7 Ways Not to Leave Your Lover- The Government

Keeping Americans poor in a prosperous country like America is not as easy as you think. After all, this is the “land of opportunity.” Legal immigrants pay tens of thousands of dollars and wait years for the opportunity to come legally and illegal immigrants often risk their lives just so they can get here and do menial work. This is the country that made Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and even OPRAH into billionaires and it’s a nation where you can have everything from hoverboards to medicine for your pet delivered right to your door. So when there’s so much wealth and opulence everywhere, how do you lock Americans out of that success?

No matter what you do, there will always be a few poor people around, but to really maximize those numbers there are very specific government policies abetted by a few cultural attitudes that will make all the difference. You want to make as many Americans poor as possible? Then start by….

1) Making Sure Taxes And Regulations Are Sky High: The biggest enemy of poverty is economic growth, which creates more jobs and higher wages. How do you slow down economic growth? One of the best ways to do it is to ratchet up the taxes and start pouring on the regulations. Let small business owners spend an inordinate amount of time wondering if they’re in compliance with some law they’ve never heard of instead of how to improve their service. Let them spend years working to make a profit and then take such a big chunk of the money they make that they want to give up. Make these small businesses spend thousands of dollars complying with nearly useless regulations instead of hiring new employees. Nobody is pulling himself out of poverty without a job and so the more jobs you kill, the better!

Also advocate doubling the Minimum Wage for the labor/payroll costs for business goes up massively and you put those very same people out of work but blame it on “greedy” businesses.

But it makes it look like you “care”.

2) Encouraging Dependency: You want to keep people poor over the long haul? Then get them dependent on a government payment that will always keep them poor. Start them young! Get as many kids as possible used to taking handouts with free breakfast and lunch programs. Then when they’re adults, make it as easy as possible to get on the dole and stay on it. In fact, you should spend millions on advertising campaigns letting people know that they’re eligible to become dependent on the government. This keeps people stuck in a no man’s land where they’re still poor, but they’re just comfortable enough that they don’t feel compelled to work to get more. In fact, you may have people AVOIDING work that would get them out of poverty because they would lose their “benefits.” It also helps create the kind of entitlement mentality that causes people to demand their employer pay them more money instead of learning new skills or just moving on to another job. Get that hook stuck deep enough in their mouth and they’ll be lucky if they ever get it out.

We are From the Government and we are here to help you. 🙂

3) Encouraging People To Have Babies Out Of Wedlock: You can put as happy a face as you want on it, but parenting is a two person job. When one person has to do it alone, it can be a backbreaker. Not only are kids’ time sinks, they are incredibly expensive.

Just call them a “Welfare Check Addition” to fake them out.

That’s why it’s important to drench the culture in sex so that people feel like they’re missing out, right this second, because they’re reading this column instead of hooking up. Put welfare in place so that poor women don’t feel like they need to marry a less than ideal partner if they have a child and praise single mothers to the skies to help encourage young girls to get pregnant out of wedlock. Then you undermine marriage at every opportunity. Put a “marriage penalty” in tax law, encourage no fault divorce, support gay marriage. Let those marriages disintegrate and then not only do you have the parent struggling, but a child raised by a single parent is much more likely to do drugs, go to jail and have mental problems, all of which make it more likely that he will be poor as well. In other words, you often can get a poverty twofer: the parent AND child.

Gotta have that next generation to feed off of. The Cycle of Life. 🙂

4) Demonizing Success: Slam rich people, corporations and anyone having any success as “greedy,” “evil,” and claim they’re “not paying their fair share.” The idea is to falsely portray success as “luck” at worst or at best, something people should feel guilty over. Not only does this keep poor Americans from trying to learn anything from the most financially successful people in society, it causes them to actually resent success. You want people protesting outside the banker’s office and demanding that his money be given away, not actually trying to pull themselves out of poverty by becoming bankers. Once financial success is viewed as evil, then by definition, only the poor can be virtuous and financial success will be de facto evidence of immorality.

So you’re better off being poor.

5) Screwing Up The Education System: As the economy has become more dependent on educated workers, it has become more important than ever to keep kids from getting a good education if you want to keep them poor. This requires a two-pronged approach.

If you’re too stupid to understand why you’re poor, that’s a good thing.

And to think only the way the Left wants you to think, and make them incapable of any other rogue thoughts to the contrary.

The web has kicked up a storm after a child was marked as incorrect for saying “5+5+5=15″on a grade school math test.

The question simply asked to use repeated addition to solve 5×3. The math question is a typical question set by the Common Core for third graders. However, under the guidelines for the Common Core, you supposed to understand 5×3 as “five groups of three” not “three groups of five.”

The child was then marked down again for drawing six rows of four instead of four rows of six.

The image was originally uploaded to Imgur and Reddit around a week ago where many commenters were infuriated by the overly pedantic “by-the-book” thinking.  One popular comment on the Reddit post said, “So now you just took a kid who was doing well at math, confused them, and turned them off of it with your continuous nit picking of shit that doesn’t matter.” (iflscience)

But it matters to the Left. You must only think THEIR way. 🙂

First, it’s important to keep pouring money into the public school system. That gives middle class Americans the false impression that something is being done to improve education; yet it never actually seems to improve education in our public schools.

You pass “budget overrides” to give the inefficient useless idiots who run the schools more money to screw up with because they threaten massive pain on your child if you don’t. It’s going to pass because of low voter turn out, but very high turn out from educators and administrators who are self-serving.

Voters in a majority of 28 Phoenix-area school districts gave the green light to additional school funding by approving bonds and overrides.

“I think parents and community members have seen the impact of failed overrides of the last two election cycles and didn’t like what was happening, they didn’t like seeing teachers leaving, they didn’t like seeing programs eliminated,” Blake Sacha, chair of the Unite for Education AZ political action committee. (AZ Central)

An Education POLITICAL PAC!!  need I say more. 🙂

Additionally, kids who are homeschooled or go to private schools consistently outperform kids who go to public schools, which makes it very important to fight to keep as many children as possible stuck in failing public schools. A kid who can’t read is likely to stay poor.

Or  one who is so indoctrinated into Leftist thinking that they are incapable of any other thoughts and become loyal Democrats. Same difference. 🙂

Then on the college level, we should keep encouraging college kids to spend big money getting degrees that typically only help them get low paying jobs. As a practical matter in the world of Skype and FaceTime, there’s already no reason why an outstanding professor couldn’t cheaply teach 50,000 students across the country at the same time with a little planning. Obviously, that would be a disaster when we’re getting students to go $100,000 in debt on student loans to get philosophy, fine arts and women’s studies degrees. Good luck getting out of poverty when you have all that debt and are making $25,000 a year.

The University needs it’s pimp , polish and preen.

6) Having Massive Immigration: Supply and demand is the simplest law of economics. How does that help make Americans poor? Well, the more replaceable any worker is, the less money you need to pay him. Why pay an engineer a decent salary if you can easily replace him with an H-1B visa worker from India or China who’ll work for $30,000 less per year? It’s also no coincidence that America’s workforce participation rate is at a 38 year low (62.8%) while immigrants make up the largest share of America’s population (13.3%) that they have in the last 108 years. It’s vital to keep bringing in as many new immigrants as possible while so many Americans are unemployed to make sure that those people don’t get jobs. This is doubly true for illegal aliens, who are often competing for jobs with even poorer Americans while they are able to work even cheaper because they don’t have to pay for Obamacare or car insurance and they can cheat on their taxes with impunity. Any time someone suggests we start putting American workers first when it comes to immigration, call them racist and keep those floodgates wide open!

More Democrat Voters!

7) Ratcheting Up Their Expenses: Of course, if you want to create more poor Americans, it’s best to tax the middle class as much as possible, but in a country where they can vote you out of office, you have to be careful about directly reaching into their wallets. So, how do you take their money without their realizing that you’re responsible?

Budget Overrides, for one. 🙂

But over all, it’s the old frog analogy.

Throw a frog in boiling water and he’ll jump right out.

Throw a frog in cold water and turn the heat up to a boil and he’ll not jump out and will die.

So you are the frog. They are the heat.

Eventually, they want you to boil.

Then they will be there to “save you” from it. 🙂

Have the Federal Reserve print money non-stop, which drives up inflation. Over time, that reduces the purchasing power of the middle class as the cost of everything seems to creep up.

And since, I know, as a Customer Service Professional who deal with “the general public” every work day, the average moron out there has no concept of inflation and what it does to them it’s a very effective tool to boil them with.

It’s kind of like Radon, an odorless, colorless gas that can  make you very sick or kill you.

Then you complain the minimum wage is too low because you’ve inflated their cost so much they can’t afford to live anymore. You blame it on the “greedy” businesses you’ve been screwing all this time.

The Circle is complete.

It’s also important to go after cheap sources of energy like oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Not only does that drive up the cost the middle class pays across the board for products, it also hits people directly when they heat and cool their homes. Exploding medical costs are also helpful and Obamacare has done an amazing job of this. Medical costs are skyrocketing for the middle class and helping to drive them towards poverty. As an extra added bonus, middle class Americans who can no longer afford to pay for their medical care because of Obamacare will also be hit with a tax penalty. If your goal is to hurt middle class Americans financially, you could not do much better than Obamacare.

Especially, when you start ratcheting up the fines for that penalty that isn’t a tax but it is a ta but you don’t call it a tax because it’s a penalty. 🙂

And blame it on…The businesses!  TA DA!!!

Money Buys Everything

http://www.usworldreport.com/entitlement-whos-gonna-pay-my-rent-welfare-queen-freaks-out-after-being-denied/

After being denied benefits this lady freaked out and launched into a profanity filled rant. She screamed “Who’s Gonna Pay My Rent!”. Its interesting that she didn’t try to focus on finding a job and a way to pay the rent herself. (US NEWS)

Welcome to Obama’s America. 🙂

Anyone that has paid any attention to the news recently knows how bad the Obama/Kerry/Hillary Iran nuke deal is. Even the majority of the American people disagree with the deal and find it completely outrageous. It is no surprise that something is behind why some people in Congress are support such a tragic idea. The reason why people are backing this proposition is nothing new to politicians. Bribery.

So is that why the Middle Easterners keep giving the Clinton Foundation millions and Hillary says nothing about those “women’s issues”. 🙂

Part of the reason why congressman are supporting this dumb deal is to support the president of their own party, but also because there are Iranian lobbyists making large campaign donations to the Democratic party and are funding this propaganda. As pointed out by Daniel Greenfield in the Front Page Magazine, most if not all of the Democratic legislators supporting this legislation are getting support for the deal financially from the Iranian lobby, specifically the Iranian American Political Action Committee (IAPAC).

The IPAC maxed out on their contributions to Democratic Senator Ed Markey and Al Franken at $5,000 each during the 2014 election cycle. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York represents the largest Jewish populated state in America, yet even she supports the deal. It is clear to see that the Democratic Party only cares about who gives them money and not who elected them in the first place. Gillibrand not only got campaign donations from the IAPAC but she also received money from Iran Lobby’s Hassan Nemazee. Nemazee was a finance director for Hillary’s national campaign and also raised a ton of money for Kerry before he pleaded guilty to a fraud scheme. From those in the House, Mike Honda (D-CA), Andre Carson (D-IN), Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Donna Edwards (D-MD), and Jackie Speier (D-CA) all received cash from IPAC.

Joe Biden and John Kerry also received large financial donations from not only IAPAC but also Housang Amirahmadi, the found of the American Iranian Council. Amirahmadi spoke of a campaign to “conquer Obama’s heart and mind” and described himself as “the Iranian lobby in the United States.” The definition of treason provided by the Legal Dictionary is as follows: The betrayal of one’s own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies. From that definition, any and all politicians who have taken Iran’s blood money have done it as an act of treason. The punishment of being found guilty of treason (by law) is: “shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.” By following the law of the land as well as the punishment found in the law, the politicians who have accepted this money should be removed from their position immediately and imprisoned for at least five years. (US NEWS)

And Obama and Hillary are 2 of 3 top recipients of PAC money from Planned Parenthood also.

So the Iranians bought a Nuke. Planned Parenthood bought selling baby parts.

Best Congress bought and paid for. 🙂

It buys silence. It buys “outrage”. It buys cowardice.

And so much more.

Money really does buy Politics. And Politicians are too happy to lie about it.

Money really does buy Everything. 🙂

False Prophets

Hot Air.com: Soon-to-be former Speaker of the House John Boehner is warning about “false prophets” in the Republican Party which are promising things they can’t deliver. He made his ominous claim to CBS’ Face The Nation on Sunday.

“And so, we’ve got groups here in town, members of the House and Senate here in town, who whipped people into a frenzy believing they can accomplish things that they know — they know — are never going to happen.”

So is that why you campaigned VERY hard about defunding ObamaCare and repealing it? Stopping Executive Amnesty?? because you knew they’d never happen but you wanted to whip people up into a frenzy to vote for YOU. 🙂

Now that’s a “false prophet” Johnnie Boy!

Boehner also discussed his “accomplishments” over the last four years including the Ryan-Murray Budget of 2013 (or sequestration, Boehner wasn’t that clear), the “doc fix” bill, and the extension of most of the Bush tax cuts. Whether any of these were actually good for the American people is questionable. The Bush tax cut extension didn’t cut spending at all and just delayed sequestration. The Ryan-Murray budget raised airline fees (aka taxes) and got rid of some of the sequestration cuts, under the promise they’d go back in place in 2022 and 2023 (not that another Congress couldn’t delay those again). The “doc fix” bill was criticized by FreedomWorks as adding $14B to the deficit over ten years. I’m not sure this is really an accomplishment, but Boehner has a message to those (like me) who don’t think it is.

“All done over the last four and a half years with a Democrat president and all voted against by my most conservative members because it wasn’t good enough. Really? You know this is the part that I really don’t understand…Our founders didn’t want some parliamentary system where if you won the majority you got to do whatever you wanted to do. They wanted this long, slow press. So change comes slowly, and obviously too slowly for some.”

Funny, that’s how Washington DOES work and exactly what the Democrats HAVE been doing with your aid and assistance. After all it was unrealistic to promise to do one thing and then actively not do it as a “pragmatic” “compromise. 🙂

As for slow change, I’d say the change in the last 8 years has been pretty rapid and “fundamentally transforming America”, Mr. Soon To be Ex-Obama kiss ass Speaker.

Boehner’s right about change coming slowly, but for the wrong reasons. If you look at how D.C. works (or doesn’t work) it seems like politicians end up being corrupted by the idea of power and the temptation of using it for their own benefit.

They are.

Peter Schweizer wrote in his 2011 book Throw Them All Out how Congress members appeared to play the stock market a bit when it comes to pending legislation.

Wonderful book. Loved it.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/the-ruling-elite-exposed/

Here’s what Newsweek wrote on the book, including hits on John Kerry and, shock of all shock, Boehner.

The Kerrys’ capital gains on the transactions were at least $500,000, and as high as $2 million (such information is necessarily imprecise, as the disclosure rules allow members to report their gains in wide ranges). It was instructive to Schweizer that Kerry didn’t try to shape legislation to benefit his portfolio; the apparent key to success was the shaping of trades that anticipated the effect of government policy…

Indeed, Schweizer reports that, during the debate over Obama’s health-care reform package, John Boehner, then the House minority leader, was investing “tens of thousands of dollars” in health-insurance-company stocks, which made sizable gains when the proposed public option in the reform deal was killed. (“There are laws and there are rules of the House, and they should be followed,” a Boehner spokesperson tells Newsweek. “The speaker does not make those trades himself. He has a financial adviser in Ohio.”)

This is what happens when politicians end up in Washington for too long. They get corrupted by the system and probably decide to just “go along to get along” when it comes to staying in power and, for lack of a better term, profiting from it. There’s a reason why almost all of the longest serving tenures in the House and Senate start in the 1900’s. Those in power decide to stay in D.C. instead of going home. Essentially, they become “the elites,” instead of those who serve out of the goodness of their own hearts. The 17th Amendment takes most of the blame for this because it allows direct election of Senators, instead of allowing the state legislatures to pick them. What’s amusing is William Jennings Bryan pushed for direct election as a way for the people to keep politicians more accountable, yet it’s obvious there’s no real accountability. Allowing direct election of Senators essentially establishes a cabal where Senators become pals with House members, thus allowing collusion which “benefits” someone other than the constituents they’re supposed to represent.

It’s here where Boehner fails to realize why the so-called “false prophets” are actually the ones who are probably more true than he realizes. It shows how foolish Congress is to keep going from “cliff to cliff” and “deadline to deadline” instead of bothering to actually budget out things. Boehner’s “false prophets” are actually the ones pushing for real reform, real change, and real spending cuts instead of just making deals from time to time to keep the government running. This is why the Tea Pary was so important in 2010 and why it should stay important when it comes to cutting spending, reducing the size of government, and getting it out of my life and yours. Hopefully the “false prophets” are the ones who actually win this fight, instead of the current “elites.” But they’ve got to be careful not to become those they seek to destroy.

Much like the Gay Mafia, that has become the very thing they wanted to destroy.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And Johnnie, you’re one of THEM, and not looking out for US.

Congress Slipped a Bo(eh)ner

The Good News: JAR JAR RESIGNS!

THE BAD NEWS: Boehner 2.0 Coming in November.

There is no way in hell the Establishment RINOs are going to allow an actual Conservative to take over as Speaker. We are going to get Boehner 2.0 shoved down our throats, most likely his loyal Lt., Kevin McCarthy.

THEN WE WILL HAVE TO DETHRONE HIM TOO!

But Jar Jar finally said “NO” for once in the last 5 years and he just might stick to it this time. Have the cowardice of his convictions.

There’s no reason to say nice things about John Boehner that he doesn’t deserve. He didn’t die; he quit his job after enough Republicans FINALLY started moving to unseat him behind the scenes. It would be a better country if that had been done years ago. Other than an earmark ban long ago and sequester cuts, which were practically accidental, John Boehner’s tenure as a leader has been one long, unbroken streak of mediocrity, cowardice and disaster.

Conservatives consider Boehner to be an untrustworthy weakling, Democrats look at him as a joke and the American public despises him. Boehner will leave office as the least popular Speaker in 30 years.

The Man who promised to stop ObamaCare and Executive Amnesty and then actively worked for them to get them passed is gone.

He was against them before he was for them. 🙂

Under the spending deals cut by House Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio), the federal government’s debt has climbed $3,968,445,855,460.28, according to debt numbers published by the U.S. Treasury.

That works out to an increase in the debt of $26,627.43 per each of the 149,036,000 people who, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, had a full- or part-time job in the United States as of August 2015.

When the first spending deal made by Speaker Boehner took effect on March 4, 2011, the total federal debt was $95,162.43 per the 149,036,000 workers who had jobs as of this August. It now equals $121,789.86 for each of those workers.

Not very “conservative” is he…

“Here’s the attitude. Ohhhh. Don’t make me do this. Ohhhh. This is too hard.” — John Boehner mocks Republicans in Congress who oppose amnesty.

Though his re-election campaign was all about stopping it.

So he was for it before he was against it! 🙂

Short Live his RINO Successor!

As a leader, Boehner’s “strategy” is usually completely reactive. It’s like he reluctantly gets in the ring with the Democrats, leads with his face and hopes that the Democrats will defeat him quickly so he can turn around and yell at the people who insisted he fight for something in the first place.

The perfect example of Boehner’s “leadership” came when Obama shut the government down because the House refused to fund Obamacare.

First of all, you have to keep in mind that John Boehner had publicly promised that the Republican Party would use the power of the purse to stop Obamacare if the GOP took control of the House in 2010.

“We are going to fight to repeal this government takeover of health care and start over with solutions that focus first on lowering costs. Cutting off funding for ObamaCare is absolutely something I support. For example, I would support moving as soon as possible to deny any funding for the estimated 16,500 IRS employees that will be needed to implement ObamaCare. House Republicans will continue to stand with the American people against this unconstitutional government takeover of health care.”

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, Boehner never had any intention of living up to his pledge.

So eventually Ted Cruz started pushing the idea of using the power of the purse to stop Obamacare and it caught on in the House to such an extent that Boehner felt compelled to try it.

After hemming and hawing that made it clear he didn’t want to pursue the strategy in the first place, Boehner announced that the House was going to fund the government except for Obamacare. Then he came out like a house on fire, slammed Obama for shutting down the government and said he would stand tall!

After a few days of that, Boehner practically went mute while the Democrats continued to hammer away at Republicans. Meanwhile, Boehner ALLIES like Peter King and Devin Nunes publicly undercut the whole strategy, something they would have NEVER done without getting the thumbs up from the Speaker.

“We are the ones who did shut the government down. You don’t take the dramatic step of shutting down the government unless you have a real strategy.” — Peter King

“Unlike many Republicans, (Devin) Nunes is publicly criticizing some of his colleagues, calling them ‘lemmings with suicide vests’ earlier this week.

….’It’s crazy. I don’t understand the whole point, the whole strategy. Most Americans don’t understand it,’ said Nunes.

The California Republican said a small group of lawmakers, what he calls ‘the lemming caucus,’ have been blocking GOP House leadership for three years.

‘It’s guys who meet privately. They’re always conspiring. It’s mostly just about power. And it’s just gotten us nowhere,’ said Nunes.”

Since government shutdowns are essentially a big game of chicken where both sides can equally be said to be at fault, but they try to blame each other, having Republicans in Congress siding with Democrats was very damaging to the effort.

Boehner had options. He could have held out and tried to make a case to the American people. He could have agreed to end the shutdown if Democrats would end the Obamacare subsidy for lawmakers and their staffs. Instead, as per usual, Boehner just surrendered and the shutdown lasted only 16 days.

To top it all off, Boehner went on the Leno Show and said none of it was his fault.

“It was a very predictable disaster, and the sooner we got it over with, the better. I told my colleagues in July I didn’t think shutting down the government over Obamacare would work because the President said, ‘I’m not going to negotiate.’ And so I told them in August ‘Probably not a good idea.’ Told them in early September. But when you have my job, there’s something you have to learn … When I looked up, I saw my colleagues going this way. And you learn that a leader without followers is simply a man taking a walk … So I said, ‘You want to fight this fight? I’ll go fight the fight with you.'”

The types of questions people had after this disaster were the ones that dogged Boehner through his whole tenure as “leader.”

The shutdown was a predictable disaster? Then why did he promise to adopt that strategy before he became Speaker? Did he not realize it was a bad idea then or was he just a liar who made promises he never intended to keep? Moreover, if Boehner knew the strategy wouldn’t work, why did he go through with it? Furthermore, how do you call talking tough for a few days and then caving a “fight?” Once Boehner decided to go with the strategy, what was his plan to win – or was it his plan all along to fight a halfhearted battle, lose and then throw up his hands and say, “I tried?” Whatever happened to actually trying to WIN battles for conservatism and the American people? When did that officially become something the Republican Party doesn’t do anymore?

Republicans have a right to expect a lot more out of a leader than drinking, crying and capitulating in every fight that matters. That’s the only thing John Boehner has offered America since he became Speaker of the House and the tragedy isn’t that he’s being muscled out of office, it’s that it didn’t happen much sooner. (John Hawkins)

But just to give you a taste of the Far Left’s response, our friends at the Daily Kos:

Oh no, the Repidiots biggest boner is leaving. Whatever will they use to screw Americans now? There is talk that Rep. McCarthy from California may replace him. That is sending the T (as in terrible) Party into fits of apoplexy. From what I read about him he is a semi intelligent (for a republican) human. He can actually see and understand facts, as opposed to most of the other morons in the party.

This is Homo Superior Liberalis folks!

But let’s get back to the Party while it lasts…

Proof of Jar Jar Binks’s death may be on the way. In a Vanity Fair interview published, appropriately, on Star Wars Day (May the Fourth…), director J.J. Abrams said he just might show fans Jar Jar’s bones.

Sorry, wrong Jar Jar… 🙂

We’re Tired of Haters & Deniers

Did you know that Climate “Deniers” and The Tobacco Industry are related? 🙂

Warmist scientists including UN IPCC Lead Author Kevin Trenberth to Obama: ‘We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. One additional tool – recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change. We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation.’

Via Politico: ‘Twenty climate scientists called for RICO investigation in a letter to Obama and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch. The scientists argue that the systemic efforts to prevent the public from understanding climate change resembles the investigation undertaken against tobacco. They draw inspiration from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse who said on the Senate floor that there might be a similar conspiracy here, and a civil trial could provide the tools of discovery needed to find out.’

Letter to President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

September 1, 2015

Dear President Obama,Attorney General Lynch and OSTP Director Holdren,

As you know, an overwhelming majority of climate scientists are convinced about the potentially serious adverse effects of human-induced climate change on human health, agriculture,and biodiversity.

We applaud your efforts to regulate emissions and the other steps you are taking.

Nonetheless, as climate scientists we are exceedingly concerned that America’s response to climate change–indeed, the world’s response to climate change–is insufficient. The risks posed by climate change, including increasing extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and increasing ocean acidity–and potential strategies for addressing them–are detailed in the Third National Climate Assessment (2014),

Climate Change Impacts in the United States. The stability of the Earth’s climate over the past ten thousand years contributed to the growth of agriculture and therefore, a thriving human civilization. We are now at high risk of seriously destabilizing the Earth’s climate and irreparably harming people around the world, especially the world’s poorest people.We appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress.

One additional tool–recently proposed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)–is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.

See Below

The actions of these organizations have been extensively documented in peer-reviewed academic research (Brulle,2013) and in recent books including: Doubt is their Product (Michaels, 2008), Climate Cover Up (Hoggan & Littlemore, 2009), Merchants of Doubt (Oreskes & Conway, 2010),The Climate War (Pooley, 2010), and in The Climate Deception Dossiers (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2015).

We strongly endorse Senator Whitehouse’s call for a RICO investigation. The methods of these organizations are quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry.

A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking.

If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done.

Sincerely,

Jagadish Shukla, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Maibach, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Dirmeyer, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Barry Klinger, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Paul Schopf, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Lynch, and OSTP Director Holdren

David Straus, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA

Edward Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Michael Wallace, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Alan Robock, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ

Eugenia Kalnay, University of Maryland, College Park,MD

William Lau, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

Kevin Trenberth, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO

Krishnamurti, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Vasu Misra, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL

Ben Kirtman,

University of Miami, Miami, FL

Robert Dickinson, University of

Texas, Austin, TX

Michela Biasutti, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Mark Cane, Columbia University, New York, NY

Lisa Goddard, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY

Alan Betts, Atmospheric Research, Pittsford,VT (

Click to access LetterPresidentAG.pdf

)

Our “The Sky is Falling!!! We’re all going to Die!!!!” unless you do exactly as we say hasn’t been working so now it’s time for the Hammer of Social Justice and The US Government to beat the infidels into submission.

The “good” Senator from Rhode Island in an Op-Ed in the Washington Post:

Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution.

Where’s the science? Oh right, it’s just evil Corporate Oil doing their mustache twirling evil deception. Unlike the disingenuous Chicken Little’s in the Global Cooling/Warming/Change holy mission of salvation. 🙂

Their activities are often compared to those of Big Tobacco denying the health dangers of smoking. Big Tobacco’s denial scheme was ultimately found by a federal judge to have amounted to a racketeering enterprise.

You mean the ones you probably supported and still take their money?

Well, Liberals are like Orwellian Nazis as they have “often been compared”. 🙂

The Big Tobacco playbook looked something like this: (1) pay scientists to produce studies defending your product; (2) develop an intricate web of PR experts and front groups to spread doubt about the real science; (3) relentlessly attack your opponents.

The Global Warming playbook goes something like this: (1) pay scientists to produce studies defending your product; (Climate Gate, anyone?) (2) develop an intricate web of PR experts and front groups to spread doubt about the real science; “97% Consensus” anyone? (3) relentlessly attack your opponents. Attack “Deniers” with RICO statutes and EPA regulations anyone?

Thankfully, the government had a playbook, too: the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. In 1999, the Justice Department filed a civil RICO lawsuit against the major tobacco companies and their associated industry groups, alleging that the companies “engaged in and executed — and continue to engage in and execute — a massive 50-year scheme to defraud the public, including consumers of cigarettes, in violation of RICO.”

Is the Tobacco Industry still around? Yep. They just are 1/10 the Lobbying juggernaut they used to be.

Do people still smoke? Yep.

Tobacco spent millions of dollars and years of litigation fighting the government. But finally, through the discovery process, government lawyers were able to peel back the layers of deceit and denial and see what the tobacco companies really knew all along about cigarettes.

You mean the million in lobbying money. And amazing how they can uncover all this and not be able to figure out Benghazi, or the IRS scandal, or Hillary’s Emails? 🙂

In 2006, Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decided that the tobacco companies’ fraudulent campaign amounted to a racketeering enterprise. According to the court: “Defendants coordinated significant aspects of their public relations, scientific, legal, and marketing activity in furtherance of a shared objective — to . . . maximize industry profits by preserving and expanding the market for cigarettes through a scheme to deceive the public.”

The parallels between what the tobacco industry did and what the fossil fuel industry is doing now are striking.

Only in your fervently anti-capitalist Luddite little mind.

In the case of fossil fuels, just as with tobacco, the industry joined together in a common enterprise and coordinated strategy.

Just like the Sky is Falling Global Warming “Consensus” crowd.

He has his own Political Action group: Oceans PAC and he gets his primary support from tech company investors & lobbyists from Comcast.

I created the OCEANS PAC because candidates who support oceans and environmental issues need our support. Indeed, the other side is funded by big polluters who don’t hesitate to put millions of dollars behind their lies. As I’ve said many times – I’m tired of bringing a knife to a gun fight. The OCEANS PAC is one way we can fight back.

And fight we must, because climate change is not a problem that will go away. Climate change is not a problem that can wait. But climate change is a problem that can be solved.  We can and we must leave a healthy environment, which includes healthy oceans, to our children and grandchildren. The public is ready for action; unfortunately, the missing piece is Congress. Congress is sleepwalking through history. It is time for Congress to hear the alarms, roll up our sleeves, and do what needs to be done. It is time to wake up. But for Congress to wake up, it needs more members who will support ocean and environmental issues – OCEANS PAC will support those candidates.

This is certainly not something I can do alone. There are high stakes involved and I need your help. I hope you will accompany me on this new journey, and that I can count on your enthusiastic support as we go forward. 

Sincerely,

Sheldon Whitehouse
United States Senator

So no conflict of interest there. 🙂  All, pure science!

2011 – 2016 PAC Contribution Breakdown

	Business	$775,653	(58%)
	Labor	$212,450	(16%)
	Ideological/Single Issue	$345,195	(26%)

Based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on Monday, August 17, 2015.

All, pure science.

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00027533

Just pure as the driven snow and twice as virtuous!

In 1998, the Clinton administration was building support for international climate action under the Kyoto Protocol. The fossil fuel industry, its trade associations and the conservative policy institutes that often do the industry’s dirty work met at the Washington office of the American Petroleum Institute. A memo from that meeting that was leaked to the New York Times documented their plans for a multimillion-dollar public relations campaign to undermine climate science and to raise “questions among those (e.g. Congress) who chart the future U.S. course on global climate change.”

Climate Gate anyone?

The shape of the fossil fuel industry’s denial operation has been documented by, among others, Drexel University professor Robert Brulle. In a 2013 paper published in the journal Climatic Change, Brulle described a complex network of organizations and funding that appears designed to obscure the fossil fuel industry’s fingerprints. To quote directly from Brulle’s report, it was “a deliberate and organized effort to misdirect the public discussion and distort the public’s understanding of climate.” That sounds a lot like Kessler’s findings in the tobacco racketeering case.

The coordinated tactics of the climate denial network, Brulle’s report states, “span a wide range of activities, including political lobbying, contributions to political candidates, and a large number of communication and media efforts that aim at undermining climate science.” Compare that again to the findings in the tobacco case.

Funny, sounds just like the Global Warming crowd!

The tobacco industry was proved to have conducted research that showed the direct opposite of what the industry stated publicly — namely, that tobacco use had serious health effects. Civil discovery would reveal whether and to what extent the fossil fuel industry has crossed this same line. We do know that it has funded research that — to its benefit — directly contradicts the vast majority of peer-reviewed climate science. One scientist who consistently published papers downplaying the role of carbon emissions in climate change, Willie Soon, reportedly received more than half of his funding from oil and electric utility interests: more than $1.2 million.

To be clear: I don’t know whether the fossil fuel industry and its allies engaged in the same kind of racketeering activity as the tobacco industry. We don’t have enough information to make that conclusion. Perhaps it’s all smoke and no fire. But there’s an awful lot of smoke.

And he knows smoke when he sees it…

Senator Whitehouse stated (On the Iran Deal): “I thank the many Rhode Islanders who have contacted me on every side of this question. I appreciate their thoughtful input.  I’ve decided to support the P5+1 agreement with Iran, not because it assures anything on its own, but because — with persistent watchfulness and effort — it could open a new doorway in the precarious Middle East. I do not see a better credible option.

And since he knows a good deal when he sees it, he must be right about Global Warming! 🙂

It’s all a Vast Right-Wing Capitalist Conspiracy!! 🙂

Tranforming America

In this presidential cycle, voters in both parties, to the surprise of the punditocracy, are rejecting experienced political leaders. They’re willfully suspending disbelief in challengers who would have been considered laughable in earlier years.

Polls show more Republicans preferring three candidates who have never held elective office over 14 candidates who have served a combined total of 150 years as governors or in Congress. Most Democrats are declining to favor a candidate who spent eight years in the White House and the Senate and four as secretary of state.

And going in larger numbers for the complete Socialist package with little baggage, Bernie Sanders.

Psephologists of varying stripes attribute this discontent to varying causes. Conservatives blame insufficiently aggressive Republican congressional leaders. Liberals blame Hillary Clinton’s closeness to plutocrats and her home email system.

But in our system the widespread rejection of experienced leaders ultimately comes from dismay at the leader in the White House. In 1960 Richard Nixon, after eight years as vice president and six in Congress, campaigned on the slogan “Experience counts.” No one is running on that theme this year.

Nixon could, because over the preceding quarter-century the majority of Americans mostly approved of the performance of incumbent presidents. Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower still look pretty good more than 50 years later.

Barack Obama doesn’t. His deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes recently said that the president’s nuclear weapons deal with Iran was as important an achievement of his second term as Obamacare was of the first. Historians may well agree.

These two policy achievements have many things in common.

Both were unpopular when proposed and still are now. In March 2010 Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that people would know, and presumably like, what was in the bill after it was passed. But most Americans didn’t like it then and most don’t today, five and a half years later. As for the Iran deal, Pew Research reports it has only 21 percent approval today, much lower than Obamacare in 2010.

But since both are on THE AGENDA, they and The Ministry of Truth are happy.

What “the American People” want is irrelevant nowadays. It’s what The Agenda wants, whether it’s The Democrats or The Republican Elite RINOs.

Both Obamacare and the Iran deal were bulldozed through Congress through legislative legerdemain. Democrats passed Obamacare by using the temporary 60-vote Senate supermajority gained through a Minnesota recount and the wrongful prosecution of Sen. Ted Stevens. After they lost the 60th vote, they resorted to a dubious legislative procedure.

The Agenda is The Agenda.

This year Obama labeled the Iran treaty an executive agreement, and Congress concocted a process requiring only a one-third-plus-one rather than a two-thirds vote for approval. Only 38 percent of members of Congress supported it. Many, such as House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, did so only after saying that they never would have accepted it in negotiations.

But the Republicans, allegedly in control of Congress,  willfully submitted to this slight of hand rather than stand on the principles that got them elected in the first place.

And they have done this REPEATEDLY. The Minority (Democrats) are still in control of Congress.

In 2008 Obama promised he would “fundamentally transform” America, and Obamacare and the Iran deal are indeed fundamental transformations of policy –transformations most Americans oppose.

But are on THE AGENDA, so they must be.

Obamacare assumed that financial crisis and recession would make most voters supportive of, or amenable to, bigger government. But as National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru points out, polling doesn’t show that. Obama assumed that if America could “extend a hand” to such propitiated enemies as the mullahs of Iran, they would become friends with us. Most Americans think that’s delusional. No wonder voters are angry.

So he goes out an gets more Illegals to vote for Democrats instead. After all, it’s about the power of Homo Superior Liberalis. The Agenda is The Agenda.

Republican voters are frustrated and angry because for six years they have believed they have public opinion on their side, but their congressional leaders have failed to prevail on high visibility issues. Their successes (clamping down on domestic discretionary spending) have been invisible. They haven’t made gains through compromise because Obama, unlike his two predecessors, lacks both the inclination and ability to make deals.

Rigid Ideologues and weak spined Republicans will do that.

So Republicans who imposed harsh litmus tests in previous presidential cycles (like asking candidates if they’ve ever supported a tax increase, or if they’ve ever wavered in their opposition to abortion) are flocking to Donald Trump, a candidate who would fail every one of them. They are paying little attention to candidates — Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal — who advance serious proposals to change public policy.

Because, we don’t believe them. The proof is in the Jar Jar Boehner and Mitch The Ditch pudding.

In polls, Democratic voters have stayed loyal to the president. But to listen to their candidates (and maybe-candidate Joe Biden) you would think we are in our seventh year of oppression by a right-wing administration. You don’t hear much about the virtues of Obamacare or the Iran deal — or “choice.”

Of course not, it’s still, Vote for Me, the “other guy” is an asshole. The “other guy” is still the fear mongering and “Bush” narratives. Grandma is still going be thrown out in the street by evil White, Male, Rich Republicans. The candy is still going to be stolen from babies by evil, heartless Conservatives.

The narrative hasn’t changed because The Democrats haven’t changed.

Most Americans hoped the first black president would improve race relations. Now most Americans believe they have gotten worse.

White Guilt has bit them in the asp!

And so a president who came to office with relatively little experience has managed to tarnish experience, incumbency and institutions: a fundamental transformation indeed. (Michael Barone)

The Real Questions

Kurt Schlichter: CNN’s Republican debate on September 16^th will be conducted with dignity and gravitas by questioners like Hugh Hewitt and Jake Tapper, who will treat the candidates with a level of respect and courtesy that many of them just don’t deserve. They have to. I don’t.

On behalf of all infuriated conservatives, I demand the right to interrogate the candidates myself. I get to ask a question and a follow-up, and here are the rules. First, answer the damn question. It insults me when you think I’ll somehow forget what I asked, so bewitching is your oratory. Second, answer, then stop talking. If you use more words than the Gettysburg Address (272) you are so, so very wrong. Third, no clichés. If you use the phrase “for the children,” I get to slap you.

Here goes:

Jeb! Bush:

You support amnesty and Common Core, you won’t undo the Iran sellout of Israel on your first day in office and – as we always expected – you’ve come out in support of more gun control. Since you have adopted Hillary’s platform, why are you running as a Republican?

HILARIOUS! 🙂

Why are you so damn special that despite there being 320 million other Americans, we can’t do any better than a third Bush?

Yeah, baby, why do we have to have another Bush?

Dr. Ben Carson:

You’re proud of not being a politician, but what makes you think D.C.’s establishment won’t chew you up and spit you out?

You’re a guy with tremendous accomplishments, morals, and character. Why do you even want to go to Washington?

The place that operates on none of those to begin with.

Jim Gilmore:

Can you name one person you aren’t related to who wants you to be president?

In fact, are you even supposed to be here on stage tonight?

Where’s Bobbi Jindal? 🙂 Who the fuck are you anways?

Chris Christie:

Let’s deal with the elephant in the room – what the hell were you thinking snuggling up to Obama?

🙂 I like these questions.

Other than talking incessantly about killing terrorists – which is cool – in what way are you even remotely a conservative?

Hehehehehehehehehe…..

Carly Fiorina:

You’re the only female running in the GOP primaries. Would you even be on this stage if you were a dude?

You were a senior officer in a huge corporation that did a lot of government work. Why should we conservatives believe you won’t be just another crony capitalist shafting us and stealing our money for the benefit of your corporate pals?

🙂  “The First Female President” PC crap applies to you to, dear.

Lindsey Graham:

Conservatives detest you, and the feeling is mutual. Are you in this as some sort of establishment stalking horse to make sure a real conservative doesn’t derail Jeb! by snagging South Carolina’s delegates?

Yes,why do we need a  RINO in The White House too?.

Anything else interesting that you’d like to tell us tonight?

Doubt it.

John Kasich:

You decided to go along with Obamacare in Ohio. Why, as a conservative would I ever support you in the primary over someone committed to the destruction of that socialist atrocity?

Not that the present RINOs didn’t in fact run on destroying it and then kissed its ass after the election. What make us think you wouldn’t do the same thing?

Nothing.

Like many, even most, conservatives, I think you’re a smug, sanctimonious jerk who hides his self-righteousness behind a vague, unfocused aura of pseudo-Christian progressivism. Why should I allow you to spend four to eight years in my face telling me how I don’t measure up to your allegedly Jesus-inspired standards?

Good one.

George Pataki:

Since I really have no idea why you’re running, let me just ask you this: Who’s more badass, Captain Kirk or Picard?

Star Wars or Doctor Who?

Marco Rubio:

My family is half Cuban, and we loved you and your life story until you lied to us about amnesty – no, that’s not an invitation for you to try to convince us how your past embrace of amnesty was not really an embrace of amnesty. You lied to me once – why should I ever believe anything you ever say again?

I agree completely.

Here’s your chance to be clear – do you agree with me and most conservatives that America has zero moral obligation to illegal aliens, that they should receive no government benefits, and that they should leave our country?

Now, careful, you might just be a “racist”. 🙂

Ted Cruz:

I think you are a genius lawyer and a true conservative, but you are off-putting to people who aren’t movement conservatives and I fear your candidacy would be Goldwater II: The Revenge. Do the math for me – how can you possibly win 270 electoral votes?

Wouldn’t you better serve conservatism as Chief Justice Ted Cruz?

Can a Cruz missile hit the right target or just explode in our faces when running against Bernie Sanders or Hillary?

Rand Paul:

Like your father, I can listen to you for a couple minutes, find myself nodding in agreement, and then BAM! you say something nutty, usually about foreign policy. How can I be sure you will do the most important thing a president must do – relentlessly and ruthlessly kill America’s enemies?

Chemtrails. Are they a thing?

Just how stable are you?

Scott Walker:

The idea behind your campaign seemed to be that you’re a normal guy who would return us to normalcy, but we conservatives don’t want normalcy anymore. We want vengeance. Will you commit to ruthlessly annihilating liberalism wherever you find it?

More specifically, will you commit to destroying all federal government employee unions?

We need some Wisconsin union missile strikes, not just a guy from Wisconsin.

Mike Huckabee:

You combine a love of big government with a kind of religious paternalism that evokes an unholy love child of LBJ and Elmer Gantry. Can you sketch me out a scenario where you win the general election that doesn’t involve someone releasing tapes of Hillary gleefully vivisecting corgi puppies?

You play bass. Really, is that a president’s instrument?

Bill Clinton played Sax, look what that got us.

Bobby Jindal:

As an Asian-American, can the GOP win over that growing minority group by addressing the systemic racism they face because of Democrat-dominated universities’ admissions policies?

I think you’d be a good president, but I don’t think you can win. Shouldn’t you agree to come on board with someone up here on stage who might win and agree to be his/her HHS secretary?

Be useful.

Rick Santorum:

You lost your Senate seat in Pennsylvania back in 2006, meaning you have failed in every election campaign since 2000. Why is this time different?

It won’t be.

My country is falling apart and, like most conservatives, that’s my No. 1 priority. Why should I vote for you and re-fight the gay marriage battle that we’ve already decisively lost instead of saving our Constitution from these leftist creeps?

And are you the man to do it?

Donald Trump:

Yeah, it’s been a lot of fun watching you make the GOP establishment wince by raising subjects like illegal alien thugs that the elite wants hushed up. We’ve had some laughs. But if you are elected president, you will be the commander-in-chief. This is a no gotcha question – I led soldiers for 27 years, so this is personal to me and to millions of conservatives whose sons, daughters, mothers, and fathers serve. Can you give me one good reason why you are worthy of our trust to lead and to safeguard the lives of the incredible men and women of our armed forces?

I don’t have a follow-up to that question, because at the end of the day, no other question really matters.

This isn’t “Celebrity Apprentice”. You don’t get to vote someone off every week, you have to deal with these assholes for 4 years at least. Can you handle that without saying “You’re Fired” and throwing childish insults at them every week?

These are the questions no one will ask.

The there’s the Iran Deal. Where you give the #1 state sponsor of Terrorism in the World $150 Billion dollars as a bonus gift to develop Nuclear Weapons that they won’t use for …TERRORISM!  <<dramatic music sting>>

So what do think about that?

The No Weenie Congress

Hey GOP establishment, how about, for once, you cause your opponents pain instead your allies? You’ve managed to win back both houses of Congress – by which I mean we conservatives won them back for you – and since then you’ve accomplished exactly nothing. President Fail is handing the mullahs the Bomb, Obamacare remains a thing, and Planned Parenthood is still dismembering babies on our dime. The president has a bully pulpit and you’re satisfied with the legislative branch being a weenie pulpit.

Or being the nerd who gets the wedgie on the playground and then says, “Thank you, Mr President, may I have another!”

But the creaky Boehner and McConnell machine can choose to succeed at something other than failure. It can use the Congress to deal some pain to the left. Sure, that will require guts and a commitment to the conservative cause, but maybe the rise of Donald Trump has scared these squishes enough to fake having them.

Naw, I think they are too committed to be Squishy RINOs afraid of their own political shadows. They talk tough, sometimes, but no action.

Here is some potential legislation that might do some good if enacted, but more importantly, will put the Democrats in both houses in unpleasant, painful positions going into an election year. Yeah, I know, the filibuster…blah blah blah. How about we opt to nuke it before The Lightbringer’s new buddies in Tehran decide to nuke Tel Aviv – and before the grassroots of your party decides to nuke you a year from November?

Amen!

Here’s some Climate Change for ya! Courtesy of our Obama Allies.

1. The Second Amendment Protection Act. For years, Democrats in state and local governments have infringed upon the civil rights of Americans by unjustly preventing them from exercising their right to keep and bear arms throughout our great nation as God intended. Anti-gun laws in cryptofascist states and localities have unfairly victimized far too many decent Americans.

You don’t stop being an American protected by the Bill of Rights simply because you set foot into the State of New York. That’s why we need a law that will allow all American citizens the right to exercise their Second Amendment freedom to keep and bear arms, concealed or openly as each citizen chooses, free of the constraints imposed by gunophobic state and local governments. Yeah, there will be some whining about federalism from the Republican bow tie n’ perpetual virginity crowd, but who cares?

2. The National Voter ID and Election Integrity Act. Why can’t the federal government generate a national voting ID card and distribute it free to Americans who can’t manage to find their local DMV? The law, of course, will also require a photo ID for any federal election voter. A huge majority of Americans recognize that asking for ID is no infringement except upon those who want to commit fraud, or who are frankly too damn stupid to be voting anyway.

Ge ready for the all-out nuclear tactic of “racism” though. You have to have ID to do the most mundane things in life, but if you ask an illegal for an ID or any Liberal to vote, it’s “racism!”.

Get over it.

3. The Liberal Donor Class Windfall Profits Tax. It’s time that Democrats’ favored interest groups paid their fair share! After all, those tech guys in Silicon Valley didn’t build that. They got the benefit of California’s fine infrastructure, outstanding schools, and superb business environment [*Struggles to not giggle hysterically*]. How about a 50% tax on their earnings?

Or maybe we could take Hollywood Liberal Actors, especially the one who make millions per picture. Now there’s a healthy tax. 🙂

The same with Hollywood – it’s time for the people who support Obama with lavish fundraisers to raise some funds for working American families! Spielberg, Streisand, all you Kardashians – 50% of your earnings is a small price to pay for social justice!

I agree. 🙂 Put YOUR money where your Liberal mouth is!

Oh, and any income from lobbying after serving in any governmental position? Yep, taxed 50%. Or may 90%. For America.

How about we just ban them all together. Call the Inside The Beltway Inside Trader Ban Act.

Go work at McDonalds for $15/hr like you advocate.

4. The Use the Taxes on Drivers for Drivers Act. You know that gas tax you pay every time you fill up the tank? Much of it is passed out to leftist constituencies to pay for buses, subways and bike lanes.  (or in Phoenix- Light rail boondoggles) How about a law that forces gas taxes to be used solely for improving roads? No more subsidies to underwrite Democrat inner city bus systems and light rail boondoggles. 🙂 No more pleasing rich liberals in dorky cycling shorts by forcing us normal people to pay for their stupid bike lanes.

We promise if you tax yourself into the poor house we may just built that city park for the children…

5. The College Student Civil Rights Act. Let’s make it easy to sue your university. Academia is a festering pustule on our society, and it’s time to lance the boil and drain the progressivism!

That’s one BIG swampy Tar Pit of Liberalism that is so overgrown is there anything else left that it hasn’t sucked down it maw?

We’ve all seen how young men are victimized by froth-mouthed feminists eager to convict them of the crime of existing while male.

Down with heteropatriarchy! White Privilege BS!

We’ve also seen how goose-stepping administrators and commie professors seek to control the free-speech of these young Americans.

You too can have an American Flag on campus!

It’s time to protect our students‘ rights by applying expanded federal civil rights protections to the students of any university that takes even a penny of government funds. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to due process – now, who could ever be against those [*snickers deviously*]? And if the student wins, he gets his attorneys fees!

🙂

There are many possible new laws that would be both great public policy and annoy our opponents. GOP congresslosers just need to locate the fortitude to pass them. Sure, Obama will veto them, but it’ll force his few remaining minions on Capitol Hill to take stands their constituents will hate.

But it requires The RINOs to grow a pair, of horns to blow and to stick to the Left. Be prepared to be called “extremists” by the extremists, “racists” by the liberal race-baiting squads, and “homophobic bigots” but the liberal “tolerance” and “diversity” Ministry of Truth.

They are going to do it anyhow, so you might as well do something with it that is more than “Thank you, Mr. President. Can I have another!”

The GOP establishment hacks will resist because they think they’ve gone to D.C. to govern. Well, we don’t want or need governing. We want and need the destruction of the liberal edifice Barack Obama and his cronies have built.

Govern later. Right now, we need to sack the Liberal Rome. Visigoths Unite!

We need to use every bit of power at our disposal against our opponents. No, it’s not as much fun as guzzling free Dewar’s on the tab of some K Street lobbyist, but too bad. GOP establishment, get off your sorry rears and get something done for a change. (Kurt Schlichter)

AMEN!

Special Needs Education

A new Rasmussen poll shows most Americans favor a wall on our southern border to stop uncontrolled immigration and that 80% want illegal alien felons deported. What about this do our elites not understand?

They understand their Agenda. It’s you who don’t understand that THEIR Agenda and their narcissism is far more important to them than grubby little old smelly you.

The 51% majority in favor of a wall broke down to 70% of Republicans, 57% of independents and a 30% plurality of Democrats. On illegal immigrant felons, 92% of Republicans, 69% of Democrats and 82% of independents want them sent home.

So what? That’s not on The Agenda, so it doesn’t matter.

These percentages represent sizable upticks in public support for the rule of law on immigration. Americans are tired of the law being ignored and city, state and federal officials collaborating in the law-breaking.

But the one’s in power are not. They want them for Votes and cheap labor. That way it’s self-perpetuating power for them.

With such poll numbers, getting behind the majority would seem a no-brainer for elected representatives. But the politicians, along with bureaucrats and nongovernment organizations, resist at every turn.

Because that’s not on THEIR Agenda.

Maybe that’s why sentiment has crystallized behind solutions such as walls and deportation. And why some eloquent cries for justice and democratic representation have been heard in unlikely places.

All the way from the 710 freeway corridor in Los Angeles, a gritty industrial area with many black and Latino residents, a Compton man showed up in Arizona last month to tell thousands at a Donald Trump rally about his talented football-star son who was murdered by illegals in cold blood.

Shortly afterward, citizens of nearby Huntington Park rose up against the nomination by one cynical councilman to city boards of two illegals who couldn’t even qualify for the DREAM Act. The mayor approved the appointments on the grounds there was no difference in the value of citizenship or immigrating illegally.

The outrage in Huntington Park evoked last year’s revolt in middle-class Murrieta, Calif., where federal officials tried to sneak busloads of illegals into the community and dump them at local bus stops. The opposition there was also led by black, Latino and Middle Eastern residents, many of them legal immigrants.

In both cases, residents were protesting against public officials who failed to respect the will of the people.

But it’s the will of the Politicians and their own personal power that matters, right? 🙂

All this started in California in 1998, when a federal judge overturned Proposition 187 denying public services, including education, for illegals. Voters strongly opposed the court’s ruling, but Democrats let it stand after they took power in Sacramento.

A floodgate of benefits has been open ever since. Along with education came “free” health care, college scholarships and special “centers” to attend to illegals’ special needs.

Because some “citizens” are more equal than others. 🙂

In 2003, Gov. Gray Davis was thrown out of office by voters in a recall referendum for attempting to issue driver’s licenses to illegals. Today, despite continued public opposition, illegals get licenses for the asking, and the DMV has hired an extra thousand employees just to process all the askers.

As for rule of law, forget it. This summer, two California women were murdered by illegals — one in broad daylight on San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf and the other in a horrific home invasion in Santa Maria. Both suspects had the special protection of sanctuary cities where they needn’t worry about being deported.

Evidence is now mounting that illegals are casting ballots in California elections, with highly suspicious voting drives noted in areas in which they dominate. In a little-covered move earlier this month, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill allowing noncitizen “immigrants” to work at polling precincts to help process all the non-English speakers. (IBD)

The Democrats want to welcome the new class of Welfare Democrat voters. They don’t care if there are murderers,rapists, or terrorists in with them. That’s justice the price to be paid by you for their power. It’s no big deal to them. It’s not like you matter.

You’re sheep, and you’ll do as you are told. And if that doesn’t work then we’ll just remind you how heartless, mean, and racist you are for opposing us. 🙂

Ideological Warriors of The Faith

Liberals are famous for shaming conservatives for their past associations with questionable characters, while they exempt themselves from the same standards. What a shocker!

For thee, not for me.

Every other week, a liberal Twitter troll cites a Republican politician’s innocent appearance at some long-forgotten political event with the likes of a Ku Klux Klan member, hoping to besmirch his reputation. Better yet, sometimes one of them will post a black-and-white photo of such an appearance, as if it’s a smoking gun that will end the hapless Republican’s career.

It shouldn’t surprise you that liberals had no problem with Sen. Robert Byrd’s despicable association with the KKK. A typical liberal defender would say: “Oh, my gosh! This man was a pillar of progressivism. He cared deeply for people. He was the conscience of the Senate.”

How about Sen. Ted Kennedy? Liberals couldn’t have cared less that any other person would have been charged with manslaughter for his role in the death of Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick. Their attitude was: “Why, he is the ‘Lion of the Senate.’ No one cares more about the poor than he does.”

President Bill Clinton? As the most powerful man on the planet, he sexually harassed a young female intern in the White House, directly lied about it to the American people and committed felony perjury, for starters. Yet liberals still regard him as a man of unsurpassed class and virtue.

The Rev. Al Sharpton? The examples are endless.

Why do you suppose that is?

The reason is that for liberals, the acid test for one’s moral character is his ideology. Does the person support progressive causes? If so, it doesn’t much matter what he did in the past.

Present or future, for that matter.

That’s not the case for Republicans. Even an accidental brush with a bad person or cause is fair game because conservatives, on balance, can’t be good people — even those with an unblemished record of selfless service.

I’m still waiting for the “he slapped his baby sister from his high chair, a woman, so he obviously has hated women since then” because  it fits the mode of the Liberal attack and the Liberal media.

Romney’s “47%” was a national scourge. But “attacks” on Hillary for the emails & Benghazi are “just politics”.

The Planned Parenthood tapes are “edited” and “an attack of women” so they are “just politics”.

Remember the George Bush AWOL letter that was proven to be a fake “but what was written on it was true” back in 2004 by none other than Dan Rather. He was interviewed in 2013 still asserting he was correct “none has proven it was a fake” in his mind.

Liberals, as I have said many times, in their own heads have no capacity for being wrong about anything, ever.

That’s the narcissist faith they have in their absolute superiority and their inability to admit when they are clearly wrong.

Their ideology is perfect. All you have to do is believe it, or else. And if it doesn’t work, it’s someone elses fault because they are perfect.

Take Ken Starr, who served as independent counsel to investigate the Clintons. He was as pure as Snow White. But you don’t mess with Bill. Despite his stellar professional and personal record, the Clinton war room and the liberal media savaged him as a devious pervert.

Today we are witnessing another glaring example of this double standard. Planned Parenthood has been all over the news with the release of a series of horrifying videos showing it harvested and sold the organs of aborted babies.

Every decent American would condemn Planned Parenthood for this practice, right? Wrong. According to many progressives, conservative filmmakers selectively edited the videos to defame this noble organization, which provides “essential services for women.”

And now it’s a “war on women” you misogynist pigs if you bring it up. The Left’s favorite phrase for anything that involves women and their ideology being questioned.

And there are plenty of Liberals out there who will defend “the woman’s right to choose” to the death (and harvesting of organs and body parts) of any woman or child.

It’s a matter of Ideology. The truth doesn’t matter.

The Ideology is strong. The Ideology is right. The Ideology is Moral. The Ideology is Sacrosanct.  The Ideology shall not be questioned.

Especially, not by you grubby, illiterate, baseless, evil morons who oppose them politically.

To oppose them is to be the Anti-Christ, even though many of them hate Christians too anyways.

They are Holy, you are not.

Liberals protect progressive organizations, but none more than those that perform abortions, for abortion is the foremost sacrament of the religion of liberalism. Liberals will protect Planned Parenthood at all costs because it is darn near a holy shrine.

Planned Parenthood’s sacred stature is also seen in the recent brouhaha over the Smithsonian Institution’s display of a sculpture of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, in its “Struggle for Justice” exhibit.

A group of black pastors from nine states demanded the removal of the statue because of Sanger’s ties to the eugenics movement. “Sanger may have been a lot of things,” the pastors wrote in a letter to the Smithsonian, “but a ‘champion of justice’ she definitely was not. Perhaps the Gallery is unaware that Ms. Sanger supported black eugenics, a racist attitude toward black and other minority babies; an elitist attitude toward those she regarded as ‘the feeble minded;’ speaking at rallies of Ku Klux Klan women; and communications with Hitler sympathizers. Also, the notorious ‘Negro Project,’ which sought to limit, if not eliminate black births, was her brainchild. Despite these well-documented facts of history, her bust sits proudly in your gallery as a hero of justice. The obvious incongruity is staggering!”

The Democrats overwhelmingly supported Slavery and then Racial Discrimination from the founding of the country until AFTER the passage of The Civil Right Acts they opposed in the mid-Sixities but try to educate them on that and you’ll get a supernova of hate-filled fire & brimstone expelled at inhuman speed in your direction.

HOW DARE YOU!

The past is an “inconvenient truth” for Democrats and Liberals. Their own is inconventient to their holiness and inconvenient for their opponents because they will make the smallest, most innocuous (or even fabricated) mole mill into a mountain taller than Everest.

It’s what they do.

Martin Luther King, one of the great pillars of The Civil Rights Movement itself is now the target of Liberal ire because if you use his speeches and quotes against their race baiting you are “mind raping” black people, especially if you’re an evil cracker! (white). You just want to shut them up and shut them down if you talk about “I Have a Dream”.

The Smithsonian callously denied the request, saying that the bust serves its goal to “see the past clearly and objectively” and that though some of Sanger’s beliefs “are now controversial,” her inclusion represents the “full spectrum of the American experience.”

See, an “inconvenient truth”. 🙂

Translation: Liberals value abortion more than they do African-Americans. There is no way anyone can say “objectively” that Sanger was a champion of justice for African-Americans or that her horrific views were merely “controversial.”

More Blacks are aborted in New York City alone than are born there. An inconvenient truth.

In 2012, black women in New York City aborted over 6,500 more children than they gave birth to. Data from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shows that, among non-hispanic black women, there were 31,328 “induced terminations” to 24,758 live births.

In total, there were almost 74,000 abortions in New York in 2012, meaning that 42.4 percent of all abortions were of black children. Hispanic children accounted for 31 percent of those aborted in the city at a total of nearly 23,000. Altogether, black and Hispanic abortions were 73 percent of the total of 73,815 abortions in New York in 2012. (NRO)

Point this out to a liberal and you’ll get a spew of hatred about “political” and “anti-choice” and hating freedom and probably end up being called a racist and a hater of women in one long vitriolic spew.

This is stunning when you consider the lengths liberals go to pander for the black vote. They must figure that the objections are mostly coming from black pastors whose theology is light-years from that of such progressive blacks as Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

And I still wonder what the Jews will do when Israel is nuked by Iran. Jews are overwhelmingly Democrats, even though the Democrat policies and elites are clearly anti-Semites.

But the Ideology is what matters, not the truth. The ultimate in Orwellian conditioning.

2+2=5 because the Party Ideology says so.

It would be interesting to see how the Smithsonian would react if Sharpton and Jackson joined these pastors.

So while liberals are trying to purge America of symbols of its history of slavery, they are protecting the patron saint of abortion, whose attitude toward blacks was more despicable than that of a slaveholder. She believed that reducing the black population, even if it meant killing the unborn, would purify the human race.

If enough attention were called to these types of things and a sufficient number of blacks began to realize that liberals have been using them for their votes, we might see a sea change in American politics.

But the Liberal Media is is in full “bury it”, “discredit it” mode.

For now, we must just marvel at liberals’ cynicism, double standards and hypocrisy. But one of these days, their conflicting “values” are going to come home to roost. (David Limbaugh)

One can only hope. But their narcissism and sanctimony is what keeps them warm in this cold, cold, racist world full of “haters”. 🙂

 

Sowell Thoughts & More

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

Stupid people can cause problems, but it usually takes brilliant people to create a real catastrophe.

The stupid people are usually following the really brilliant one.

President Obama’s “agreement” with Iran looks very much like “the emperor’s new clothes.” We are supposed to pretend that there is something there, when there is nothing there that will stop, or even slow down, Iran’s development of a nuclear bomb.

But it accomplishes the Agenda and makes HIM and the stupid sheep that groupthink his talking points feel better.

The endlessly repeated argument that most Americans are the descendants of immigrants ignores the fact that most Americans are NOT the descendants of ILLEGAL immigrants. Millions of immigrants from Europe had to stop at Ellis Island, and had to meet medical and other criteria before being allowed to go any further.

And so what if violent crime is up because of them, at least they vote for Democrats…

Governor Bobby Jindal: “I realize that the best way to make news is to mention Donald Trump. … So, I’ve decided to randomly put his name into my remarks at various points, thereby ensuring that the news media will cover what I have to say.” Governor Jindal’s outstanding record in Louisiana should have gotten him far more attention from the media than Trump’s bombast.

Because the “unbiased” “journalist” in the media only want to cover the dark side of anyone who isn’t on the leftist agenda.

Since July 14–when the first video from the Center for Medical Progress’ (CMP) undercover investigation was released–the networks had 243 hours and 30 minutes of morning and evening broadcasts.

Total: 14,610 Minutes. so 23 minutes = .00157% of the news air time. So how much has been spent hyping and sniping at Donald Trump? 🙂

Of that number, only 1 minute and 13 seconds was devoted to the Planned Parenthood videos with the accompanying audio. Concerning any kind of coverage the CMP videos received from the Big Three, a total of 23 minutes and 32 seconds were devoted to the story from all three networks. CBS proved to be the network that gave the most time to the story, with 14 minutes and 59 seconds worth of general coverage. They only gave the audio/video a minute worth of airtime. Katie Yoder of the Media Research Center  crunched the numbers:

MRC Culture searched Nexis and watched news shows to count the time spent on Planned Parenthood. We included stories that the media connected to Planned Parenthood videos (for example, the Senate’s vote on Planned Parenthood). We did not include teasers.NBC total coverage of CMP videos: 6 minutes, 52 seconds

13 seconds playing actual CMP footage with audio

ABC total coverage of CMP videos: 1 minute, 41 seconds

0 seconds playing actual CMP footage with audio

CBS total coverage of CMP videos: 14 minutes, 59 seconds

1 minute playing actually CMP footage with audio

GRAND TOTAL of network coverage of CMP videos: 23 minutes, 32 seconds

GRAND TOTAL of CMP video content played with audio: 1 minute, 13 seconds

Yoder also mentioned that in September of 2012, the Big Three devoted 88 minutes over the course of three days after Mitt Romney made his infamous “47 percent” remarks. Donald Sterling, former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers, and his secretly recorded remarks garnered 146 minutes worth of airtime from the networks.

I guess the editorial boardrooms of ABC, NBC, and CBS still believe that possibly felonious human body parts sales are just the edited vignettes* of a rabid anti-abortion activist’s imagination. Or maybe they still think, like White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, that Planned Parenthood has a “high ethical standard,” so this must be a hack job.  Earnest admitted that he didn’t really watch the videos. Hillary Clinton’s campaign said the former first lady hasn’t watched either.

So, is this the same ole’ liberal media? Yeah, that’s probably the reason.  It also explains why so many Americans haven’t heard about the CMP investigation.  (Townhall)

In her latest book, “Adios, America!” Ann Coulter says, “if Romney had won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2012, instead of 27 percent, he still would have lost. On the other hand, had he won just 4 percent more of the white vote, he would have won.”

But white people are politically incorrect so you can’t target a campaign at them. You have to target it at people who have been conditioned over a lifetime to hate you instead!

Despite an old saying that taxes are the price we pay for civilization, an absolute majority of the record-breaking tax money collected by the federal government today is simply transferred by politicians from people who are not likely to vote for them to people who are more likely to vote for them.

And the government is STILL spending more than it takes in, and they are proud of it!

They’ve “reduced” the deficit. Aka, they overspend less than they were. That’s because WE are paying more than we ever have!!

Do the people who are always demanding that there be more “training” for police ever say that the hoodlums that the police have to deal with should have had more training by their parents, instead of being allowed to grow wild, like weeds?

Discipline? Are nuts!! That’s cruel. Parents don’t want to have anything to do with it, and teaching people to be responsible for their actions, forget about it.

Narcissism Rules!

Europe is belatedly discovering how unbelievably stupid it was to import millions of people from cultures that despise Western values and which often promote hatred toward the people who have let them in.

But at least ours vote for Democrats, right? 🙂

There are so many conservative Republican candidates for the party’s presidential nomination that they may once again split the conservative vote so many ways as to guarantee that the nomination will go to some mushy moderate.

Or the Elites in the party will grant it to us.

Barack Obama wrote a book titled “The Audacity of Hope.” His own career, however, might more accurately be titled “The Mendacity of Hype.”

With all its staggering horrors and insanities, World War II may yet turn out to have been just a dress rehearsal for the ultimate catastrophe of a nuclear-armed terrorist nation like Iran. We seem oblivious to the possibility that we may be leaving our children and grandchildren at the mercy of people who have demonstrated repeatedly that they have no mercy.

But at least they won’t have nuclear weapons… 🙂

No matter how many federal felony laws Hillary Clinton may have violated by using her own personal email account to do her work as Secretary of State, she is unlikely to face any legal consequences. President Obama can pardon her, as he can pardon Lois Lerner or the head of the Internal Revenue Service or others who may have violated federal laws during his administration.

It’s not like she’s General Patreaus, or even Richard Nixon!! 🙂

When Jeb Bush allowed hecklers shouting “Black lives matter” to drive him off the stage in Las Vegas, he may have given us a clue as to what kind of president he would be. We ignored too many clues about Barack Obama before putting him in the White House. There is no excuse for ignoring clues about another candidate now. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan letting hecklers drive him off the stage?

Nope. But Jeb Bush is the perfect squishy Elite RHINO for the job. Just enough nothing-there to make the Elites happy.

Donald Trump has credited his political donations with getting Hillary Clinton to come to his wedding. What kind of man would want Hillary Clinton at his wedding, much less boast of having her there?

A salute to Bill O’Reilly for being one of the very few people in the media to talk plain common sense about the disintegration of the black family, and the resulting social problems that followed.

Ronald Reagan won two landslide victories with the help of “Reagan Democrats.” These were voters who usually voted for Democrats but were now voting for Reagan. He got these voters by winning them over to his policy agenda — not by adjusting his policy agenda to them, as the Republican establishment today seems to think is the way to expand their constituency.

Appeasement doesn’t work. Period. Even on Democrats.

Trump Card

While I am not a Trump Sycophant, the points made are true.

Politics: As the presidential debate approaches, the Republican establishment is at a loss to figure out Donald Trump’s runaway popularity. That’s easy: The GOP base is fed up with its mealy-mouthed, impotent leaders.

Republican voters see their party’s recently crowned congressional kingpins, as well as the career pols running for the White House, as all talk and no action, while Trump comes across as someone who’d actually get things done.

The real estate magnate is tapping into frustration mainly over GOP Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s and House Speaker John Boehner’s failure to deliver on promises made during the 2014 campaign.

McConnell and Boehner have the power of the purse, yet they’ve punted on promises to defund executive amnesty for illegal immigrants, the Affordable Care Act, the Dodd-Frank Act, HUD’s plan to remap the suburbs and, most recently, Planned Parenthood.

Repealing ObamaCare was the cornerstone of their message to the GOP faithful in 2014. In October alone, they ran more than 35,000 TV ads promising to scrap it. They also flooded the airways with 10,000 commercials vowing to block Obama’s unconstitutional order suspending enforcement of immigration laws.

Then they gave into so fast the spin didn’t have time to snap your head off.

On these messages, Republicans were swept back into power. The day after their victory, McConnell and Boehner wrote a national column pledging to make good on their many pledges. But once seated, they agreed with Democrats to fully fund ObamaCare. They also failed to pass a Homeland Security bill blocking Obamamnesty.

They had no convictions, just more BS.

McConnell’s impotence was on display again Monday when he failed to pass a bill to end taxpayer funding for organ-harvesting abortion clinics. A week earlier, he forced through an amendment reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, a bastion of crony capitalism.

Last year he complained “many bills that passed the Republican-led House in recent years were never even brought to a vote by the Democratic Senate majority,” adding “many passed with bipartisan support — only to gather dust in a Democratic-controlled Senate that kept them from ever reaching the president’s desk.”

Now they reach his desk with their approval. That’s not what the American People signed up for.

But nothing’s really changed in McConnell’s Senate, where the now-Democrat minority filibusters bills to death. He could have nuked the filibuster like his predecessor Harry Reid, but he’s refused to wield such power for fear of media backlash. What good is a GOP Congress when Obama has had to veto only four bills, while getting virtually all his radical nominees approved?

Minority Rule. Yeah, that’s why we gave the Republican a Majority, so they could let the tyrannical Majority be the Tyrannical minority!

Unlike the GOP political class, Trump is not cowed by the inside-the-Beltway crowd. He gives it right back, which is why he’s leading his closest rival by 2-to-1.

That said, Trump is no conservative panacea. Many of his policy positions, past and present, are a problem, as are his generous donations to Democrats.

In fact, his $34,000 gift to Democratic campaign committees in the 2006 election cycle helped put Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi in power. Two years later, they rammed through the medical and financial regulations that McConnell and Boehner can’t roll back.

By breaking their word, these two leaders could deliver the presidential nomination to a candidate whose Republican credentials, if not his swagger, are in doubt.

And “Jar Jar” Boehner and the Wimpy McConnell have only themselves to blame for it. They said one thing and did the opposite, yet again.

But do I think Trump will get the nomination?

No.

The Republican Elites like Boehner and McConnnell will get together with their Democrat Like-minds with the Media in tow and sabotage him (Nuke him) because he’s not what THEY want.

In the end, it’s not what the people want that matters to Republicans in DC, and that’s why Trump is winning right now.

Kids Count

Ever since President Obama took office, the poverty rate among children has soared to 22 percent, with three million more children living in poor conditions, according to an authoritative new report released Tuesday.

A higher percentage of children live in poverty now than did during the Great Recession, according to a new report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation released Tuesday.

The 2015 “KIDS COUNT” report from the Annie E. Casey Foundation said that the percentage of children living in poverty jumped from 18 percent in 2008, the year Obama was elected, to 22 percent in 2013. It added that the rate dropped from 2012 to 2013, in line with the improving economy.

About 22% of children in the U.S. lived below the poverty line in 2013, compared with 18% in 2008, the foundation’s 2015 Kids Count Data Book reported. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Human and Health Service’s official poverty line was $23,624 for a family with two adults and two children.

“The fact that it’s happening is disturbing on lots of levels,” said Laura Speer, the associate director for policy reform and advocacy at the Casey Foundation, a non-profit based in Baltimore. “Those kids often don’t have the access to the things they need to thrive.” The foundation says its mission is to help low-income children in the U.S. by providing grants and advocating for policies that promote economic opportunity.

More “White Privilege”? 🙂

Evil, greedy “rich” people?

This has to be “racist” at some point, doesn’t it? 🙂

Among minority children and in some states, especially the South, however, the situation is dire. The report said, for example:

• The rate of child poverty for 2013 ranged from a low of 10 percent in New Hampshire, to a high of 34 percent in Mississippi.

• The child poverty rate among African Americans (39 percent) was more than double the rate for non-Hispanic whites (14 percent) in 2013.

The report also explained that a lack of jobs or good income above the poverty rate of $23,624 was the reason more children have grown up in poor families.

• In 2013, three in 10 children (22.8 million) lived in families where no parent had full-time, year-round employment. Since 2008, the number of such children climbed by nearly 2.7 million.

• Roughly half of all American Indian children (50 percent) and African-American children (48 percent) had no parent with full-time, year-round employment in 2013, compared with 37 percent of Latino children, 24 percent of non-Hispanic white children and 23 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children.”

Click to access aecf-2015kidscountdatabook-2015.pdf

VIVA LA REVOLUCIóN

“[T]hink about how even with all the gridlock and polarization in Washington, we have made so much change these past six years:  12 million new jobs.  Sixteen million people who finally have health insurance.  Historic agreements to fight climate change.  Epic increases in college financial aid.  More progress on LGBT rights than any time in our history. And today, it is no longer remarkable to see two beautiful black girls walking their dogs on the South Lawn of the White House lawn.  That’s just the way things are now,” Obama said to applause at the liberal arts college.

“rise above the noise and shape the revolutions of your time.”Michelle Obama

It would takes days to point out all the lies and partisan ideological distortions in that one paragraph, but that’s also the point at which we are in America.

There are millions of slobbering liberals and just plain ignorant Americans who’d believe every word of it and would fight to very last drop of your evil blood to defend “the truth” as they want everyone to see it.

The truth has no meaning anymore. One’s partisan agenda, whether Republican (secret trade deal anyone?) or Democrat doesn’t matter, the truth even less so.

Dishonesty is the only rule left.

Narcissism rules.

It’s time for the looting and sacking of Rome, 406 AD.

Did the Visigoths and The Romans prosper from the sacking of Rome and the Destruction of the Roman Empire?

Well, 1600 years later apparently both the barbarians and the elites have figured it out.

The peasants are the one who are going to get screwed, but we’ll make them happy to do it to themselves.

“So get out there and volunteer on campaigns, and then hold the folks you elect accountable.”

Why? that’s they VERY LAST thing anyone wants to do to a Liberal, especially your husband. That would be “racist”, “bigotry”,”misogyny” or “islamophobia”.

So what she saying is to hold accountable only those people with whom you disagree (aka non-liberals), make sure they are destroyed because she and her husband are above it all and are unaccountable for their actions anyhow, as it should be.

Make sure division and destruction are left in your wake. Your Agenda is THE ONLY AGENDA. Your Narrative is the ONLY Narrative. Make sure no one gets in your way and if they do, destroy them!!

Especially if they are white, male, and/or Christian they deserve it!

“See, that is how you will rise above the noise and shape the revolutions of your time.”

http://www.amazon.com/Adios-America-Ann-Coulter/dp/1621572676

Ann Coulter is back, more fearless than ever. In Adios, America she touches the third rail in American politics, attacking the immigration issue head-on and flying in the face of La Raza, the Democrats, a media determined to cover up immigrants’ crimes, churches that get paid by the government for their “charity,” and greedy Republican businessmen and campaign consultants—all of whom are profiting handsomely from mass immigration that’s tearing the country apart. Applying her trademark biting humor to the disaster that is U.S. immigration policy, Coulter proves that immigration is the most important issue facing America today.

How to Underwhelm The People

The new Republican-led Congress is drawing harsh reviews from the public – including most Republicans. Just 23% of Americans say congressional Republicans are keeping the promises they made during last fall’s campaign, while 65% say they are not.

And yet they don’t really care what you think either…

Nearly four-in-ten (37%) say the new Congress has accomplished less than they expected, while 4% say it has accomplished more than expected. About half (53%) say its accomplishments are in line with what they expected.

Well, The Republicans have caved on basically everything so not much has changed has it?

On both measures, the public’s views are far more negative than they were of the Democratic-led Congress in March 2007, after the Democrats regained control of both chambers following several years of Republican control. Views are also much more negative than they were in April 1995, shortly after the GOP had gained control of the House and Senate for the first time in four decades.

The new national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted May 12-18 among 2,002 adults, finds that just 22% approve of the job performance of Republican congressional leaders, little changed since the summer of 2011. Ratings for Democratic congressional leaders are somewhat better (33% approve).

Unlike after some previous partisan turnovers on Capitol Hill, negative assessments of the new Congress now cross party lines. Today, just 41% of Republicans approve of the job their party’s leaders in Congress are doing. By comparison, in April 2011, 60% of Republicans approved of GOP leaders’ job performance and in April 1995, 78% approved of GOP leadership’s policies and proposals.

And just 37% of Republicans say their party’s leaders are keeping their campaign promises, while 53% say they are not. In 2011, after the party won its House majority, 54% said GOP leaders were keeping promises. And in April 1995 — as the Republican-led Congress hit the 100-day milestone — fully 80% of Republicans said this.

Democrats were also relatively upbeat about their party’s leaders at the 100-day mark in 2007, when 60% said Democratic leaders were keeping their campaign promises.

Currently, Republicans (36%) are about as likely as Democrats (38%) or independents (38%) to say Congress is accomplishing less than they expected.

Public evaluations of the congressional leadership of both parties remain negative. Today, just a third (33%) say they approve of the job Democratic leaders are doing, while even fewer (22%) say they approve of GOP Congressional leadership.

Ratings for the Congressional leadership of both parties have been relatively stable over the past few years. Though the job approval ratings of both GOP and Democratic leadership rose slightly earlier this year, current ratings are now on par with attitudes last spring.

While the overall ratings of Republican congressional leaders over the last few months have dropped a modest four points, Republican ratings of their own party’s leadership have moved in a significantly negative direction over the first few months of a GOP-controlled Congress.

Today, more Republicans say they disapprove (55%) than approve (41%) of the Republican congressional leadership’s job performance. In February, Republican evaluations were more positive (50% of Republicans approved of the GOP leadership’s job performance, 44% disapproved). And this shift in opinion is primarily seen among conservative Republicans: 54% approved of GOP congressional leaders’ job performance in February, today just 41% approve. By contrast, Democratic views of their party’s congressional leadership are substantially more positive and are little changed over this time. Currently 60% of Democrats approve of the job performance of Democratic leaders, while 35% disapprove.

Independent views of the two parties largely track those of the overall public: Just 19% approve of GOP leaders’ job performance, while 27% approve of Democratic congressional leadership.

While the overall ratings of Republican congressional leaders over the last few months have dropped a modest four points, Republican ratings of their own party’s leadership have moved in a significantly negative direction over the first few months of a GOP-controlled Congress.

Today, more Republicans say they disapprove (55%) than approve (41%) of the Republican congressional leadership’s job performance. In February, Republican evaluations were more positive (50% of Republicans approved of the GOP leadership’s job performance, 44% disapproved). And this shift in opinion is primarily seen among conservative Republicans: 54% approved of GOP congressional leaders’ job performance in February, today just 41% approve. By contrast, Democratic views of their party’s congressional leadership are substantially more positive and are little changed over this time. Currently 60% of Democrats approve of the job performance of Democratic leaders, while 35% disapprove.

Independent views of the two parties largely track those of the overall public: Just 19% approve of GOP leaders’ job performance, while 27% approve of Democratic congressional leadership.

By contrast, Democrats are more positive about their own party’s performance on these three issues than are Republicans. About six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners (62%) say the Democratic Party is doing a good job representing their views on same-sex marriage, while just 30% say they are not doing a good job. Views are more mixed when it comes to illegal immigration and government spending. Overall, 51% of Democrats say their party is doing a good job on the issue of illegal immigration, compared with 43% who say they are not doing a good job. On the issue of government spending, as many Democrats say their party is doing a good job representing their views on the issue (47%) as say it is not doing a good job (47%). Democratic views have shown little change on these measures since the questions were last asked in September 2014.

And amid debate over the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade proposal, 39% of respondents say they approve of Obama’s handling of international trade, while 44% say they disapprove; 17% do not offer a rating of his performance on trade.

But the Republicans want to pass it anyways!

That’s why “Jar Jar” Boehner and his Dumber Cousin are the Democrats best hope for a complete takeover of Congress and the Monarchy for Queen Hillary.

The Case For Hillary

1) After being accused of racism every time they disagree with the President, Americans will enjoy the change of pace by being accused of sexism every time they disagree with the President.

At least we’d get rid of “race relations” being the problem. We’d replace it with “gender relations” and White Males would STILL be the ultimate enemy!! 🙂

2) America’s military would be unstoppable because of three little words that Hillary would bring to the White House, “Flying Monkey Legions!”

Vast Right Wing Conspiracies would be true. 🙂

3) It would be terrible for our first black President to be the worst POTUS of all time and Hillary can take care of that problem.

4) Americans LOVE dynasties! Next it’s Jeb Bush’s turn. Then Chelsea Clinton. THEN Michelle Obama. Then Jenna Bush. Then Malia Obama and so on and so on into infinity. If Americans didn’t like being ruled by royal families, then you’d think there would have been some small indication of it in our history by now, right? 😉

5) We Americans take pride in giving good value for the money that’s paid to us and all those foreign governments that paid off Hillary when she was Secretary of State would REALLY hit the jackpot if she became President.

You wouldn’t have to worry about whether the President was corrupt because you’d already know she is BEFORE you elected her so nothing would be a surprise. The media wouldn’t would have to cover it as a “scandal” because that would just be Hillary being Hillary so nothing out of the ordinary there.

6) She’ll be a fantastic role model for young women who’ll learn that as long as you marry the right man and ride his coattails at every opportunity – you, too, can succeed!

7) Well, if she could handle being Secretary of State with no problems, then obviously…oh wait, she didn’t, did she?

8) Eight more years of complete and utter servile capitulation to a President of the United States should be enough to destroy the whole liberal mainstream media’s reputation for good.

9) If Hillary were to win, then all the people who tell America how incompetent she’ll be will be able to enjoy being proven right about her over and over again just as they have been about Barack Obama.

10) It’s long since time that small children were shown The Vagina Monologues before the White House Easter Egg Roll.

11) Everybody THINKS he can be President, but for hundreds of years, Americans have insisted on choosing Presidents based on “merit” and “accomplishments.” If both Obama and Hillary can be President, then that proves any undeserving idiot can do the job as long as he or she checks the right diversity box.

12) Despite the many credible claims that the money she made was part of a shady bribe, obviously parlaying $1,000 into $100,000 in highly speculative commodity market trading proves that Hillary Clinton really is…THE SMARTEST WOMAN ON EARTH!

13) Who could possibly be a better role model for young women in America than a politician who has been endorsed by Larry Flynt AND Hookers for Hillary?

14) Replacing Air Force One with a broomstick would mean tens of millions in savings for the taxpayers!

15) Like duh, she’s an incompetent lying socialist who will drive the final nails in America’s coffin after 8 years of Barack Obama and…oh wait, the goal here IS to destroy America, right? Oh, wow…it’s not? Then maybe she’s NOT the right candidate. (John Hawkins)

Naw, she the only one LEFT according to the Media… 🙂

And imagine how how annoyed the Jihadists will be with a Woman in charge! How dare we do something so vulgar and such a heresy! Maybe we can get her to wear a Burka. 🙂

Imagine what Bill could do for fundraiser for her re-election in 2020! The Hookers For Hillary could become his extended family, especially with Bill around to “entertain” them.

Imagine his School Lunch program. Wieners for everyone!

Think of the possibilities! Maybe even get Monica Lewinsky for a Cabinet “position”.

Word Games

“Like most political topics [in the US] the debate is relatively non-existent.  Once you identify pro or con on the subject, the other side assumes they know your feelings and arguments and immediately begins either attempting to convert you or demonize you for your beliefs.”

This struck a cord with me because of how true I feel it is. Why is this? What is a society that does debate more productively? What would you like to see happen and might it happen? Any thoughts are welcome.

My definition of debate; respectful conversation that might lead one or both sides to see the full scope of an issue and agree on a best choice in the matter. -Timothy A Walker

Advocacy is the norm.  Unlike debate, advocacy can be effective sans facts.  Good advocacy works on our reason, emotion and the character of everyone involved is a consideration too.

Unlike debate, advocacy shares a lot of common ground with propaganda and is very easily abused.

There has been a consistent reduction of clarity in news, linked to misinformation, that favors advocacy forms of dialog.  Infotainment is advocacy.

The lack of clarity norms renders debate lofty,inaccessible and boring essentially.

We need advocacy and we need debate.  I believe the real answer to this is a sharp increase in clarity norms, which would favor good advocacy and frame it as the gateway to debate instead of being the gateway to misinformation and polarization is most often is now.

Clarity is a non partisan common interest we all should have.—Doug Dingus

In the 1980s there was a TV show called “Not Necessarily The News” on HBO that featured something called “sniglets.” (Hosted by Bob Saget). Although it’s probably a hate-crime to say the word “sniglet” out loud now and will get you accused of homophone-a-phobia, a sniglet is a word that should appear in the dictionary but doesn’t. Sniglets have all but disappeared, but the dictionary itself might as well be thrown out too. Words that had unambiguous meanings for decades or even centuries have seen those definitions changed by progressives in the name of political correctness.

To make sure you are up to date on which words and phrases are now permissible, I’ve assembled a few here that have seen their definitions change so you don’t get accused of being an “Ist-a-phobe” at the water cooler come Monday.

Thug: noun.
Old meaning: a violent criminal.
New meaning: a racial slur; the same as the “n-word.”
Source: Tonight Show band leader Questlove in a tweet this week and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: upriser, revolutionary, victim, misguided young people, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When referencing the bad guys in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and when talking about white hockey players Food Stamps: noun.
Old meaning: a small document that is given by the government to poor people and that can be used to buy food.
New meaning: a racial slur; “code” for black people.
Source: Democrats in the 2012 election deemed pointing out the fact there are more people on food stamps under President Obama than at any point in American history to be “racial code.” It being a fact was deemed irrelevant.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: economically challenged, differently fed, Democratic Party voter.
Acceptable uses: When calling for greater funding for the program or when accusing a Republican of wanting to “gut” the program.

Budget cut: noun.
Old meaning: the act of reducing budgeted expenditures.
New meaning: a reduction in the rate of increase in spending where more money is spent than the prior year but slightly less than previously projected; draconian gutting of vital programs, particularly for poor and minority people.
Source: The Democratic Party and the mainstream media.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: There is no alternative; reducing, or even proposing a reduction in the rate of increase of government spending, is racist.
Acceptable uses: The term is not only allowed to be used when talking about spending on national defense, it is required.

Urban: adjective.
Old meaning: of or relating to cities and the people who live in them.
New meaning: racist code for “black people.”
Source: Every progressive everywhere.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: Underrepresented communities, victims.
Acceptable uses: Only when giving the full name of a country singer or talking about an awful store selling clothes for white suburban hipsters.

Progressive: adjective.
Old meaning: Political philosophy based on the belief that some people are intellectually and genetically superior to others and should, therefore, be able to exercise power over everyone else, up to and including who can live or reproduce.
New meaning: tolerant, loving, smart, caring.
Source: The Democratic Party (which also was the source of the original definition but now chooses to pretend otherwise) and pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary None. Even though the philosophy was created by those who literally advocated for the extermination of “undesirable” people (minorities and poor, uneducated whites), people proudly call themselves progressive without consequence.

Tolerance: noun.
Old meaning: willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own.
New meaning: Conformity; the belief that the only acceptable thoughts are those that adhere to a progressive philosophy.
Source: The Democratic Party, College professors, pretty much everyone on MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. There is no need to remove this word from your vocabulary, but it is important to remember it means only the new definition. Any deviation from the new meaning to the old one will be met with protests, boycotts and potential massive fines from government.

Diversity: noun.
Old meaning: the quality or state of having many different forms, types, ideas, etc.
New meaning: different colored, like-minded drones. It no longer applies to the ideas or thoughts, only skin color. This word particularly does not apply to black or Hispanic conservatives.
Source: The Democratic Party, the mainstream media and pretty much everyone on (the mostly white) MSNBC.
Suggested replacements for your vocabulary: None. You must not question this concept, only blindly accept it. To point out the hypocrisy of rich, white liberal progressives living in gated communities extolling the virtues of diversity is a near hate-crime.
I hope this small but important list helps you navigate our brave new world. Should you find yourself violating these suggestions by saying something like, “Well, progressive Democrats and their policies have pretty much had unfettered reign in the most violent and economically depressed areas of the country for generations and things have only gotten worse,” the only hope for redemption is a donation to a progressive organization that sells “indulgences.”

The most popular indulgence sellers are the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. Donations are tax deducible and you can rest assured that your money will be put to good use, not wasted on frivolities like accurate record keeping or paying taxes. (Derek Hunter)

Don’t do as They do, do as they say. OR ELSE!

I’m Shocked!

From a strategic standpoint, delaying bad news until after the people it affects have to re-elect you is sort of a no-brainer. But this story in the Washington Post about the Obama Administration deliberately pushing back the effective date of hundreds of new environmental, work safety and health care regulations to avoid contention over the massive governmental oversight expansion during the 2012 campaign is less of a “wow, I’m outraged they did that!” sort of story and more of a “well, you probably knew this but the Washington Post is just getting down to reporting it a little over a year later now that it will have little impact on your opinion.”

The delays meant that rules were postponed or never issued. The stalled regulations included crucial elements of the Affordable Care Act, what bodies of water deserved federal protection, pollution controls for industrial boilers and limits on dangerous silica exposure in the workplace.

The Obama administration has repeatedly said that any delays until after the election were coincidental and that such decisions were made without regard to politics. (WP)

IS ANYONE REALLY STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THAT? (of course there is…)

After all, you’re probably still figuring out why you got double-charged for health insurance this month.

The White House systematically delayed enacting a series of rules on the environment, worker safety and health care to prevent them from becoming points of contention before the 2012 election, according to documents and interviews with current and former administration officials.

Some agency officials were instructed to hold off submitting proposals to the White House for up to a year to ensure that they would not be issued before voters went to the polls, the current and former officials said…

The Obama administration has repeatedly said that any delays until after the election were coincidental and that such decisions were made without regard to politics. But seven current and former administration officials told The Washington Post that the motives behind many of the delays were clearly political, as Obama’s top aides focused on avoiding controversy before his reelection.

The Post is flabbergasted and, upon discovering such a dramatic betrayal of their trust, was forced to send not one but two unpaid interns out to purchase smelling salts and a fainting couch. And while other, less disarmingly handsome Presidents have also made a point of delaying new regulations until after they were officially re-elected, the report indicates that the Obama Administration went above and beyond the call of duty.

Not that you’re surprised by any of this, of course. But it’s worth noting that at least someone else discovered it for a change, right? (Naked DC)

I guess we had to re-elect him to find out what was in it…

 

C.R.E.E.P.y…..

Committee to Reelect the President. President Nixon, that is. 🙂

The White House held an off-the-record briefing with reporters on Friday afternoon to discuss recent revelations about the Benghazi investigation, sources familiar with the meeting tell POLITICO. The meeting began around 12:45 p.m. and postponed the daily, on-the-record White House press briefing to 1:45 p.m. White House press secretary Jay Carney did not respond to a request for confirmation of the meeting. The off-the-record session was announced to reporters in the wake of an ABC News report showing that White House and State Dept. officials were involved in revising the now-discredited CIA talking points about the attack on Benghazi.

Strategy Meeting with The Ministry of Truth? 🙂

Susan Rice’s Benghazi talking points were redacted and revised at least 12 times in advance of public consumption in order to help cover up the administration’s security failures prior to the attack.

 They doctored intelligence to protect the political reputations of people who dropped the ball.

To Protect the Re-election of a President.

C.R.E.E.Py

The Internal Revenue Service apologized Friday for what it acknowledged was “inappropriate” targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.

IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their exemption applications, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.

White House Chief Mouthpiece, Jay Carney: “I.R.S. is an independent enforcement agency,” said Carney. “The — which I believe, as I understand it, contains only two political appointees within it. The individual who is running the I.R.S. at the time was actually an appointee from the previous administration.”

IT WAS BUSH’S FAULT!!!!

AMAZING CHUTZPAH!! wouldn’t you say. 🙂

Par for the course and predictable, I’d say.

“I call on the White House to conduct a transparent, government-wide review aimed at assuring the American people that these thuggish practices are not under way at the IRS or elsewhere in the administration against anyone, regardless of their political views,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

White House spokesman Jay Carney declared it was indeed inappropriate for the IRS to target tea party groups. But he brushed aside questions about whether the White House itself would investigate.

Instead, Carney said the administration expects a thorough investigation by the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration. The inspector general has been looking into the issue since last summer, and his report is expected to come out next week, the IG’s office said Friday.

Carney said he did not know when the White House first learned that tea party groups were being targeted.

Lerner acknowledged it was wrong for the agency to target groups based on political affiliation.

“That was absolutely incorrect, it was insensitive and it was inappropriate. That’s not how we go about selecting cases for further review,” Lerner said at a conference sponsored by the American Bar Association.

“The IRS would like to apologize for that,” she added.

C.R.E.E.P.y….. 🙂

“The admission by the Obama administration that the Internal Revenue Service targeted political opponents echoes some of the most shameful abuses of government power in 20th century American history,” said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Many conservative groups complained during the campaign that they were being harassed by the IRS. They accused the agency of frustrating their attempts to become tax exempt by sending them lengthy, intrusive questionnaires.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., said Friday he will hold a hearing on the matter has not yet set a date.

“The IRS absolutely must be non-partisan in its enforcement of our tax laws,” Camp said. “We will hold the IRS accountable for its actions.”

“It’s the line people that did it without talking to managers,” Lerner told The AP. “They’re IRS workers, they’re revenue agents.”

Meaning their manager were asleep at the switch, or tacitly implicit right? 🙂

“It is suspicious that the activity of these ‘low-level workers’ was unknown to IRS leadership at the time it occurred,” said Jenny Beth Martin, national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, which describes itself as the nation’s largest tea party organization. “President Obama must also apologize for his administration ignoring repeated complaints by these broad grass-roots organizations of harassment by the IRS in 2012, and make concrete and transparent steps today to ensure this never happens again.”

Bwah hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Never happen. After all, it was George Bush’s Fault! :0

Here are some of the things they wanted to know about those groups.

1. We’re gonna need all your direct and indirect communication. “‘Direct and indirect communications’ is profoundly chilling of First Amendment rights, ” said David French, senior counsel for American Center for Law & Justice, which has been representing 27 conservative organizations met with IRS inquisitions. “It’s so vague as to be impossible to comply with.”

2. What do we need to know about your members? Nothing much. Just ALL THE THINGS!

3. Your present and past employees and their relationships, please.

4. No, family members of past and present board members and employees are not exempt, nor are their activities with other groups. Why do you ask?

5. If someone in this country’s free press has ever interacted with you in any way shape or form about your free speech activities, we’re going to need documentation of that.

6. By the way, all the insane, intrusive information we’re asking for is understood to be public once you’ve given it to us, so please include only the most flattering possible photos of your children and pets.

7. There are very specific requirements for completing and submitting this insane, intrusive information we’re asking for. Does it feel like you’re running hurdles yet, Lolo?

8. Don’t forget to read the continued very specific requirements for completing and submitting this insane, intrusive information.

9. If you do not comply with these very specific requirements for completing and submitting this insane, intrusive application, you will go directly back to Start, you will not pass Go, and let’s face it, we will probably collect $200.

10. Please predict the future reliably. Thank you for your time.

But not to worry, it was George Bush’s Fault!!

Sleep tight…Don’t let the IRS Bed Bugs bite…

<Insert C.R.E.E.Py Music>

Money & Politics

Happy Cost of Government Day!

Candidate Obama 2008:

I always believed that welfare had to be changed. I was much more concerned ten years ago when President Clinton initially signed the bill that this could have disastrous results …

… It worked better than I think a lot of people anticipated. And one of the things that I am absolutely convinced of is that we have to have work as a centerpiece of any social policy. Not only because, ultimately people who work are going to get more income. But the intrinsic dignity of work, uh, the sense of purpose.

… We were made for work … and the sense that you are part of a community, because you’re making a contribution.

President Obama 2012 pandering for re-election because of his lousy economy: Ah, forget it!

The Department and Health and Human Services announced the agency will issue waivers for the federal work requirement of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program — considered a central facet of welfare reform in 1996 — Thursday.

The “Information Memorandum” states that the agency will be issuing waivers for TANF’s work participation requirements for parents and caretakers as a way to find new approaches to better employment outcomes.

Just sit on your ass. Collect your check and watch The View.

Oh, and VOTE FOR ME! because the other guy won’t be as nice. He’s the Devil incarnate , you know (a rich white guy!). 🙂

And also, F*ck you Bill! (Clinton who passed the Welfare form with Democrat support in 1996).

According to Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, the memorandum is proof of the Obama administration’s continued disrespect for the rule of law.

“President Obama just tore up a basic foundation of the welfare contract,” Jordan said in a statement. “In exchange for taxpayer-funded TANF payments, the law calls on able-bodied adults to work, look for work, take classes, or undergo drug and alcohol counseling. It’s the tough love that gives people motivation to help themselves…Today’s action is also a blatant violation of the law. After immigration, education, marriage, and religious conscience protections, we can now add welfare reform to the list of laws President Obama refuses to follow.” (DC)

He just don’t feel like it, right now. He has only 1 priority in his life right now and this is getting in the way.

It’s good to be The King.

Speaking of Money:

The Internal Revenue Service’s total revenue went down from 2007 to 2009, while the tax rate for the top earners went up, increasing from 19.4 percent to 21 percent. Meanwhile, McBride said, the tax rates for the bottom two quintiles’ — -5.8 percent of income in 2007 and -9.3 percent in 2009 — means the  IRS actually paid them.

The top 20 percent of earners — the top quintile — bore 67.9 percent of the federal tax burden in 2009. The middle quintile paid 9.4 percent, while the lowest paid .03 percent of the federal tax burden.

So the Rich got poorer and the poor got refunds. The rich paid more taxes and the poor paid less (50% pay no income taxes at all!)

Now that’s “fair”!! 🙂

In the chart <below>, we’re measuring the strength of all the post World War II recession recoveries as measured from the very bottom of payroll jobs lost. The last time we featured it, the recovery from the 2007 recession was just barely the worst ever.

And today, it is definitively the worst recession jobs recovery ever.

Worst. Recession. Jobs. Recovery. Ever.

But that’s Bush’s Fault!  🙂

Nothing produces a greater sense of the futility of facts than seeing someone in the mass media repeating some notion that has been refuted innumerable times over the years.

On July 9, on CNN’s program The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, commentator Gloria Borger discussed President Obama’s plan to continue the temporary extension of the tax rates established under the Bush administration — except for the top brackets, where Obama wanted the tax rates raised.

Ms. Borger said, “If you’re going to lower the tax rates, where are you going to get the money from?”

First of all, nobody is talking about lowering the tax rates. They are talking about whether or not to continue the existing tax rates, which are set to expire after a temporary extension. And Obama is talking about raising the tax rate on higher-income earners.

But when Ms. Borger asked “where are you going to get the money from” if you don’t raise tax rates, she was assuming an automatic correlation between tax rates and tax revenues, which is demonstrably false.

As far back as the 1920s, a huge cut in the highest income-tax rate — from 73 percent to 24 percent — led to a huge increase in the amount of tax revenue collected by the federal government. Why? Because investors took their money out of tax shelters, where they were earning very modest rates of return, and put it into the productive economy, where they could earn higher rates of return, now that those returns were not so heavily taxed.

This was the very reason why tax rates were cut in the first place — to get more revenue for the federal government. The same was true, decades later, during the John F. Kennedy administration. Similar reasons led to tax-rate cuts during the Ronald Reagan administration and the George W. Bush administration.

All of these presidents — Democrat and Republican alike — made the same argument for tax-rate reductions that had been made in the 1920s, and the results were similar as well. Yet the invincible lie continues to this day that those who oppose high tax rates on high incomes are doing so because they want to reduce the taxes paid by high-income earners, in hopes that their increased prosperity will “trickle down” to others.

In reality, high-income earners paid not only a larger total amount of taxes after the tax-rate cuts of the 1920s, but also a higher share of all the income taxes collected. It is a matter of record that anyone can verify by looking at with official government statistics.

This result was not peculiar to the 1920s. In 2006, the New York Times reported: “An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.”

Expectations are in the eye of the beholder. Tax-cut proponents expected precisely the result from the Bush tax cuts that so surprised the New York Times. So did tax-cut proponents in the John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan administrations.

If this concept has not yet trickled down to the New York Times or CNN’s Gloria Borger, that is a commentary on the media commentators.

Ms. Borger may simply not know any better, but Barack Obama cannot use that excuse. When he was a candidate for president back in 2008, Charles Gibson of ABC News confronted him with the fact that there was no automatic correlation between the raising and lowering of tax rates and whether tax revenues moved up or down.

Obama admitted that. But he said that he was for raising tax rates on higher-income earners anyway, in the name of “fairness.” How higher tax rates that the government does not actually collect make any sense, whether from a fairness perspective or as a way of paying the government’s bills, is another question. The point here is that Obama knew then that tax rates and tax revenues do not automatically move in the same direction.

In other words, he is lying when he talks as if tax rates and tax revenues move together. Ms. Borger and others in the media may or may not know that. So they are not necessarily lying. But they are failing to inform their audiences about the facts — and that allows Obama’s lies to stand.

NOVEMBER IS COMING