Conventional Silliness

We Told You!

The liberal “Democratic” process was rigged like a Third Word Banana Republic Dictatorship!

You Sanders Voters were discounted, disrespected and disregarded.

Bwah hahahahahaahahahhahahahahahahaha

Chanting “Hell No, DNC, we won’t vote for Hillary” and “This is what democracy looks like,” the marchers headed from City Hall down Broad Street, the main north-south artery that leads from the city center to the convention site about 4 miles away. (NBC10)

And the Liberals were playing upt he faked, paid for “violence” and “protests” at then RNC Convention last week when they have REAL protestors on their own door step.

Their corrupt Chairwoman resigns and immediately goes to the head of the Hillary Corruption Team. 🙂

And whose protecting them from the angry masses, but the Cops  AND GUNS the Democrats set the angry masses on!!

The Irony is delicious. (and lost on Liberals BTW).

Bernie Sanders supporters with tape over their mouths reading ‘Silenced By DNC’ stand in the arena.

It’s just way to funny. Like most Liberal failures you just can’t make this stuff up.

20,000 freshly leaked emails reveal resentful disdain toward Sanders, as party favored Clinton long before any votes were cast

FEEL THE BURN!

In its recent leak of 20,000 DNC emails from January 2015 to May 2016, DNC staff discuss how to deal with Bernie Sanders’ popularity as a challenge to Clinton’s candidacy. Instead of treating Sanders as a viable candidate for the Democratic ticket, the DNC worked against him and his campaign to ensure Clinton received the nomination.

One email from DNC Deputy Communications Director Eric Walker to several DNC staffers cites two news articles showing Sanders leading in Rhode Island and the limited number of polling locations in the state: “If she outperforms this polling, the Bernie camp will go nuts and allege misconduct. They’ll probably complain regardless, actually.”

Instead of treating Sanders with impartiality, the DNC exhibits resentful disdain toward him and the thousands of disenfranchised voters he could have brought into the party.

“Wondering if there’s a good Bernie narrative for a story, which is that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his campaign was a mess,” wrote DNC Deputy Communications Director Mark Paustenbach to DNC Communications Director Luis Miranda, in response to backlash over DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz shutting off the Sanders campaign’s access to voter database files.

Another chain reveals MSNBC’s Chuck Todd and DNC staff members discussing how to discredit MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski’s call for Wasserman Schultz to resign.

Most of the emails released come from seven prominent DNC staff members: senior adviser Andrew Wright, national finance director Jordon Kaplan, finance chief of staff Scott Comer, Northern California finance director Robert Stowe, finance director of data and strategic initiatives Daniel Parrish, finance director Allen Zachary and Miranda.

The release provides further evidence the DNC broke its own charter violations by favoring Clinton as the Democratic presidential nominee, long before any votes were cast.

Over the past several weeks, Guccifer 2.0 released several internal memos showing DNC staff strategizing to make Clinton the presidential nominee—as early as March 2015. In June 2016, Florida-based law firm, Beck & Lee, filed a class action lawsuit against Wasserman Schultz and the DNC based on the revelations from these leaked files.

Other emails show DNC staff in damage control over allegations from the Sanders campaign, when a report—corroborated by a Politico—revealed the DNC’s joint fundraising committee with the Clinton campaign was laundering money to the Clinton campaign instead of fundraising for down-ticket Democrats. Regardless of the fundraising tactics, because both major campaigns didn’t agree to use the joint fundraising committee super-PAC with the DNC, the DNC should have recused itself from participating with just the Clinton campaign.

The Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 leaks are the perfect end to a Democratic primary that undermined democracy at every possible opportunity while maintaining plausible deniability.

The party’s rules, including the use of super delegates—who disproportionately endorsed Clinton before the primaries began—are intended to provide the Democratic Party leverage over the election process. Throughout the primaries, decisions were made by DNC officials to help Clinton build and maintain a lead over Sanders.

More votes were cast for Clinton, but they were cast at the behest of a Democratic Party that downplayed her shortfalls to the extent that Sanders not only had to run against Clinton but also against the entire Democratic Establishment. Heading into the Democratic National Convention, voters are beginning to understand that their voices are of little concern to the leadership. (Observer)

Naturally, The DNC doesn’t take responsibility for it, even though Debbie Does Hillary resigned as a sacrificial fake out.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign has accused Russia of meddling in the 2016 presidential election, saying its hackers stole Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails and released them to foment disunity in the party and aid Donald Trump. (From Hillary’s Private Server maybe? 🙂 )

Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, said on Sunday that “experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails, [and are] releasing these emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump”.

“I don’t think it’s coincidental that these emails are being released on the eve of our convention here,” he told CNN’s State of the Union, alluding to the party’s four-day exercise in unification which is set to take place this week in Philadelphia.

“This isn’t my assertion,” Mook said. “This is what experts are telling us.”

In a statement, the Clinton campaign repeated the accusation: “This is further evidence the Russian government is trying to influence the outcome of the election.” (UK Guardian)

So fellow Communist Elitists want Trump to win?

I’m confused. 🙂

Spin Cycle

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Set Partisanship on SPIN!

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

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

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

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

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

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

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

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

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

VALERIE PLAIME! VALERIE PLAIME! VALERIE PLAIME!  🙂

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crafting D.C. Style

Oh they hear you, they just don’t care what you think. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Before the Obama administration gave an inaccurate narrative on national television that the Benghazi attacks grew from an anti-American protest, the CIA’s station chief in Libya pointedly told his superiors in Washington that no such demonstration occurred, documents and interviews with current and former intelligence officials show.

The attack was “not an escalation of protests,” the station chief wrote to then-Deputy CIA Director Michael J. Morell in an email dated Sept. 15, 2012 — a full day before the White House sent Susan E. Rice to several Sunday talk shows to disseminate talking points claiming that the Benghazi attack began as a protest over an anti-Islam video.

That the talking points used by Mrs. Rice, who was then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, were written by a CIA that ignored the assessment by its own station chief inside Libya, has emerged as one of the major bones of contention in the more than two years of political fireworks and congressional investigations into the Benghazi attack.

What has never been made public is whether Mr. Morell and others at the CIA explicitly shared the station chief’s assessment with the White House or State Department.

Two former intelligence officials have told The Washington Times that this question likely will be answered at a Wednesday hearing of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence during which Mr. Morell is scheduled to give his public testimony.

Mr. Morell, who has since left the CIA, declined to comment on the matter Monday. He now works at Beacon Global Strategies, a Washington insider strategic communications firm.

One former intelligence official close to Mr. Morell told The Times on the condition of anonymity that “the whole question of communication with the station chief will be addressed in his testimony.”

“We’re confident that it will clarify the situation in the minds of many who are asking,” the former official said.

Another former intelligence official told The Times that Mr. Morell did tell the White House and the State Department that the CIA station chief in Libya had concluded that there was no protest but senior Obama administration and CIA officials in Washington ignored the assessment.

Why they ignored it remains a topic of heated debate within the wider intelligence community.

A third source told The Times on Monday that Mr. Morell and other CIA officials in Washington were weighing several pieces of “conflicting information” streaming in about the Benghazi attack as the talking points were being crafted.

“That’s why they ultimately came up with the analysis that they did,” the source said. “The piece that was coming out of Tripoli was important, but it was one piece amid several streams of information.”

One of the former intelligence officials said the Libya station chief’s assessment was being weighed against media reports from the ground in Benghazi that quoted witnesses as saying there had been a protest. Analysts at the CIA, the source said, also were weighing it against reporting by other intelligence divisions, including the National Security Agency.

“The chief of station in Tripoli who was 600 or 700 miles away from the attacks wouldn’t necessarily have the only view of what actually went on in Benghazi,” that former official said.

U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attack.

While the testimony is expected to focus on Benghazi, the hearing arrives at a time of growing tensions between Congress and the CIA over such matters as the Bush administration’s interrogation rules and mutual charges of spying and illegality between the Senate intelligence committee and the agency.

Lawmakers are likely to press Mr. Morell for a reaction to reports this week that a classified Senate intelligence report has concluded that harsh interrogation methods used in the years after Sept. 11 provided no key evidence in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and that the CIA misled Congress on the matter.

The CIA disputes that conclusion. The Senate panel is expected to vote Thursday on sending the Obama administration a 400-page executive summary of the “enhanced interrogation” report to start a monthslong declassification process.

One of the key issues likely to come up during the House hearing involves what was said during a series of secure teleconferences between CIA officials in Washington and Libya from the time of the attack on Sept. 11, 2012, to the completion of Mrs. Rice’s talking points for dissemination on the Sunday talk shows Sept. 16.

Multiple sources confirmed to The Times on Monday that the station chief’s email to Mr. Morell was written after one of the teleconferences during which senior CIA officials in Washington — Mr. Morell among them — made clear to the Tripoli station chief that they were examining alternative information that suggested there was a protest before the attack.

After the exchange, Mr. Morell signed off on the CIA talking points given to Mrs. Rice promoting what turned out to be the false narrative of a protest. The development ultimately triggered an angry reaction from Republicans, who have long claimed that the Obama administration, with an eye on the November elections, was downplaying the role of terrorists in order to protect the president’s record on counterterrorism.

Documents since released by the White House show that administration officials boasted in internal emails at the time about Mr. Morell’s personal role in editing and rewriting the talking points.

“Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy editing hand to them,” an Obama administration official wrote Mrs. Rice on the morning of Sept. 15.

What is not clear is whether the email was in any way referring to the conflicting intelligence streams about a protest in Benghazi.

Alternatively, the email notes that Mr. Morell was uncomfortable with an initial draft of the talking points batted back and forth between White House and CIA officials “because they seemed to encourage the reader to infer incorrectly that the CIA had warned about a specific attack” in Benghazi.

During interviews with The Times, several former senior intelligence officials have lamented the whole “talking points” issue, saying the CIA was caught in the middle of the White House, Congress and the reality on the ground in Benghazi while crafting the points.

The reason the CIA ended up taking the lead on the talking points was because, as news of the attack was breaking around the world, lawmakers on the House intelligence committee were seeking guidance from the agency on how to respond to media questions without revealing classified information.

Specifically, Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican and the committee chairman, and ranking Democrat C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland asked for the guidance.

One former senior intelligence official told The Times that as word circulated through the inner circles of the intelligence community that the CIA was working on the talking points, officials within the Obama administration steered the mission toward crafting something Mrs. Rice could say on national talk shows.

“In essence, the talking points got repurposed,” the former official said. “What it turned into — and I don’t think Michael ever knew this, it’s something to watch for in his testimony this week — was, ‘Let’s hand this thing to the U.N. ambassador and make it what she should say.’”

“That’s a big deal,” the former official said. “It’s one thing to prepare something for lawmakers so they don’t make a mistake or say something inaccurate. It’s quite another matter to have that feed the administration’s then-current, definitive account of what had actually happened in Benghazi.”

“There are a lot of twists and turns in this,” added another former intelligence official. “A lot of it hangs on the fact that the agency thought they were crafting these talking points for Dutch Ruppersberger and Mike Rogers, not the White House.” (WT)

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Class Warfare Breaks Out

For the last couple of days there has been near riotous mob of angry people protesting the  government.
They have signs saying the guy in charge is a dictator.
The compare him to Hitler.
The call him Satan.
He’s evil incarnate.
They say things no one should reprint.
“Kill The Bill” was a chanting war cry!!!

But it’s not a Tea Party Rally.
It’s a Union Protest!
Yes, the “civility” and “bi-Partisan” Left is mad as hornets at the Governor Of Wisconsin.
And the Liberal media loves them for it.

And his crime?
Asking fat cat, narcissistic Liberal Unions members to contribute more to their own pensions

and health benefits (even less than private sector workers).
Well, you’d think he just outlawed Cheese or the Packers or said something derogatory about Muslims!
Because the Unions surely have declared Jihad.

Teachers have staged sick outs.
The 14 Democrats from the State Senate have snuck off to a resort in Illinois (at taxpayer expense no doubt) to prevent the vote on the bill from happening.

And the protesters are yelling and have signage portraying things even I won’t print.
But that’s ok, because it’s liberal outrage. That’s politically acceptable to the Left and The Media.

It’s righteous, in fact.

And I’m sure they would all agree that it’s not “uncivil” the crude things they are saying about their Governor. After all, they are the ones saying them, so they can’t possibly be wrong.

So just remember, when a leftist complains about your “hate speech” just try poking their sacred cows and you’ll get so much toxic vitriol that it will make your great-great-grandmother blush with embarrassment and make sailors look like saints.

And the hypocrisy of it all is completely lost on them, by them way.
Because, after all, it’s “Do what I say! Not what I do”.
They can do it. You can’t.
Simple.

And the president is behind them. “Some of what I’ve heard coming out of Wisconsin, where you’re just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally, seems like more of an assault on unions,” President Obama told TMJ4 in Milwaukee.

He’s supporting these “terrorists” (as the Tea party was called) and there are reports that his campaign committee has sent “operatives” into the situation to help fight the evil anti-union thugs. 🙂 The Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America arm — the remnant of the 2008 Obama campaign — is playing an active role in organizing protests against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.
But that’s not “astroturf” though.

The State of Wisconsin was overwhelming turned into a Republican legislature in 2010 by the voters who had had enough of overspending and debt.
The State is 3.6 Billion in the red thanks to the Liberals.
Now the Republicans want to do something about it that doesn’t involves “taxing the rich” and overregulating and strangling businessmen. Class Warfare, where’s the Class Warfare!!?? The Left would ask.
And that’s what makes the Left mad.
They are the spoilt children of a greedy generation and they don’t want to have to be more grown -up about it.
They just want to sit in the State house in Madison and wave their hateful and very uncivil signs and yell and scream about Hitler and The Governor are equivalent.
You will not take away any of their toys.
It’s there’s and you can’t make them pay for it! They are ENTITLED.
“We are all willing to come to the table. We’ve all been willing from day one,” said Madison teacher Rita Miller. “But you can’t take A, B, C, D and everything we’ve worked for in one fell swoop.”

Seems to me, when this agrument was made about ObamaCare to the Liberals they laughed it off and said you can’t possible do it “piece meal”.

What is good for the Liberal Goose is not good for the Anti-Liberal Gander apparently. These are rules set up by Liberals to benefit Liberals and you aren’t suppose to challenge your superiors on it.

They will just sit down, hold their breath, and turn blue.
Then the media will come along and do their children-are-being-hurt,you’ll have no police,  no firefighters (even though they were exempt in the bill) the media and the Left don’t care.

It’s point scoring time!
Armageddon has come to earth and landed in Madison, Wisconsin.
The End of the World has arrived.
It’s the End of Days!
Yeah, it’s the end of Let’s spend our way out of debt and tax the rich to make up for it.
Oh, and state employees will have to actually contribute real money to their lavish pensions and massively generous health care.
EVIL!
Pure EVIL! 🙂

But if you get 250,000 people protesting the Left, say on ObamaCare, well, they are just  “astroturf”, “stupid”, “dupes”, morons and will have scron and ridicule heeped on them by the ton. The amount of ridicule and contempt a Liberal has for people who disagree with them is incalculable.
But in Madison, they are courageous freedom fighters fighters for your children and they are all saintly in every way–while they are yelling that their Governor is Hitler!! 🙂

But don’t ever call them “astroturf”, “stupid”, “morons”, “domestic terrorists” while they are calling you a turd, a dictator, or other very uncivil things.
Because they are the Left, and only their rules apply.

America, what a country!

 

BUT DON’T EVER TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING “UNCIVIL”!!! 🙂

 

I Can See Liberal Insanity From My House!

This ditty would be unbelievable if you were are a sane, rational person, but we are talking about The Left: (kfyi.com)

Teaching “Kids” Graffiti to Protest SB1070

Unbelievable! I’m not sure what I’m more flabbergasted by:

1) That they would teach kids to use graffiti to protest;
2) That the YWCA thinks a class mixing 13 and 24 year old “kids” is a good idea;

3) That the YWCA has a “Racial Justice Director.”

So I wonder how many of the graduates of this course are down by the Madison street jail chaining themselves to Jail??

But don’t worry, And no indoctrination was applied.

It wasn’t “biased” and it was “fair”. 🙂

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

At a demonstration Wednesday in Mexico City against Arizona's law. ASSOCIATED PRESSAt a demonstration Wednesday in Mexico City against Arizona’s law. ASSOCIATED PRESS

Mexico’s government gloated triumphantly after a federal judge’s injunction blocked Arizona’s immigration law. But it’s no victory for Mexico. In fact, Mexico’s leaders ought to be mortified.

As radical immigration activists crowed with glee and the Obama administration claimed victory, Mexico’s government joined the applause.

Calling Judge Susan Bolton’s injunction Wednesday “a step in the right direction,” Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa declared: “The government of Mexico would like to express its recognition for the determination demonstrated by the federal government of the United States and the actions of the civil organizations that organized lawsuits against the SB 1070 law.”

First, Mexico encourages illegal immigration to the U.S. Oh, it says it doesn’t, but it prints comic book guides for would-be illegal immigrants and provides ID cards for illegals once they get here. In Arizona alone, Mexico keeps five consulates busy.

That’s not out of love for its own citizens, but because Mexicans send cash back to Mexico that helps finance the government.

Instead of selling its wasteful state-owned oil company or getting rid of red tape to create jobs in Mexico, Mexico spends the hard currency from remittances. It fails to look at why its citizens leave.

According to the Heritage Foundation-Wall Street Journal 2010 Index of Economic Freedom, Mexico’s big problem is — no shock — government corruption, where it ranks below the world average.

That’s where Mexico’s cartels come in.

Mexico’s encouragement of illegal immigration undercuts its valiant war against its smuggling cartels. The cartels’ prowess and firepower have made them the only ones who can smuggle effectively across the border. U.S. law enforcers say they now control human-smuggling on our southern border.

Feed them immigrants and they grow more cash-rich — and right now, immigrant smuggling is about a third of the cartels’ income. (IBD)

And the remittance payments have to continue so it’s not in the government’s interest to REALLY do something.

But we, the ones who are against illegal immigration are the racists and the nazis! 🙂

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

Imagine this being said by ANYONE other than a Liberal:

President Obama waded into the national race debate in an unlikely setting and with an unusual choice of words: telling daytime talk show hosts that African-Americans are “sort of a mongrel people.”

The president appeared on ABC’s morning talk show “The View” Thursday, where he talked about the forced resignation of Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod, his experience with race and his roots.

When asked about his background, which includes a black father and white mother, Obama said of African-Americans: “We are sort of a mongrel people.”

“I mean we’re all kinds of mixed up,” Obama said. “That’s actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it.”

Obama noted “there’s still a reptilian side of our brain” that leads people to not trust others “if somebody sounds different or looks different.”

But we, crackers, are the the racists!!! 🙂

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

This, also from the View, is hilarious : “My hope is that I’ve tried to set a tone in the debate that says, ‘Look, we can disagree without being disagreeable,'” Obama said.

Bwah Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

And I’m sure in his own mind he believes it. Cognitive Dissonance is rampant of the Left.

Another “hope” crushed. 🙂

So we need change in November. 🙂

I’m too Busy

It’s Memorial Day.

The day we are supposed to thank those men and women brave enough to sacrifice their lives so that people like me can blog and willfully ignorant and arrogant Liberals can continue to lie.

I say, thank you.

We need more people like that.

But what we don’t need is more ignorance and political grandstanding.

But this the Obama Administration. What else could you expect.

President Obama has turned down Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s request to meet while she’s in Washington next week as tensions mount between his administration and Arizona over the state’s new law cracking down on illegal immigrants.

Brewer will be in Washington to meet with other governors. She said Friday that she had asked to meet with Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to discuss border security and immigration. But Obama’s schedule “doesn’t allow for a meeting” with her, White House spokesman Adam Abrams said, adding that the president “does intend to sit down with the governor in the future.”

When Obama returns from his Chicago vacation on Tuesday, he will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Peru President Alan Garcia at the White House. On Wednesday, Obama is meeting with Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, before heading to an event in Pittsburgh and hosting a concert at the White House to honor Paul McCartney.

On Thursday, Obama will speak at Secretary Clinton’s reception for a new partnership between U.S. and India. On Friday, the president will welcome the Major League Soccer men’s championship team, Real Salt Lake, to the White House.

I’m sorry, I can’t meet with you tonight, I have to get my hair done and play Beatles Rock Band with my kids.

The apparent snub comes after Justice Department officials told Arizona’s attorney general and aides to the governor Friday that the federal government has serious reservations about the state’s new immigration law. They responded that a lawsuit against the state isn’t the answer.

“I told them we need solutions from Washington, not more lawsuits,” said Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat.

And Terry “The Tool” is against the law to begin with and was thrown off the legal team by Brewer. Well, it’s nearly impossible to believe Terry Goddard would have the balls to go against his Homo Sapien Liberalis kin and do his job properly.

But our Governor won’t get the light of day from the Liberal Political Elite.

Their too busy with their Agenda and their sanctimony.

But when a Terrorist comes across the border and kills people, they will have been their since “Day One”. Just watch for it! 🙂

But instead we get this kind of crap:

“The law signed by Brewer of Arizona is just like the German Nazi laws that make Jews scared to go out on the streets. We have to smash their business agreements in the nose. We have to declare war on Arizona.”
— Ricardo Rocha, journalist and TV presenter, said of the immigration law (TIME, April 28, 2010)

Teachable Moment:

A “Terry Stop” is a stop of a person by law enforcement officers based upon “reasonable suspicion” that a person may have been engaged in criminal activity, whereas an arrest requires “probable cause” that a suspect committed a criminal offense. The name comes from the standards established in a 1968 case, Terry v. Ohio.

The issue in the case was whether police should be able to detain a person and subject him to a limited search for weapons without probable cause for arrest. The Court held that police may conduct a limited search of a person for weapons that could endanger the officer or those nearby, even in the absence of probable cause for arrest and any weapons seized may be introduced in evidence.

When a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him or her to reasonably suspect criminal activity may be occurring and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, the officer might approach and briefly detain the subjects for the purpose of conducting a limited investigation. The officer must identify himself or herself as a police officer and may make reasonable inquiries. If after initial investigation the officer still has a reasonable fear for the safety of himself and others, the officer may conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing in an attempt to discover weapons that might be used to assault him or her.

Oh no! Racial Profiling!! 😦

And then there’s The Ministry of Truth:

“Day of outrage, anger on the streets of Phoenix and across this country tonight,” ABC anchor David Muir declared, pleading: “Will an army of protesters be heard?” Reporter Jeremy Hubbard began his story for World News: “In their most massive numbers yet, a deluge of adversaries rally and rail against what could soon be the law of the land in Arizona.”

Will the 7,000 a t Tempe Diablo Stadium in support of the law be noticed??

Will the LA Times wonder about a poll they did where they misstated the Law and still 50% of the people supported it!

From the Los Angeles Times: “50% of registered voters surveyed said they support the law, which compels police to check the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally, while 43% oppose it… Strong majorities of white voters and those over 50 support the Arizona law, while Latinos and those under 30 are heavily opposed.”

Even though that misstates the law (see Terry Stop) the race baiters lost.

Whoops!

But will the Ministry of Truth Media notice?

Yeah, right…as if…

Liberals and the Open Borders crowd are too busy pushing their agenda to care what the truth really is.

They want to tell you what it is, for them.

And that’s enough.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

So here’s another one you won’t likely here much about:

ZAPATA, Texas (AP) – The waters of Falcon Lake normally beckon boaters with waterskiing and world-record bass fishing. But this holiday weekend, fishermen on the waters that straddle the U.S.-Mexico border are on the lookout for something more sinister: pirates.

Twice in recent weeks, fishermen have been robbed at gunpoint by marauders that the local sheriff says are “spillover” from fighting between rival Mexican drug gangs.

Boaters are concerned about their safety, and the president of the local Chamber of Commerce is trying to assure people that everything’s fine on the U.S. side of the lake.

At the fishing camp his family has owned for 50 years, Jack Cox now sleeps with a loaded shotgun at his feet and a handgun within reach.

In the American waters, Cox said, “you’re safer, but you’re not safe.” Mexican commercial fishermen regularly cross to set their nets illegally, why wouldn’t gunmen do the same? he asked.

Two weeks ago, the Texas Department of Public Safety warned boaters to avoid the international boundary that zig-zags through the lake, which is 25 miles long and 3 miles across at its widest point. Authorities also urged anyone on the water to notify relatives of their boating plans to aid law enforcement in case of trouble.

Since issuing the warning, most boats have stayed on the U.S. side.

“That’s a good indication. It means they’re getting the message,” Texas Parks and Wildlife Capt. Fernando Cervantes said Thursday as he patrolled with two other game wardens. “They’re still coming out, but they’re not going across.”

The border is marked by 14 partially submerged concrete towers that mark the Rio Grande’s path before the lake was created in 1954.

Rejoice, The Media is there to cover “The News”. 😦

What Would Mexico Do?

Before I get into the fun, how about the silly:

Rallies protesting against Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants are planned in more than 70 cities across the U.S. this weekend.

Protesters say the law, which requires authorities to question people about their immigration status if there is any reason to suspect they are in the country illegally, is already seeing challenges to block it.

The upcoming May Day rallies will pile pressure on President Barack Obama to overhaul immigration laws in the election this year.

Should someone point out that May Day, is a Communist Holiday?? 🙂

******

So what does Mexico, that holier-than-thou country to the south, through which they come and from which they largely come.

You get caught being an Illegal Alien in Mexico, you have 3 basic choices:

1) Pay off the Federales and go on your way (“be of economic or social interest”)

2) Go to Jail, it’s a Felony you know…

3) Get beat up or shot dead.

That’s it.

But don’t worry, pulling over a car for speeding THEN wondering why there are 15 people stuffed into a Ford Taurus is Racists and insensitive!! 😦

Or that drug cartel shoot-out on the highway where innocent people are caught in the middle of it.

Or the Drop houses with 50 illegals and several armed Coyotes are stashed in family neighborhoods.

Doing anything about that because Washington is too busy pandering to them is racist! 😦

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.

– The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?

– If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.

Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama’s illegal alien aunt — a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).

Law enforcement officials at all levels — by national mandate — must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens’ arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.

Ready to show your papers? Mexico’s National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens’ identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.

All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico’s Le General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There’s been no public clamor for “comprehensive immigration reform” in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.

But don’t worry, we in Arizona are the mean racist arseholes!! 😦

Noncitizens cannot “in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.” In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).

The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn’t respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun. (Michelle Malkin)

So when foreigner complained about the incivility of the Mexican government, they just got even nastier about it.

They don’t take any crap from anyone.

But they are more than willing to join with the Pro-Illegal crowd in the U.S. to foist off their excess population on us.

It’s the second largest income for the country, patronage from illegals in this country sending money back to Mexico.

Why would they want to change that.

And we’re still the Nazi’s.

Funny That…. 😦

Hipócritas.

Can’t you feel the Liberal “moral outrage” from here…