “To tack this on to the China currency manipulation legislation is nothing more than a political stunt,” he said. (Weekly Standard)

So was the “pass the bill” crap. But that was their stunt and wasn’t a stunt because they were doing it. 🙂

But it’s nice to see the Republicans doing something other than rolling over and “compromising”.

Oh, and by the way–Eric Holder was warned about Fast & Furious over a year ago. Just thought you’d like to know that “justice” and truth is alive and well in the Obama Administration. 🙂

New documents obtained by news organizations show Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial Fast and Furious operation as far back as July 2010. That directly contradicts his statement to Congress.

Internal Justice Department documents show that at least ten months before that hearing, Holder began receiving frequent memos discussing Fast and Furious.

In Fast and Furious, ATF agents allegedly allowed thousands of weapons to cross the border and fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

It’s called letting guns “walk,” and it remained secret to the public until Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered last December. Two guns from Fast and Furious were found at the scene, and ATF agent John Dodson blew the whistle on the operation.

Ever since, the Justice Department has publicly tried to distance itself. But the new documents leave no doubt that high level Justice officials knew guns were being “walked.”

Oh, and President Obama knew about Solyndra’s potential financial problems BEFORE he even endorsed them but did it anyways for politics and his agenda.

New e-mails released Monday show the White House was warned about Solyndra’s potential problems even before President Obama visited the company’s Fremont, Calif., headquarters and used it as a backdrop for his push for renewable energy investment and green jobs.

“A number of us are concerned that the president is visiting Solyndra,” Steve Westly, managing partner of Westly Group, wrote in an e-mail to Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett on May 24, 2010, a day before the president’s well publicized trip to Solyndra. “[T]here is an increasing concern about the company because their auditors, Coopers and Lybrand, have issued a ‘going concern’ letter … Many of us believe the company’s cost structure will make it difficult for them to survive long term.”

“I just want to help protect the president from anything that could result in negative or unfair press,” Westly wrote. “If it’s too late to change/postpone the meeting, the president should be careful about unrealistic/optimistic forecasts that could haunt him in the next 18 months if Solyndra hits the wall, files for bankruptcy, etc.”

“DOE … has one loan guarantee to monitor and they seem completely oblivious to this issue,” one OMB analyst said to another in an April 2, 2010, email.

“What’s terrifying is that after looking at some of the ones that came next, this one [Solyndra] started to look better,” another OMB e-mail exchange said of Solyndra. “Bad days are coming.” (National Journal)

President Barack Obama’s “green jobs” initiatives suffered another major blow late Monday, as the nonprofit National Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, Colorado, announced a plan to lay off roughly 10 percent of its staff through a voluntary buy-out plan.

According to the Denver Post, the lab plans to eliminate between 100 and 150 of its 1,350 jobs. The Obama administration supported the NREL in 2009 with roughly $200 million in stimulus grants. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu visited Golden in May 2009 to promote the NREL as a beneficiary of those funds. (DC)

Amy Oliver of Colorado’s conservative Independence Institute said one way to look at these potential “green jobs” shortcomings is that the NREL is exaggerating its claims. Oliver told The Daily Caller that the government-funded lab has seen a surge in government funding in recent years.

“Their funding for 2008 was $328 million,” Oliver said in a phone interview. “In 2010 it was $536.5 million. They’ve had a 64 percent increase in their funding during the Obama administration.”

And it’s doing so well! Lots of money down a rat hole and more people get laid off. The perfect Obama plan. 🙂

Candidate Obama pledged in 2008 that he would add 5 million green jobs to the economy, but Republican lawmakers in Washington, D.C. now say the White House has stretched what it defines as a “green job” in order to pad its numbers.

At one recent House oversight committee hearing, Republicans prodded Obama’s Labor secretary Hilda Solis to explain why a bus driver who happens to drive a vehicle powered by “green” or “renewable” energy is classified by Obama administration officials as holding a “green job.” Solis struggled with the answer, instead arguing with Florida GOP Rep. Connie Mack, who asked her the question.

Oliver told TheDC that ordinary jobs with peripheral connections to  “renewable energy” are frequently misclassified as “green jobs” in Colorado. With Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter in charge, a strong environmental lobby using local, state and federal government to protect its interests, and news media unwilling to push for answers, Oliver said progressive causes have abused taxpayer dollars at institutions like NREL for years.

The Agenda is The Agenda and reality be damned!
And we have a new class of “saved or created”  ‘green’ Jobs to fudge up the number and puff up the Administration.
Gee, that’s never happened before!!! 🙂
And if you think they don’t want to cover up their skeletons:

In an obvious effort to protect President Barack Obama, a group of congressional Democrats has introduced legislation to create an official process that will allow the commander-in-chief to keep presidential records secret after he leaves office.

Ironically, Obama revoked <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ExecutiveOrderPresidentialRecords> a similar George W. Bush order in one of his first official acts as president.

That’s far more important than Obama’s “jobs Bill”. 🙂
Isn’t politics, especially on the left, fun. 🙂

The political left has turned obesity among low-income individuals into an argument that low-income people cannot afford nutritious food, and so have to resort to burgers and fries, pizzas and the like, which are more fattening and less healthful. But this attempt to salvage something from the “hunger in America” hoax collapses like a house of cards when you stop and think about it.

Burgers, pizzas and the like cost more than food that you can buy at a store and cook yourself. If you can afford junk food, you can certainly afford healthier food. An article in the New York Times of September 25th by Mark Bittman showed that you can cook a meal for four at half the cost of a meal from a burger restaurant. So far, so good. But then Mr. Bittman says that the problem is “to get people to see cooking as a joy.” For this, he says, “we need action both cultural and political.” In other words, the nanny state to the rescue!

It’s very true that the boxed meals are more expensive than doing it yourself. Fast Food and convenience foods are more expensive in the long run. But making your own food is more time consuming and requires more labor and some skill. Now, does that sound like something a Liberal wants to do when they can just mandate that the government force everyone else to do it for them? 🙂

An arrogant elite’s condescension toward the people — treating them as children who have to be jollied along — is one of the poisonous problems of our time. It is at the heart of the nanny state and the promotion of a debilitating dependency that wins votes for politicians while weakening a society.

Those who see social problems as requiring high-minded people like themselves to come down from their Olympian heights to impose their superior wisdom on the rest of us, down in the valley, are behind such things as the hunger hoax, which is part of the larger poverty hoax.

We have now reached the point where the great majority of the people living below the official poverty level have such things as air-conditioning, microwave ovens, either videocassette recorders or DVD players, and own either a car or a truck.

Why are such people called “poor”? Because they meet the arbitrary criteria established by Washington bureaucrats. Depending on what criteria are used, you can have as much official poverty as you want, regardless of whether it bears any relationship to reality.

Those who believe in an expansive, nanny state government need a large number of people in “poverty” to justify their programs. They also need a large number of people dependent on government to provide the votes needed to keep the big nanny state going.

Politicians, welfare state bureaucrats and others have incentives to create or perpetuate hoaxes, whether about poverty in general or hunger in particular. The high cost to taxpayers is exceeded by the even higher cost of lost opportunities for fulfillment in their lives by those who succumb to the lure of a stagnant life of dependency. (thomas sowell)

But it’s “fair” that the not-poor pay for the poor. That the rich be taken down to benefit the rest of us, right? 🙂

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)–Karl Marx

And it’s not “fair” that others get more than me. So what if they work harder, longer and are smarter than me. That’s just not “fair”.

It’s all THEIR fault! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

Political Cartoons by Bob GorrellPolitical Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
And he’s black! Now that will REALLY annoy the Left! 🙂


The Role of Government

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Obama Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett: “We have to give people a livelihood so they can provide for their families,” Jarrett says in the video. “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

But that’s not socialism or government trying to run your life for you. Nope. Nothing to see here…

Contrast that with Sen. Marco Rubio during a recent speech at the Reagan Presidential Library:

These are proper roles of government — within the framework of creating an environment where economic security and prosperity is possible.  And on the compassion side of the ledger, which is also important to Americans — and it’s important that we remind ourselves of that — I don’t really like labels in politics, but I will gladly accept the label of conservatism. Conservatism is not about leaving people behind. Conservatism is about empowering people to catch up, to give them the tools at their disposal that make it possible for them to access all the hope, all the promise, all the opportunity that America offers. And our programs to help them should reflect that.

Now, yes, there are people that cannot help themselves. And those folks we will always help. We are too rich and prosperous a nation to leave them to fend for themselves. But all the others that can work should be given the means of empowering themselves to enter the marketplace and the workforce. And our programs and our policies should reflect that. We do need a safety net, but it cannot be a way of life. It must be there to help those who have fallen, to stand up and try again.
Amen.  Even if you’re a bleeding heart type who’s inclined to agree with Jarrett that the feds ought to take a more proactive role in directly aiding the poor through wealth redistribution, I’d point out that Big Government has done a really lousy job at achieving that goal through the years.  The Democrats’ Great Society and its “war on poverty” has been a wildly costly and tragically ineffective proposition.  More recently, President Obama promised that his 2009 “stimulus” program would “lift two million Americans from poverty.”  Hundreds of billions of dollars later, 2.9 million more Americans have fallen into poverty.  Which is to say nothing of the gutwrenching economic desolation that has afflicted so many of human history’s socialistic dystopias. 

Big, overbearing, meddling government isn’t merely philosophically wrongheaded, it just doesn’t work.  That’s why conservatives are exempliying true compassion when they work to limit the size, scope, and influence of a Leviathan that consumes greedily, but has little to show for it. (Guy Benson)

Speaking of overbearing…

The Obama administration is escalating its crackdown on tough immigration laws, with lawyers reviewing four new state statutes to determine whether the federal government will take the extraordinary step of challenging the measures in court.

Justice Department lawyers have sued Arizona and Alabama, where a federal judge on Wednesday allowed key parts of that state’s immigration law to take effect but blocked other provisions. Federal lawyers are talking to Utah officials about a third possible lawsuit and are considering legal challenges in Georgia, Indiana and South Carolina, according to court documents and government officials. (WP)

This would be the same Justice department that refused to prosecute the Black Panther Case, and is trying desperately to cover up the forceable walking of guns into Mexico under “Fast & Furious” amongst many other problems.

But states wanting to crack down on illegal immigration where this government refuses to go, well…That’s just evil. 🙂

He <Obama> told a roundtable of Latino reporters Wednesday that Arizona’s immigration law created “a great danger that naturalized citizens, individuals with Latino surnames, potentially could be vulnerable to questioning. The laws could be potentially abused in ways that were not fair to Latino citizens.”

The same old tired parroted argument that is, of course, utterly false and has been proven to be so. But since when did truth ever stop a liberal from using fear and intimidation? NEVER.

“We can’t have a patchwork of 50 states with 50 different immigration laws.”

We must have only 1 law. Ours. And if we chose to ignore it well too F*cking bad for you you can’t do anything about it! We are all powerful and what we say goes. Period. End of story.

Isn’t Democratic government grand? 🙂

PASS THE BILL

“Are they against putting teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job? Are they against hiring construction workers to rebuild our roads and bridges and schools? Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every worker and small business in America?”–President Obama

He’s going to drive the price of straw through the roof if he keeps this up? The army of straw men he’ll have by election time will rival the Chinese Military.
So if you’re against his bill not only are you racist, but heartless, mean, cruel and just want to kick people in the nuts repeatedly!
Emotions must trump logic because logic tells you he’s full of bovine fecal matter!
“Well, this isn’t about giving me a win, and it’s not about [Republicans],” Obama said.

Pinocchio’s nose just grew so long it hit the other side of the universe!
“This isn’t just about what I think is right.”
Yes it is.
Your Ego would have it no other way.
Liberal Economist God Paul Krugman: The truth is that we’re in this mess because we had too little regulation, not too much.
Dozens of infrastructure projects could qualify for expedited treatment under a White House plan to create jobs by cutting through regulatory red tape that critics say is holding up important initiatives.
But I thought we needed MORE regulations? 🙂

President Barack Obama last month ordered Interior, Agriculture, Housing, Transportation and Commerce Department officials to identify by Friday up to three big projects each that could merit faster environmental approvals and other permits. Funding must already be arranged or identified.

Obama is facing a tough re-election fight next year in the face of a stubborn 9.1 percent unemployment rate. Infrastructure projects, which can help state and local economies, are a key part of his job creation strategy.

Administration officials would not discuss proposals while they were under review, but transportation and construction groups say there are at minimum 50 projects in the permit process that could qualify for faster treatment.

Most are winding their way through a federal, state and local maze that often takes several years and can last between 15 and 20 years for the biggest proposals.

“It’s just the whole process itself. The way we build things in this country ensures that it will take decades,” said Mark Policinski, executive director and chief executive of the Ohio Kentucky Indiana Regional Council of Governments.

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

“We are very interested in any relief the president and his agencies can give us on the red tape that usually ties our projects up for years,” John Horsely, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, told Reuters. “I’ve characterized the process we’ve been going through as one step forward, two steps back.”

But I thought we needed MORE Regulations. 🙂

We Need to Spend More. Regulate More. And it is the role of government to make sure everyone is “lifted up” and provided for.
Thanks comrades, but no thanks.
OBAMACARE
Guy Benson

ABC Newsman Jake Tapper surveys the national landscape and is startled by the observation that several of President Obama’s famous healthcare promises don’t quite seem to be coming to fruition.  (You don’t say).  He confronts White House deputy chief of staff Nancy-Ann DeParle with the evidence, and oh my does she spin.  Even I’m dizzy:

A new study by the Kaiser Family Foundation underlines that many of the promises surrounding President Obama’s health care legislation remain unfulfilled, though the White House argues that change is coming.  Workers at the Flora Venture flower shop in Newmarket, NH, remember when presidential candidate named Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., promised that their health care costs would go down if they elected him and his health care plan was enacted.  On May 3, 2008, the president told voters that he had “a health care plan that would save the average family $2,500 on their premiums.”  Last year workers at the flower shop saw their insurance premiums shoot up 41 percent.

The Kaiser Family Foundation shows family premiums topped $15,000 a year for the first time in 2011, increasing a whopping 9% this year, three times more than the increase the year before. The study says that up to 2% of that increase is because of the health care law’s provisions (me: and that’s just the beginning), such as allowing families to add grown children up to 26 years old to their policies.

What does Nancy-Ann have to say for herself?

DeParle insists families will see that savings — by 2019.  “Many of the changes in the Affordable Care Act are starting this year, and in succeeding years,” DeParle told ABC News, “and by 2019 we estimate that the average family will save around $2,000.”  DeParle said that the “big increases that occurred last year were probably driven by insurance plans overestimating what the impact would be and maybe trying to take some profits upfront before some of the changes in the Affordable Care Act occur.

In other words, everything will be turning up roses eight years from now — you’ve gotta trust us.  Plus, these know-nothing insurance companies are “probably” overestimating the impact of the law.  I mean, what do they know?   I wonder if Kathleen Sebelius is scribbling furiously in her “zero tolerance” notebook.  Tapper continues:

The Kaiser study also indicates employers are switching plans and shifting costs onto employees. Half of workers in smaller firms now face “deductibles of at least $1,000, including 28 percent facing deductibles of $2,000 or more,” according to the study.  Doesn’t that fly in the face of the president’s promise that “if you like your health care plan you can keep your health care plan”? ABC News asked DeParle.

Perfectly legitimate question.  Back to you, White House flack:

She said no — the president wasn’t saying the legislation would guarantee that everyone can keep his or her preferred plan, just that the legislation wouldn’t force anyone to change. “What the president promised is that under health care reform, that he would make it more possible for people to have choices in these (health insurance) exchanges,” DeParle said. “And that’s going to be what will help businesses bring costs down. Right now, they’re just struggling. That’s one reason why they’re shifting costs to employees.”

Unbelievable.  President Obama didn’t really mean you could keep your plan if you like it, we’re now told; he just meant the law would help provide more choices in the government-approved exchanges.  I’m sorry, but I’m quite certain that’s not what he said at all.  Unfortunately for the White House, there’s this thing nowadays called “the internet,” on which people can research topics such as, “what exactly did President Obama say about me being able to keep my plan?”  Well, well, well.  Look at what the search engine turned up:

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.

Contrast that unambiguous, definitive pledge with DeParle’s historical revisionism and hedging.  You know, I’m beginning to suspect Joe Wilson’s sentiment — albeit disrespectful and inappropriate for the venue — was absolutely, positively on the money.

So remember how this blog started: “We are working hard to lift people out of poverty and give them a better life, a footing, and that’s what government is supposed to do.”

Now don’t you feel all warm and fuzzy… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers


Perception

Janeane Garofalo: “Herman Cain is probably well liked by some of the Republicans because it hides the racist elements of the Republican party. Conservative movement and tea party movement, one in the same.

“People like Karl Rove liked to keep the racism very covert. And so Herman Cain provides this great opportunity say you can say ‘Look, this is not a racist, anti-immigrant, anti-female, anti-gay movement. Look we have a black man.'”

So if you don’t like Obama’s policies, you’re a racist. And if you like a black Republican it’s just because you ARE racist and just want to hide it…”I have many black friends…” 🙂

So it’s the “So when did you stop beating your wife” false choice fallacy.

SoWhen did you stop being a racist? 🙂

Herman Cain says President Obama’s supporters play the race card to paper over the commander in chief’s failures. “While I don’t believe that Barack Obama used racial issues to get elected, I do believe that many of his supporters selectively use race to cover up some of his failures,”

“Whenever President Obama is criticized over policy mistakes, his surrogates tend to play the race card, as if there’s supposed to be something inherently morally wrong in such criticism,” he adds.

The former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza said, “I have received some of that same vitriol simply because I am running for the Republican nomination as a conservative.”
But he’s not with his brothers in suffrage to the White Man (and Republicans)! 🙂

“This is a great great country that had gotten a little soft and we didn’t have that same competitive edge that we needed over the last couple of decades,” Mr. Obama said in response to a question about the country’s economic future. “We need to get back on track.”

So Trillions of dollars on “stimulus”, ObamaCare, massive regulations, choking businesses to death, redistribution of wealth, inflation, and persistent unemployment over 8% for 2 1/2 years is the solution.

Oh wait, he’s running for re-election so what’s he want–More Spending, More taxes, and more regulations. Head Meet Wall!

Yep, that’ll work! If you just do it more it will work! 🙂

We couldn’t be “soft” because he wants everyone dependent on the government and when the rubber meets the road the instinct is to cry for more money and complain about “rich” people having too much give me some of yours. Nah… 🙂

Or as is in his own Jobs Bill that Congress must pass:  The job creation bill that President Obama sent to Congress earlier this month includes a provision that would allow unsuccessful job applicants to sue if they think a company of 15 more employees denied them a job because they were unemployed.

That has nothing to do with it… 🙂

Interesting perspective.  I wonder where America could have lost its competitive edge. It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with a government that blows billions on green energy boondoggles while making it harder to drill for oil while trying to make electricity rates “skyrocket.” It couldn’t have to do with extending unemployment benefits to 99 weeks (and rising), or to bailouts or perhaps advice like this offered by Michelle Obama:

     “We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we’re asking young people to do,” she tells the women. “Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.” Faced with that reality, she adds, “many of our bright stars are going into corporate law or hedge-fund management.” (FOX)

Nope. It’s The Republicans Fault. And those nasty violent, racist Tea-Baggers and evil “corporate jet owners”. 🙂
The Narcissistic “Me” Generation and their kids who feel entitled to other people’s money and success would have nothing to do with it at all!
The schools that teach liberalism and socialism as a good thing to kids who don’t know any better has nothing to do with it at all!
A biased liberal media has nothing to do with it at all.
It’s just a bunch of Racist Republicans that doom us all. 🙂
“Telling those who are scared and struggling that the only way their lives can get better is to diminish the success of others . . . trying to cynically convince those who are suffering that the American economic pie is no longer a growing one . . . insisting that we must tax and take and demonize those who have already achieved the American dream . . . is a demoralizing message for America.” (Larry Kudlow)
Let me illustrate by a conversation I had recently.
The other person (paraphrasing): Times are tough. Companies need to have sympathy for our suffering. Raising their prices is just not right.
Me (paraphrasing): But inflation happens, especially when medical costs are going up, food prices are going up ,etc. (Inflation is up 5% since  2009).
Other person: but it’s not right, they should lower their prices because we are suffering (Notice the word choices that keep popping up).
I want to, but I didn’t ask this person, in times when everything is great and booming is it then ok for them to overcharge you because times are good (by analogy because they are supposed to undercharge you when times are bad). But I know the response: No.
Companies are supposed to think about “Me” First. Me…Me…Me…ME!
Do What I want. What benefits me. Screw you.
Who gives a crap if undercharging people costs jobs and could cause the company to go under (it’s called debt). It benefits me. And besides, “you have enough already”. 🙂
This person would not have cared because it’s all about them! When times are bad, pity me, when times are good kiss my ass.
It’s all about the the Narcissism.
And besides, you have more than you need anyhow. Give me some or I’ll get some to take it from you.
No, that’s not “soft” at all… 🙂
Obama said. “I remember when I was in 8th grade I had to take a class called ethics. Now, ethics is about right and wrong, but if you’d ask me what my favorite subject was back in 8th grade, it was basketball. I don’t think ethics would have made it on the list.” (CNS)
DOH!!
Kinda like being in a Black Liberation Theology Church for 20 years and not hearing a damn thing… 🙂
By the way, as a note on the Obama Jobs Bill that will be the Republican’s Fault when it fails:

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said that, at the moment, Democrats don’t have the votes to pass President Obama’s jobs bill, but Durbin added that that would change.

“Not at the moment, I don’t think we do but, uh, we can work on it,” Durbin said according to Chicago radio station WLS…

“The oil-producing state senators don’t like eliminating or reducing the subsidy for oil companies, “Durbin said. “There are some senators who are up for election who say I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people. So, we’re not gonna have 100% Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bi-partisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”  (hot air.com)

And when they don’t it will be their fault.

Ta Da!

America, what a Country!

As a Tea party Independent I have to wonder if these “outraged” Liberals would have felt same way abouthe Bush as Hitler, or a chimp, or the Assassination Movie about killing The President of the United States. Doubt it.
Fascinating…
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Mindless IV: The Circle of Cronyism

And the light WAS train anyhow, but because it was politically incorrect (fossil fuels you know) it was discontinued because it cost too much with all the new taxes and regulations and ObamaCare it was too much for the evil corporate greedy bastards to care about anymore and all the employees went to work for Solyndra…That went bankrupt you say? Taking $535 Million dollars in taxpayer money with it down the rat hole…well, isn’t that just depressing. 🙂
2 Notes: 1 Yes, there was no blog yesterday. Long Story. 2) Today is the first anniversary of my mother’s death, I still miss you dearly.
Now back to the show… Oh, and more head against wall, breaking wall Liberalism.

The Energy Department announced Wednesday that is has finalized more than $1 billion in loan guarantees for two separate solar energy projects. (Meaning, when they go bust we get stuck with the check AGAIN!).

The decision comes several weeks after Solyndra, a California-based solar manufacturer that received a $535 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration in 2009, filed for bankruptcy and laid off 1,100 workers, setting off a firestorm in Washington.

DOE announced a $737 million loan guarantee to help finance construction of the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, a 110-megawatt solar-power-generating facility in Nye County, Nev. The project is sponsored by Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve.

The Energy Department said the project will result in 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs.

OOH!!! 45 jobs!!! WOW!!! Impressive.
Lost 1100 jobs and $535 Million on Solyndra so lets do it again with even more more money and create 45!!
That sounds like Obamanomics to a tee doesn’t it!?
Only 14 Million more to go!
Head, meet Wall. Wall, you’re going down! 🙂
Oh, and just in case you forgot about Obama’s “agenda” cronyism…

A Daily Caller investigation has found that in addition to the failed company Solyndra, at least four other solar panel manufacturing companies receiving in excess of $500 million in loan guarantees from the Obama administration employ executives or board members who have donated large sums of money to Democratic campaigns.

And as questions swirl around possible connections between political donations and these preferential financing arrangements, the Obama White House suddenly began deflecting The Daily Caller’s questions on Wednesday to the Democratic National Committee.

We have nothing to hide. We are the “most transparent administration ever”. Yeah, but what it’s transparent about is not good. 🙂

Companies like First Solar, SolarReserve, SunPower Corporation and Abengoa SA have already, collectively, received billions in loans through Obama administration stimulus programs to build solar power plants in the southwestern United States.

Yet each, with the exception of the privately held SolarReserve, has seen its stock price hammered at the same time it was lobbying the Obama administration and Congress for billions in loan guarantees.

The Hill newspaper reported Wednesday that the Santa Monica, Calif.-based SolarReserve has secured a $737 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy for a Nevada solar project.

That company has ties to George Kaiser, the Oklahoma billionaire who raised $53,500 for President Obama’s campaign in 2008. Through his Argonaut Private Equity firm, Kaiser holds a majority stake in Solyndra.

Argonaut has a voting stake on SolarReserve’s board of directors in the person of Steve Mitchell, who also serves on Solyndra’s board of directors.

Ah, Circle of Cronyism Life…

But don’t worry, Obama doesn’t allow lobbyists in his administration. He said so. You trust him, don’t you? He’s never lied to you.

It was George Bush who cut down the Cherry tree. Or was it The Tsunami, ATMS, Tea-baggers, racists,Bankers, “rich” people,or Republicans. 🙂
FAST AND FURIOUS
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Evasion.

During a White House roundtable with three Spanish-language media outlets on Wednesday, President Barack Obama skated around questions about Operation Fast and Furious.

“We’re working very hard to have a much more effective interdiction effort … we are checking southbound transit … to capture illegal guns, illegal cash transfers to cartels,” he said at the morning event with representatives from Yahoo!, MSN Latino, and AOL Latino/Huffington Post Latino Voices. “It is something we’ve been building … it’s not yet finished, and there’s more work to do,” he said. (DC)

That’s why we forceably sold 1700 of them to know criminals and forced agents to let them cross the border so they could be lost in Mexico and kill people. Yeah!!

So he’s looking in to it. Just have patience. Sounds familiar some how?

Oh, it’s that “laser like focus”. That’s the ticket! 🙂

Obama blamed budget problems, in part, for what some see as ATF’s incompetence. “Part of the problem is budgetary [and] … we are going to have to figure out ways to operate smarter and more efficiently in investigations without a huge expansion of resources  because those resources are aren’t there.”

In other words, lets spend as little as possible looking into this embarrassing screw up. That’s the budgetary problem.

PASS THE BILL

“A chief economist at Moody’s [Mark Zandi] (The people who downgraded us and let the mortgage mess go unchecked) — someone who has advised both Republicans and Democrats — very recently has said that the American Jobs Act will add two percent of growth to the American economy and create almost 2 million badly needed jobs,” Sebelius said at the U.S. Commerce Department’s Annual Minority Enterprise Development Week conference on Wednesday.

Mark Zandi: “The fiscal boost from the jobs package next year would be larger than in the first year of the 2009 economic stimulus,” Zandi said in a statement released by the White House last week.

The only impact the stimulus had was to raise the deficit and more people LOST their jobs. So it’s go big and go home! 🙂

The Stimulus was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%
ObamaCare was supposed to create 4 Million Jobs.
And now the new solar deal will create 45!
So naturally, you have to believe them, right?
Head….Wall! 🙂

Always beware of Democrat who like a “republican/conservative economist”. There’s a RINO in the tent. Or in this case, the Democrats have made it all up.

To his credit, Zandi has never tried to hide his ideological beliefs. “I’m a registered Democrat,” he told The Washington Post in a 2009 profile. He worked with McCain not because he agreed with the GOP’s economic agenda but because of his policy of “help(ing) any policymaker who asks, whether they be a Republican or a Democrat.” According Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain’s chief economic advisor, Zandi was brought on to the campaign to provide instant analysis of economic news, not to set policy.

Democrats first began citing Zandi’s tenuous conservative credentials and support for government spending during the debate over Obama’s original stimulus plan. “I’m just saying what Mark Zandi from Moody’s, an adviser to John McCain, is saying: You have to have a package of this robustness if you’re going to make a difference,” then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi said during a press conference in early 2009.

New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer had referred to him as a “conservative Republican” in an interview with Fox News the month before.

Orwellian dishonesty from Democrats, jeez whodathunkit?! 🙂
Barney Keller, a spokesman for the influential Club for Growth. “He’s about as conservative as Paul Krugman, and wrong just as often.” (DC)
After all, Obama is the President of all “57 States”. 🙂
The White House mixed up Wyoming and Colorado when issuing press credentials for President Barack Obama’s tour of Western states this week. The press credentials show California, Washington, and Wyoming highlighted in white. However, the president spoke Tuesday in the other rectangular-shaped state: Colorado.  (where he was met by protesters from the Left who were mad at him for not be Leftist enough).
All those square states look the same anyway. (NRO)
Trust Us, We are from the Government and we are here to help you! 🙂
OBAMACARE
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

The signature legislation of the Obama Administration, the Affordable Care Act, came under damaging assault Wednesday from a Kaiser Family Foundation survey that found it has already partially contributed to increasing health care costs.

The Kaiser survey helps to shed some light on why so few employers are hiring, as health care costs for employers are spiraling upwards.

The survey found that insurance premiums rose by 9 percent in 2011. Healthcare costs for a single worker went up on average from $5,049 to $5,429, and for a family, costs rose from $13,770 to $15,073, on average.

The survey also found that some provisions of the Affordable Care Act already in place — including the allowance for young people up to 26 years of age to remain on their parents insurance policy — contributed to 20 percent of that increase.

And in case you were wondering, the majority of Americans still hate ObamaCare and favor repeal.

But don’t tell the Mainstream Media or the Democrats, they are too busy with “pass the bill” and pass the buck to care what you think. They just want you to think what they want you to think. That’s all. 🙂
Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

The Real Story

To make this easier I have removed the Trillions (now dollars) and the like to simplify it.

You take in $2.00

You spend $3.60

So now when people are screaming at you to cut spending you say “ok I’ll  promise that my ‘super committee’ will cut .15 cents a year (That’s a $1.50 over TEN years) if you let me spend another $1 NOW on top of what I am ALREADY spending.

I will gladly pay you .15 cents on Thursday if you loan me a dollar now.

Oh, you don’t want to?

Well, rich Uncle Warren can afford it. He has more than he needs so let’s force him to give it to me.

And that will solve everything.

It’s only “fair” He has more than me, or you, after all.

And what are you going to do with that dollar, young man, you might ask? Pay down your debts?

No. I’m going to spend it on my union buddies,entitlements, and government jobs so they can kick it back to me for my campaign just like I have done before.

So how is that going to create more jobs?

It will create government jobs (government jobs are paid for by whom exactly? — taxpayers! and unions make up how much of the actual workforce- 18%!!).

The Top 2% spend 1/3 of all the consumer cash in this country. They also pay the most taxes.

The Top 1% pay nearly 40% of all the income taxes.

47% of all American pay no income taxes AT ALL.

But the rich  are the greedy bastards who have to be taken down by the Bolsheviks.

Hate them!

Mind you they create most of the actual jobs.

But they are evil, hoarding little bastards and we must take their money.

Not cut spending or pay down the debt. We need to give out more freebies to my apparatchiks and monetary drug dealers.

The number of households receiving food stamps swelled by 2 million to 13.6 million, meaning that nearly 1 in 8 receives the government aid.

But food stamps are an economic stimulus according to Obama Administration officials. So it’s all good.

In record-setting numbers, young adults struggling to find work are shunning long-distance moves to live with Mom and Dad, delaying marriage and buying fewer homes, often raising kids out of wedlock. They suffer from the highest unemployment since World War II and risk living in poverty more than others – nearly 1 in 5.

“We have a monster jobs problem, and young people are the biggest losers,” said Andrew Sum, an economist and director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University. He noted that for recent college grads now getting by with waitressing, bartending and odd jobs, they will have to compete with new graduates for entry-level career positions when the job market eventually does improve.

“Their really high levels of underemployment and unemployment will haunt young people for at least another decade,” Andrew Sum, an economist and director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University said.

In all, the employment-to-population ratio for all age groups from 2007-2010 dropped faster than for any similar period since the government began tracking the data in 1948. In the past year, 43 of the 50 largest U.S. metropolitan areas continued to post declines in employment, led by Charlotte, N.C., Jacksonville, Fla., Las Vegas, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Detroit, all cities experiencing a severe housing bust, budget deficits or meltdowns in industries such as banking or manufacturing.

Without work, young adults aren’t starting careers and lives in new cities, instead hanging out with their parents.

“Many young adults are essentially postponing adulthood and all of the family responsibilities and extra costs that go along with it,” said Mark Mather, an associate vice president at the private Population Reference Bureau. He described a shift toward a new U.S. norm – commonly seen in Europe – in which more people wait until their 30s to leave the parental nest. (AP)

And it’s “the rich”‘s fault don’t you know!. And Republicans “protect” the rich so vote for me (the Democrat) because the other guy’s an asshole!

If we just SPEND EVEN MORE and have even more government largess everything will eventually work out.

If you bang your head against the wall hard enough YOU WILL BREAK THE WALL!

The Wimpy President : Wimpy is soft-spoken, very intelligent, and well educated, but also cowardly, very lazy, overly parsimonious and utterly gluttonous. He is also something of a scam artist and, especially in the newspaper strip, can be notoriously underhanded at times.

“I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”

I’ll gladly cut $1.5 Trillion OVER TEN YEARS (most of which I won’t be the President for) if I can spend yet another Trillion Now!

And if you don’t let me “pass the bill now” you’re just an obstructionist protecting greedy rich people, and a violent tea-bagger racist! 🙂

New campaign ad for Obama in Spanish only, “In the face of Republicans, the President can’t do it alone. Read the plan. Stand together for more jobs.”

Welcome to Obamanomics. The Land of Opportunists and Apparatchiks!

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

As the U.S. government grapples to find ways to trim the bloated federal deficit, a new report suggests officials might start with cutting out $16 muffins and $10 cookies.

“We found the Department (of Justice) spent $16 on each of the 250 muffins served at an August 2009 legal conference in Washington,” said a DOJ Office of Inspector General report released on Tuesday.

The DOJ spent $121 million on conferences in fiscal 2008 and 2009, which exceeded its own spending limits and appeared to be extravagant and wasteful, according to the report that examined 10 conferences held during that period.

The review turned up the expensive muffins, which came from the Capital Hilton Hotel just blocks from the White House, as well as cookies and brownies that cost almost $10 each.

The department spent $32 per person on snacks of Cracker Jack, popcorn, and candy bars and coffee that cost $8.24 per cup at another conference, the report said.

The DOJ also spent nearly $600,000 for event planning services for five conferences, the document said.

A Justice Department spokeswoman said most of the gathering were held when there were no strict limits on food and beverage costs, adding the DOJ had taken steps since 2009 “to ensure that these problems do not occur again.”

Word of the agency’s extravagant spending drew a swift response from Capitol Hill.

Senator Chuck Grassley, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee which has oversight of the Justice Department, said the report was a blueprint for the first cuts that should be made by the “super committee” searching for at least $1.2 trillion in savings.

“Sixteen dollar muffins and $600,000 for event planning services are what make Americans cynical about government and why they are demanding change,” Grassley said in a statement. “People are outraged, and rightly so.” (yahoo)

Let them Eat Cake!  or in this case Muffins! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Henry PaynePolitical Cartoons by Eric AlliePolitical Cartoons by Steve BreenPolitical Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson