Post Super Bowl

For the Record, I didn’t watch it. I was playing Lego Dimensions Doctor Who for around 7 hours yesterday and had a great time doing it.

So has the left yelled Racism yet that the Carolina Panthers and their Black Quarterback got beat by an old White Guy?

Well, they are apparently mad at Doritos too!

that @Doritos ad using #antichoice tactic of humanizing fetuses & sexist tropes of dads as clueless & moms as uptight.-NARAL

I always get amused by the “anti-choice” label for not killing a human being. Only the Left could come up with that Orwellian bad boy.

Pro-abortion group offended by unborn baby acting like a human (Cortney Obrien).

Damn straight they are. How dare you show that truth! That’s not the Narrative. That’s no the “Truth”. How dare you defy the Left.

They are Homo Superior Liberalis, they are you Superiors. They are your Lords and Masters! You grubby, insignificant, peasant!

Get a life! 🙂

Josh Perry had it right: It must be hard living life in a state of perpetual outrage.

That’s the Left for ya.

Already mocking the regressives for their furious think pieces over how that funny Doritos ad is a threat to abortion rights. #SB50— Brian S Hall

Right there with you, my man. 🙂

Remember CNN’s Carol Costello? She’s the one who thought it was really, really funny when Bristol Palin was assaulted back in 2014. Well, here’s he reaction to the Doritos Super Bowl ad:

‘I’m never eating Doritos again.’ Screams “outraged” Leftists everywhere.

So how long before they try and boycott or ban it for saying something against the The Holy Writ of Liberalism?

Brought to you by a filmmaker from Perth, Western Australia, Peter Carstairs. 🙂

He’s white, so is this also “White Privilege”?

And 4 People didn’t die over this one. But a Liberal Holy Writ took a hit.

So a good Sunday, over all. 🙂

OK, that ad was adorable! It shows an expectant mother and father getting a sonogram of their new baby, with the mom getting mad at the dad for eating Doritios during the examination. Except the baby can be seen on the screen reacting to the dad and his Doritos. When the mom throws the chip across the room in anger, the baby decides to birth itself to get the tasty snack! Check it out:

Togetherness

“America’s not just looking out for yourself, it’s not just about greed, it’s not just about trying to climb to the very top and keep everybody else down,” (say the guy who has had 100 fundraisers since declaring his re-election bid – Twice as many as the Evil Bush did in 2004) Obama said at the UAW’s annual National Community Action Program Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C.

Instead, Obama – who climbed to the very top of American politics just three years ago – said that instead America was about being “all in it together,” and giving people “a hand up.”

“When our assembly lines grind to a halt, we work together, and we get them going again,” he said. “When somebody else falters, we try to give them a hand up, because we know [that] we’re all in it together.”

So when the UAW goes on strike because they just wanna screw GM (and the others) for more money it’s not about “greed” it’s about “being together”.

So in 1976, when the UAW in Michigan (where I grew up) went on strike because they were only making $28/hr back then and stay out  until they got paid even more, it wasn’t about “greed” and power. It was about “togetherness”. 🙂

Obama also attacked critics of his bailout policies who say that saving failed companies does not reflect traditional American values.

Bailing out The UAW (in the guise of GM who now has a Obama kiss ass for a boss – “Jobs Czar” Jeffrey Imhelt – who is not an evil rich Corporate CEO even though GM paid no taxes in the US last year) was essential to his “togetherness”.

Bailing out the Big Banks with their evil rich CEOs that the left hates was “togetherness”.

Solyndra , Abound Solar, Light Squared and other “green” companies being given almost a Trillion in government grants only to go belly up a year later is “togetherness” not agenda politics.

The Over 8% unemployment for MORE THAN 3 years is an “improving economy” that we all shared in.

And 3 different Obama Administration have said unemployment is a “stimulus” for the economy so all those people out of work are all in it “together”.

“I keep on hearing these same folks talk about values all the time. You want to talk about values? Hard work, that’s a value. (just don’t work TOO HARD or you’ll be “greedy” and “rich” and thus an evil SOB- unless you’re donating $38,500 a person to Obama’s Re-election campaign that is) Looking out for one another, that’s a value. The idea that we’re all in it together and [that] I’m my brother’s keeper and [my] sister’s keeper, that’s a value,” Obama declared.

Yes, Comrade, it is a value. 🙂

Wall Streeters are evil according to the left’s favorite sons- The Occupoopers. But when the Dow (aka Wall Street) hits 13,000 and the “rich” on Wall Street get richer that’s a good thing for everyone and not a massive hypocrisy and double standard for your Class Warfare rhetoric.

Forget the modest 3.1 percent rise in the Consumer Price Index, the government’s widely used measure of inflation. Everyday prices are up some 8 percent over the past year, according to the American Institute for Economic Research.

Forget the $4 and $5 gas prices that made the Democrats scream Armageddon is coming when Bush was President. Now, we share in the knowledge that it’s not the President’s fault when he’s a Democrat. 🙂

And saying no to virtually everything else other than Solyndra and it’s kin, including the Keystone XL pipeline and the degree of oil independence and jobs it would have brought is a shared sacrifice to environmentalist fringe “good”.

Motor fuel and transportation costs are up 21.06 percent from year-ago levels. The cost of food, prescription drugs, and tobacco also have increased faster than the government’s inflation measure, rising 3.56 percent, 4.21 percent, and 3.4 percent, respectively.

On the bright side, prices of household fuel (natural gas and electricity) and supplies have increased only 2.74 percent; recreation and personal care products are up less than 1 percent; and telephone or Internet services are down 0.66 percent.

Just one month from today, Japan will lower their corporate income tax rate from 39.5 to 35 percent . When they do so, the United States will officially have the dubious distinction of possessing the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world, a federal/state integrated rate of 39.2 percent.

To put that in perspective, the average in the developed world is only 25 percent. Our six major trading partners–Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, and France–will all have a lower rate than we will have. As a result, capital and jobs will continue to flow overseas, rather than staying here to create jobs, increase wages, fund pensions, invest in new business, or grow nest eggs.

President Obama last month proposed a plan to raise net taxes, but in the process lower the U.S. corporate rate to about 32 percent. That simply isn’t worth it. In exchange for a jobs-killing net tax hike, the Obama plan would still leave us with a tax rate higher than the OECD average, and higher than all our major trading partners except Japan and France.(KFYI)

So the Federal government isn’t “greedy” (wanting higher taxes than anyone) they just want everyone to suffer TOGETHER. 🙂

And ObamaCare:

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with  the new HHS mandate that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

So to keep costs down, stop having babies!!

During the subcommittee hearing, Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.) said that contraception provided by insurance companies to people employed by religious organizations under the future form of the rule Sebelius described would not be was not free.

“Who pays for it? There’s no such thing as a free service,” Murphy asked.

Sebelius responded that that is not the case with insurance.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for cost of contraception,” Sebelius answered.

Murphy expressed surprise by the answer.

“So you are saying, by not having babies born, we are going to save money on health care?” Murphy asked.

Sebelius replied, “Providing contraception is a critical preventive health benefit for women and for their children.”

Murphy again sought clarification.

“Not having babies born is a critical benefit. This is absolutely amazing to me. I yield back,” he said.

Sebelius responded, “Family planning is a critical health benefit in this country, according to the Institute of Medicine.”

Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), a member of the subcommittee, said after the hearing that if mandating contraception saves money there shouldn’t be a need for a mandate.

“Their argument is this: Health insurance companies will offer it for free because they make money. You reduce the number of people getting pregnant therefore you reduce the cost of pregnancy, or low birth weight pregnancies or other kind of pregnancies,” Guthrie told CNSNews.com.

“If you think about it, why don’t health insurance companies provide it now if the argument is health insurance companies are going to make a lot of money? If the health insurance companies were really acting in their own best interest, they would be giving these pills out for free, if it really saved money,” Guthrie added.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said on Nov. 14, 2011 that $1 billion in health care grants were a way of ‘sparking’ the U.S. economy.

So to keep costs down, stop having kids! (thus having less people to take over from you and to pork you when you get old and demand your “free” ObamaCare).

Anyone see the problem??

Returning to bully business as usual, the Obama campaign launched a brazen salvo against two prominent conservative critics and their legions of private citizen donors.

Let’s be clear (to use Obama’s favorite phrase): This is not just the politics of personal destruction. It’s a vendetta of campaign finance destruction. Under the guise of “disclosure,” Team Obama is exploiting the power of high government office to intimidate lawful, peaceful contributors who support limited-government causes.

In a scathing fundraising e-mail appeal, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina name-checked wealthy free-market philanthropists Charles and David Koch — along with a growing movement of grassroots conservatives who have freely, voluntarily and legally given money to the Koch-founded nonprofit activist group Americans for Prosperity and its sister foundation. As a speaker at several AFP events over the past three years, I’ve met thousands of like-minded, hardworking Americans who support their work at the local, state and federal levels.

“When you attempt to drown out (Americans’) voices through unlimited, secret contributions to pursue a special-interest agenda that conflicts with what’s best for our nation, you must expect some scrutiny of your actions,” Messina railed. (Unlike the Ministry of Truth and his 100+ fundraisers) The threat of scrutiny was backed by Obama himself, whose official campaign Twitter account directed 12 million-plus followers this week to “add your name to demand that the Koch brothers make their donors public.”

But Obama’s own former top officials run a so-called super PAC (Priorities USA) that also maintains nonprofit status and subsidizes advocacy ads while protecting its donor base. The White House, of course, is mum on the unlimited, secret contributions that Obama is now encouraging wealthy liberals and lobbyists to make in pursuit of his own special-interest agenda — i.e., re-election.

The president’s flapping lips are also sealed when it comes to applying his disclosure standards to the shadowy, George Soros-backed Center for American Progress, which has supplied the Obama administration with countless top policy staffers, including special Department of Health and Human Services assistant Michael Halle and HHS Director Jeanne Lambrew, a former senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. CAP founder John Podesta was Obama’s transition chief, overseeing the backroom process of rewarding friends and allies with plum positions. CAP flacks shrugged off conflict-of-interest questions: “We respect the privacy of supporters who have chosen not to make their donations public,” CAP spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said.

As for respecting the privacy rights of Obama’s foes? Not so much.

It seems to me no small coincidence that this disclosure charade comes just as numerous tea party organizations are reporting that the Internal Revenue Service has targeted them for audits. According to Colleen Owens of the Richmond (Va.) Tea Party, several fiscal-conservative activist groups in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio and Texas have received a spate of IRS letters. The missives demand extensive requests to identity volunteers, board members and … donors.

This is B.O.’s M.O. His bully brigade did the same to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its donors during the November 2010 midterms as payback for the organization’s ads opposing the federal health care takeover. And in 2008, Obama’s allies at a Soros-tied outfit sent out “warning” letters to 10,000 top GOP givers “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.” Witch hunt leader Tom Matzzie, formerly of Soros-funded MoveOn.org, bragged of “going for the jugular” and said the warning letter was just the first step, “alerting donors who might be considering giving to right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.”

Matzzie also advertised a $100,000 bounty for dirt on conservative political groups “to create a sense of scandal around the groups” and dissuade donors from giving money. The effort was cheered by Accountable America adviser Judd Legum, founder of Think Progress — the same group that led the attack on the Chamber of Commerce and is run by Podesta’s Center for American Progress. Just as with the Obama super PAC led by former White House officials, Matzzie’s group “Accountable America” was a 501(c)(4) nonprofit entity that shielded the identity of its donors.

Oh, and remember this? In 2008, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, both Obama promoters, threatened to bring criminal libel charges against anyone who spread what they considered “false criticisms” of their Dear Leader.

It is no small exaggeration to conclude that Team Obama’s dead aim is to chill conservative speech and criminalize conservative dissent. All Americans for prosperity must push back with one voice: No, you can’t. (Michelle Malkin)

I guess Hilary was right, It does “take a Village” 🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Hmmm…

In light of new information emerging about the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) Operation Fast and Furious (read here about ATF targeting FBI informants), we thought revisiting this video ain’t a bad idea.

Back in April of 2009, President Obama alluded in a question and answer session to the notion of “gun tracing” in Mexico . . . leading many to conclude that he may have known more than he’s ever admitted about Operation Fast & Furious and long before he says he knew anything.  You be the judge . . .

Hmmmm….

The Wisdom of Samuel L Jackson (He ain’t no Jedi…)

Barack Obama‘s politics meant nothing to Samuel L. Jackson because the “Pulp Fiction” star only voted for the president for one reason and one reason only … because he’s black. 

In an interview with Ebony magazine, Jackson explained, “I voted for Barack because he was black. ‘Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them … That’s American politics, pure and simple. [Obama’s] message didn’t mean [bleep] to me.”

Jackson then went on to drop the N-word several times when discussing Obama, telling the mag, “When it comes down to it, they wouldn’t have elected a [bleep]. Because, what’s a [bleep]? A [bleep] is scary. Obama ain’t scary at all. [Bleeps] don’t have beers at the White House. [Bleeps] don’t let some white dude, while you in the middle of a speech, call [him] a liar. A [bleep] would have stopped the meeting right there and said, ‘Who the [bleep] said that?’ I hope Obama gets scary in the next four years, ‘cuz he ain’t gotta worry about getting re-elected.” (TMZ)

But if you disagree with a Liberal you’re a racist. 🙂

Hmmm….

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Late last week, the White House tried claimed to “compromise” on the new ObamaCare requirement that all employers provide insurance with free birth control coverage, including religious employers. The compromise actually wasn’t a compromise at all, yet the White House is shutting down debate on the issue and saying it’s a done deal.

President Barack Obama and his deputies are using the demeaning language of disease and green-eyeshade accounting to establish free birth control as a government-backed right, and also to downgrade the value of human lives, say social conservatives.

“They’re claiming that children are like a disease and increase health costs,” said former Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright.

Unborn children, however, “are humans beings and that’s what Obama and the abortion crowd refuse to recognize,” she told The Daily Caller.

The Catholic Church’s opposition to the new Obama administration regulations is heavily influenced by its ideological and religious support for human life, and its twinned opposition to birth control, including contraception, and abortion.

That ideological point was prominently displayed in the Feb. 10 response to Obama’s announcement from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

“First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen — to cover sterilization and contraception … [but] pregnancy is not a disease,” said the response.

Obama’s unsympathetic language was showcased in his Feb. 10 announcement that he would require health insurance companies to offer free birth-control services to the employees of religious groups, despite the congregations’ constitutional protection from state regulation.

“It’s a lot cheaper to prevent an illness than to treat one … [and] preventive care should include coverage of contraceptive services such as birth control,” the president said in brief remarks in the White House press room.

Even when Obama championed the claim that women have a moral right to use birth control, he talked about biological health, not of moral freedom. “Every woman should be in control of the decisions that affect her own health,” he said.

Except that he passed a law MANDATING their “pro-choice”  “pro-Control”–it was called ObamaCare.

MANDATING Freedom of Choice…Hmmm….

White House officials also justified the far-reaching policy by saying it would cost nothing, and therefore would impose no real burden on religious organizations.

Cost Nothing? Boy he really has no idea how capitalism works does he…Hmmm…

“Covering contraception saves money for insurance companies by keeping women healthy and preventing spending on other health services,” said a White House statement released Feb. 10.

But if you’re oppose to birth control to begin with, Like the Catholic Church…well, screw you… Hmmm…

Making Insurance Companies pay for something without any recourse is “free”.
Hmmm…

The Catholic Church’s advocates have reserved their strongest condemnation, however, for the White House’s description of pregnancy as a disease.

The administration believes “pregnancy is some sort of health care anomaly… [and] to be pregnant is some sort of illness,” said Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the Catholic archbishop of Washington, D.C. They believe, he said, that they “must prevent that illness. … A pregnancy becomes the problem.”

“Kids aren’t commodities — they’re humans beings and that’s what Obama and the abortion crowd refuse to recognize,” added Wright, who is now advocating for socially conservative policies at the United Nations.

But they are political footballs…Hmm…

Now, after the many genuine concerns that have been raised over the last few weeks, as well as, frankly, the more cynical desire on the part of some to make this into a political football, it became clear that spending months hammering out a solution was not going to be an option, that we needed to move this faster.  So last week, I directed the Department of Health and Human Services to speed up the process that had already been envisioned.  We weren’t going to spend a year doing this; we’re going to spend a week or two doing this.

Not to be too cynical about this, but Obama last spoke with those Catholic officials months ago regarding his mandate.  And no one at the White House bothered to contact them when it came time to offer this “accommodation,” as the bishops made clear on Friday after the Obama administration announced it.  That sounds a lot like a cynical desire to punt a political football rather than figuring out exactly why the church objected to it in the first place.  And that failure looks like the product of a cynical desire to impose the same mandate while making it look like a compromise.

Following the announced “accommodations” from the White House for religious organizations whose beliefs preclude them from offering birth control, Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, had some tough words for President Obama.

According to Land, the adjustment in the mandate requiring all employers — including religious organizations — to provide birth control is “a distinction without a difference.”

“My initial reaction is: How dumb does he think we are?” Land wondered in an interview with The Daily Caller. “Does he think when he puts lip stick on a pig, that we don’t understand that it is still a pig?”

Yes, he does. Because that’s they way the Liberal mind works. Someone objects to your idea so you just change the wording or the word and suddenly a totally new idea and if object to that it’s just because you’re “obstructionist”.

Perfect Example: Global Cooling/Warming/Climate Change etc.

Next up: Deficit Reduction (aka spending more than we have but spending less of the more than before) is good. And if you’re against it you’re just an “obstructionist”

The government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject poverty, but the poorest households no longer receive a majority of government benefits. A secondary mission has gradually become primary: maintaining the middle class from childhood through retirement. The share of benefits flowing to the least affluent households, the bottom fifth, has declined from 54 percent in 1979 to 36 percent in 2007, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published last year.

The problem by now is familiar to most. Politicians have expanded the safety net without a commensurate increase in revenues, a primary reason for the government’s annual deficits and mushrooming debt. In 2000, federal and state governments spent about 37 cents on the safety net from every dollar they collected in revenue, according to a New York Times analysis. A decade later, after one Medicare expansion, two recessions and three rounds of tax cuts, spending on the safety net consumed nearly 66 cents of every dollar of revenue.

The recent recession increased dependence on government, and stronger economic growth would reduce demand for programs like unemployment benefits. But the long-term trend is clear. Over the next 25 years, as the population ages and medical costs climb, the budget office projects that benefits programs will grow faster than any other part of government, driving the federal debt to dangerous heights.

Americans are divided about the way forward. Seventy percent of respondents to a recent New York Times poll said the government should raise taxes. Fifty-six percent supported cuts in Medicare and Social Security. Forty-four percent favored both.

But now Obama wants to cut the Deficit (not the debt) so that he’ll promise to have less and less deficits (money we don’t have) every year for the next 4 years.

He’ll have it down to 1/2 trillion in deficits by the time he leaves.

Making it 7 years in a row!

And this is an improvement, and if you don’t want to go for it you’re an “obstructionist” who just wants to protect the “rich” (the same people giving him $38,500 a person).

Hmmm…

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley