Roll Tide

One might be forgiven for thinking health insurers are cracking under the strain of Obamacare’s broken insurance exchanges. But don’t be fooled: it is the 10 million Obamacare enrollees who are in trouble, not the insurers.

To be sure, new nonprofit cooperative insurers, set up with special subsidies to compete in the exchanges, have had a terrible run. They deliberately underpriced their premiums to gain market share, expecting the federal government to bail out their losses. Once the Republicans took over the House of Representatives, then the Senate, this became unlikely. As a result, the administration announced in November that 12 of 23 nonprofit cooperative insurers were shutting down.

However, these nonprofit cooperative insurers, which did not exist before Obamacare, are not important overall. That is why UnitedHealth Group’s November 19 announcement that it is losing $500 million on the Obamacare exchanges and might withdraw from Obamacare in 2017 is a big deal. Just a few weeks earlier, UnitedHealth Group had announced it would expand into 11 new states’ Obamacare markets.

The insurer is also dialing back advertising and brokers’ commissions for 2016, even though it is too late to withdraw from the market literally. (We are in the middle of Obamacare’s third open season.) However, it is the threat of absolute withdrawal in 2017 that has shocked many. By 2017, the fourth year of Obamacare, the market is supposed to have shaken out. Both insurers and Obamacare’s political sponsors understood that insurers would not know how expensive claims would be from those who signed up during the first three years. That is why insurers were given temporary taxpayer subsidies, called reinsurance and risk corridors, for 2014 through 2016. Reinsurance is a direct handout of $25 billion from taxpayers to insurers. Risk corridors were more complicated and supposed to be budget-neutral. Insurers that made more money than expected would pay money to those that lost more money than expected.

 

When it became clear that the losers far outnumbered the winners, the administration tried to raid the kitty to make risk-corridor payments from the general fund. By this time a new Congress (in which the majority opposed Obamacare) actually read the bill that its predecessor had passed in 2010 and pointed out that the administration could not pay out that money. As a result, Obamacare insurers will only receive $362 million of $2.9 billion of risk-corridor payments requested.

However, even if Congress did cave in and pay the risk corridors in full, payments would finish in 2016. That is what makes UnitedHealth Group’s announcement about dropping out in 2017 so important: it is effectively an admission that three years are not enough to learn how to manage risks in Obamacare’s exchanges. Indeed, it suggests that risks are unmanageable, that the vicious circle of increasing premiums’ driving healthy subscribers away and leaving only sick ones on the books cannot be stopped under Obamacare.

The exchanges have fewer victims than initially expected. The economy has been strong enough that employer-based coverage has stood up to Obamacare. As a result, only 10 million people are caught in them, instead of the 21 million forecast when the law was passed. However, this is a mixed blessing. These 10 million are a politically weak constituency of working-class and lower middle-class citizens in middle age — the people whose needs politicians always talk about but seldom address because they are not politically active.

The only group politically powerful enough to renegotiate the exchanges are the insurers, and they show no more creativity than to lobby for their subsidies to be restored, which this Congress has promised not to do. On the other hand, simply quitting the exchanges is not very painful for large health insurers. UnitedHealth Group’s stock took a small hit when it admitted its struggles, but Obamacare exchanges are a tiny share of its business. As more insurers make the same decision to quit, 10 million Obamacare subscribers will be left high and dry in short order. (DC)

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Geller Apocolypse

Everything you need to know about the leftist bias in the media:

Pamela Geller says she has no regrets about Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in 2 deaths” (AP)

It was HER fault that two jihadists were killed by police after they drove a 1000 miles to kill her and anyone in her general vicinity.

The Fatwa was HER Fault.

The dead jihadists are the victims!!

OMG! How F*cked up is that!

So let’s trash her!

A master of rhetoric and clearly comfortable in the spotlight, the 56-year-old former media executive shifts easily from charming to combative. Her critics have called the cartoon contest needlessly provocative, practically an invitation for violence. But Geller argued that any blame should be focused on extremists who can’t be criticized or lampooned without resorting to violence.

“Cartoons are political critique. It’s a cartoon,” she said. “Is that what we want to outlaw? We want to outlaw humor? We want to outlaw comedy? If you want to know who rules over you, find out who you cannot criticize.”

Her activities have prompted the Southern Poverty Law Center to add her to its extremist files, calling her “the anti-Muslim movement’s most visible and flamboyant figurehead.”

In an editorial Thursday, The New York Times said Geller “has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims” and called the Garland event “an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom. … To pretend it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.”

Wow, no bias there!!

As head of an organization called the American Freedom Defense Initiative, she took in $960,000 in donations in 2013, paying herself a salary of $192,500, according to tax filings.

Donations pour in from the PayPal button on her website, Geller said, adding that she has “no idea” how much money she has raised.

Oh, and her main donor is a <<<evil music sting>> A CONSERVATIVE Foundation! OMG! THE Apocolypse is upon us all. She’s another Anti-Christ!

Yet, no one at the Liberal Media is even remotely worried about The Clinton Foundation and all that money. $500,000 per speech for Bill “gotta pay the bills”. Ha! Ha! That’s funny Bill.

Pam Geller makes money, that’s suspicious and evil.

The Clinton Foundation rakes in Millions to Billions, no one on the Left cares. They think it’s a good thing!

Hillary takes in money from dubious sources. No one cares. They let Bill have the pithy comebacks like “I just work here” and they laugh it off and  go on there merry way.

But Freedom Speech, naw, who gives a crap about that.

Hillary wants to buy the election with $2 BILLION  (3 times what Obama raised) and that’s a good thing.

The U.S. State Department will not review the breaches of the 2008 ethics agreement Hillary Clinton signed in order to become secretary of state after her family’s charities admitted in March that they had not complied, a spokesman said on Thursday.

“The State Department has not and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton’s tenure,” Rathke told reporters. (Reuters)

Muslim jihadist try to kill Americans on American soil, not only is it her fault but SHE’s THE BAD GUY for ‘upsetting’ them.

America, What a Country!

The daily threat is the Sharia-flavored assault on our liberties, the kind of pressure exerted by reasonable-sounding Islamists in communities across America, under the guise of fighting “Islamophobia.”

It was just such an event that attracted attention in January in the same convention center attacked by Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi on May 3. Dubbed “Stand With the Prophet,” it featured elements of earnest concern about Islam’s image in America. But it also featured moments of scurrilous slander against anyone who would speak boldly against the terrorist wing of the Islamic faith.

Employing the first rule of political correctness, the “Stand With the Prophet” event brimmed with the fascist sentiment that assertive words against radical Islam must be branded as hate speech.

Sadly, this is the same noxious logic the Southern Poverty Law Center uses in its reckless designation of Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative as an anti-Muslim hate group.

It is neither a hate group nor anti-Muslim. It is anti-free speech repression. Muslims willing to tolerate America’s heritage of free expression will taste no quarrel with Geller’s AFDI.

Her group mounted the cartoon contest not from a general distaste for Muslims, but as a ballsy response to Jihadist habits of suppressing expression that rattles their fragile sensibilities. The most extreme example of this thin skin is the recent tendency of some hard-liners to take up arms against those who have drawn images of the prophet Muhammad. The Charlie Hebdo attacks in January and the widespread riots protesting Danish cartoons a decade ago reveal a facet of Islam’s advance that poses a dire threat to all societies cherishing freedom of expression.

So, seeking to put a stick in the eye of such an affront, the Geller event sought to make a point that we will not be told what we can and cannot draw— or say, or write, for that matter.

By the time the day was over, another lesson had been delivered. Unlike the sitting ducks in the Paris office, in Texas, we shoot back. One hopes the growing ISIS fan base will be somewhat dampened each time its adherents are killed before they take out one infidel.

 

That lesson has been so popular that it has drawn many to approve of the whole cartoon-contest idea, fancying it as a method to smoke out the next wave of twisted souls seeking to spread the caliphate by challenging Americans engaged in free speech.

But here is where a line is drawn, between standing up for groups like AFDI as they hold such events, and actually advocating them.

That line is beyond the grasp of many. Soon after the January event in Garland had attempted to bully and berate anti-jihad speech, I heard of the plan for the Muhammad cartoon contest. I may have audibly groaned.

I am as ready as anyone to take the battle to the terrorists, whether by bombing them into oblivion in the Middle East, or defending America against violence or ancient repressions here in America.

But the cartoon contest was problematic at several levels. It was clumsily broad and needlessly hurtful to countless people who are guilty of nothing.

Remember, the cartoon-fest was not just a show of defiance to the rioters and murderers who react violently to Muhammad on paper; it was a massive back of the hand to the entire Muslim world and its article of faith that says not to draw its prophet.

Some folks cared not one bit about collateral offense. “These people killed our countrymen on 9/11,” one radio caller told me. “I can’t get real worked up about getting them steamed about a stupid cartoon.”

Not an unprincipled view. But as we hopefully move toward a new era of rejoining the war our enemy has never stopped fighting, it is time to note the need to fight hard, but fight smart.

Our war effort should do two things: obliterate the enemy militarily, and make clear that we have no dispute with Muslims willing to peacefully coexist in free societies.

The Islamic rules against depicting Muhammad are no skin off anyone’s nose, and that belief deserved better than to be savaged by some righteously offended Americans looking to score points against radical views recommending violence to prevent such depictions.

Let us focus our energies not on flipping giant birds in the general direction of all Muslims, but rather a concerted effort to vanquish the portion of Islamic culture that gave birth to murderous overreactions to art.

There have been multiple lessons in recent days, groupable in a folder one might call Free Speech 101 in the Age of Islamic Repression. Its highlights:

— Strict Quranic interpretations are incompatible with American law in many ways. Few examples are more valuable than Sharia’s call to shut down offending speech by the sword.

— In America, some folks believe that free speech is supported only if the words are embraced and praised. I cannot be more clear: Ms. Geller has the right to hold a daily Muhammad cartoon contest if she wishes. But if that tactic is not my cup of tea, no one should suggest that my defense of her rights is somehow timid.

— Vast cross- sections of America need a refresher course on free expression. The First Amendment exists to protect precisely those types of speech that rankle some sensibilities. Safe, sanguine speech requires no protection. There are exceptions for fighting words and incitements to violence, but the Garland event exemplified neither. It was a private event that forced no unwitting souls to gaze upon the Prophet. As for incitements, they are actual invitations to do specific harm. The mere crafting of words or images that are infuriating to some are the problem of the offended party, not the artist.

Those knocked off-kilter by the free expression of others have the responsibility to learn a skill set: First, let it go like big boys and girls, realizing that freedom means occasionally running across things that can anger, provoke, even infuriate; Or second, engage in more free speech in return. Explain why you are offended, call for self-restraint in the creation of incendiary images, and then just walk away. Such entreaties may prevail, they may not. Such is life in a free society.

Every Muslim in America should know that a free society is what they have chosen to enter. Our incredibly tolerant and resilient nation mounted no national wave of retribution even after Islamic terrorists ripped our hearts out on 9/11.

But clear-eyed assessments of our war against radicals are not hate speech. And the occasional edgy stunt designed to highlight the jihadists’ hostility to American law and culture does not warrant an armed attack.

In today’s America, we cannot even know the name of a heroic police officer who mowed down the two Garland terrorists before they could kill a single Texan. The reason: too many concerns about his safety.

We will know we have rejoined the battle when ISIS is more worried about its safety than the brave Americans who occasionally mow down an ISIS operative.

Meanwhile, let us marshal any passion for more cartoon contests and channel it toward something genuinely constructive: the election of a President who is serious at all levels about fighting radical Islam, fending off both its terror tactics and repressive instincts. (Mark Davis)

The Sowell of Equality

Some time ago, burglars in England scrawled a message on the wall of a home they had looted: “RICH BASTARDS.”

Those two words captured the spirit of the politicized vision of equality — that it was a grievance when someone was better off than themselves.

That, of course, is not the only meaning of equality, but it is the predominant political meaning in practice, where economic “disparities” and “gaps” are automatically treated as “inequities.” If one racial or ethnic group has a lower income than another, that is automatically called “discrimination” by many people in politics, the media and academia.

It doesn’t matter how much evidence there is that some groups work harder in school, perform better and spend more postgraduate years studying to acquire valuable skills in medicine, science or engineering. If the economic end results are unequal, that is treated as a grievance against those with better outcomes, and a sign of an “unfair” society.

The rhetoric of clever people often confuses the undeniable fact that life is unfair with the claim that a given institution or society is unfair.

Children born into families that raise them with love and with care to see that they acquire knowledge, values and discipline that will make them valuable members of society have far more chances of economic and other success in adulthood than children raised in families that lack these qualities.

Studies show that children whose parents have professional careers speak nearly twice as many words per hour to them as children with working class parents — and several times as many words per hour as children in families on welfare. There is no way that children from these different backgrounds are going to have equal chances of economic or other success in adulthood.

The fatal fallacy, however, is in collecting statistics on employees at a particular business or other institution, and treating differences in the hiring, pay or promotion of people from different groups as showing that their employer has been discriminating.

Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics! 🙂

Too many gullible people buy the implicit assumption that the unfairness originated where the statistics were collected, which would be an incredible coincidence if it were true.

Worse yet, some people buy the idea that politicians can correct the unfairness of life by cracking down on employers. But, by the time children raised in very different ways reach an employer, the damage has already been done.

What is a problem for children raised in families and communities that do not prepare them for productive lives can be a bonanza for politicians, lawyers and assorted social messiahs who are ready to lead fierce crusades, if the price is right.

Many in the media and among the intelligentsia are all too ready to go along, in the name of seeking equality. But equality of what?

Equality before the law is a fundamental value in a decent society. But equality of treatment in no way guarantees equality of outcomes.

On the contrary, equality of treatment makes equality of outcomes unlikely, since virtually nobody is equal to somebody else in the whole range of skills and capabilities required in real life. When it comes to performance, the same man may not even be equal to himself on different days, much less at different periods of his life.

What may be a spontaneous confusion among the public at large about the very different meanings of the word “equality” can be a carefully cultivated confusion by politicians, lawyers and others skilled in rhetoric, who can exploit that confusion for their own benefit.

Regardless of the actual causes of different capabilities and rewards in different individuals and groups, political crusades require a villain to attack — a villain far removed from the voter or the voter’s family or community. Lawyers must likewise have a villain to sue. The media and the intelligentsia are also attracted to crusades against the forces of evil.

But whether as a crusade or a racket, a confused conception of equality is a formula for never-ending strife that can tear a whole society apart — and has already done so in many countries. (Thomas Sowell)

Thank you, Al Sharpton, Eric Holder, and King Obama. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Less is More

Hilariously disingenuous Quote of 2013 so far, Our Dear Leader:

“We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate,” Obama said from atop the Capitol steps overlooking the National Mall.

Remind of the Tucson “Civility” Speech a year ago:

“But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.”

Too Bad he doesn’t mean a word of it and his minions will not heed these word for even a microsecond and he knows that. This stuff is for the consumption of the stupid, ill-informed, I-don’t-wanna-know voter and for the Liberal media for fawn over.

In short, it’s for the stupid and uniformed “peasant” masses and your King is just giving a lofty speech of  Sound and Fury signifying nothing!

And The Ministry of Truth is doing it’s job and be a sycophant and fawn all over his gloriousness.

“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” the president said.

But the threat posed by his over-the-top spending. Let’s not be to be too hasty. Let’s go slow. Let’s do next to nothing.

It’s not on the Agenda so it really doesn’t matter.

He said America must not rest until “all our children, from the streets of Detroit to the hills of Appalachia to the quiet lanes of Newtown, know that they are cared for, and cherished, and always safe from harm.”

Santa Claus is coming to town and the distractions are looking good for him.

We are from the Government and we are here to help you… 🙂

Officially, some 23 million people don’t have regular work. While official unemployment has dipped below 8%, the real unemployment rate — the one that counts discouraged workers and those who’d like full-time jobs but can’t find one — is 14.4%. (Which is actually higher than 4 years ago!!)

Yes, we know, this is a tired litany. And yet, have we become as a people so inured to Obama’s failure that we no longer take note of it?

After all, if you complain about it your just a hateful, divisive, ne’er-do-well who just wants everything to fail. You have no hope. Obama is your only hope!

FEAR IS HOPE!

Worse, do we just do nothing, letting Obama’s ruinous Keynesian experiments take their course?

The Liberal Media will bash into the ground worse than The Incredible Hulk jumping up and down on your carcass if you don’t play along.

During Obama’s first weeks in office in early 2009, hopes were high. At the time, he promised that, if Congress passed his $830 billion stimulus right away, by December of 2012 unemployment would be 5.2%.

Well, guess what: it’s 7.8%. (and that’s what it was 4 years ago at this time!)

That’s failure enough. But it’s far worse than even that. Today, we are still 4 million jobs below the pre-recession peak of employment. Just 460,000 jobs total have been created during Obama’s tenure.

But the Liberal will tell you it’s millions because of their fuzzy, dishonest partisan Math “skills”. But how do you create millions of jobs but still have the same unemployment rate (U3) but a higher U6??

They won’t answer that. You’re not supposed to ask that.

At the current rate of 151,000 new jobs a month with about 120,000 new entrants into the workforce each month, it would take, oh, until about 2024 just to get back to the our pre-recession peak in employment.

Today, the average time spent unemployed by those who lose jobs is 39.7 weeks — near its highest since the Great Depression. Some 4.8 million Americans are long-term unemployed, a national disgrace. Meanwhile, unemployment rates for youths and minorities are stuck at double-digit levels.

Beneath all these depressing statistics is a hard fact: The Obama economy has horribly underperformed.

But you’ll never here that from the Ministry of Truth or Obama’s Minions. They have done an ‘outstanding’ job against the odds considering how much evil they have had to fight because of George W. Bush! And those evil “obstructionist” Republicans who just want to kiss the rich and kill the poor. And let’s not even talk about the violent domestic terrorists, The Tea Party!! Pure abominations they all are.

Just have to give them more time. GWB’s evil is ever present and ever-growing to them.

The long-term GDP growth average for the U.S. is about 2.5% annually. Under Obama, growth has averaged about 1.6%. All told, therefore, our our GDP today is 9% less, or $1.4 trillion less, than it should be. That’s what the Obama economy has cost you.

And the service on the debt now is $1.4 Trillion a year. That’s one hell of a minimum credit card payment!

Obama has spent four years not passing budgets, running up trillion-dollar deficits, piling on $6 trillion in debt, spending $800 billion on phony “stimulus,” while hitting businesses large and small with an estimated $518 billion in new regulations.

And that doesn’t include the coming hit from new taxes contained in the fiscal cliff deal and ObamaCare that will start hitting entrepreneurs and small businesses this year. In short, don’t expect boom times. (IBD)

Expect Less. He’ll meet your expectations and everyone will be happy.
Now that’s an America every one can get behind.
Sounds Great. Less Results!
Don’t look to the Sky, Look at your Feet!
Strive for Less and you’ll succeed!!
Now that’s America 2013! Be Loud and Proud! 🙂
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

It was Bush’s Fault! Damn Republicans…

Food For the Sowell Chapter III

With all the talk about taxing the rich, we hear very little talk about taxing the poor. Yet the marginal tax rate on someone living in poverty can sometimes be higher than the marginal tax rate on millionaires.

While it is true that nearly half the households in the country pay no income tax at all, the apparently simple word “tax” has many complications that can be a challenge for even professional economists to untangle.

If you define a tax as only those things that the government chooses to call a tax, you get a radically different picture from what you get when you say, “If it looks like a tax, acts like a tax and takes away your resources like a tax, then it’s a tax.”

One of the biggest, and one of the oldest, taxes in this latter sense is inflation. Governments have stolen their people’s resources this way, not just for centuries, but for thousands of years.

Hyperinflation can take virtually your entire life’s savings, without the government having to bother raising the official tax rate at all. The Weimar Republic in Germany in the 1920s had thousands of printing presses turning out vast amounts of money, which the government could then spend to pay for whatever it wanted to pay for.

Of course, prices skyrocketed with vastly more money in circulation. Many people’s life savings would not buy a loaf of bread. For all practical purposes, they had been robbed, big time.

A rising demagogue coined the phrase “starving billionaires,” because even a billion Deutschmarks was not enough to feed your family. That demagogue was Adolf Hitler, and the public’s loss of faith in their irresponsible government may well have contributed toward his Nazi movement’s growth.

Most inflation does not reach that level, but the government can quietly steal a lot of your wealth with much lower rates of inflation. For example a $100 bill at the end of the 20th century would buy less than a $20 bill would buy in 1960.

If you put $1,000 in your piggy bank in 1960 and took it out to spend in 2000, you would discover that your money had, over time, lost 80 percent of its value.

Despite all the political rhetoric today about how nobody’s taxes will be raised, except for “the rich,” inflation transfers a percentage of everybody’s wealth to a government that expands the money supply. Moreover, inflation takes the same percentage from the poorest person in the country as it does from the richest.

That’s not all. Income taxes only transfer money from your current income to the government, but it does not touch whatever money you may have saved over the years. With inflation, the government takes the same cut out of both.

It is bad enough when the poorest have to turn over the same share of their assets to the government as the richest do, but it is grotesque when the government puts a bigger bite on the poorest. This can happen because the rich can more easily convert their assets from money into things like real estate, gold or other assets whose value rises with inflation. But a welfare mother is unlikely to be able to buy real estate or gold. She can put a few dollars aside in a jar somewhere. But wherever she may hide it, inflation can steal value from it without having to lay a hand on it.

No wonder the Federal Reserve uses fancy words like “quantitative easing,” instead of saying in plain English that they are essentially just printing more money.

The biggest and most deadly “tax” rate on the poor comes from a loss of various welfare state benefits– food stamps, housing subsidies and the like– if their income goes up.

Someone who is trying to climb out of poverty by working their way up can easily reach a point where a $10,000 increase in pay can cost them $15,000 in lost benefits that they no longer qualify for. That amounts to a marginal tax rate of 150 percent– far more than millionaires pay. Some government policies help some people at the expense of other people. But some policies can hurt welfare recipients, the taxpayers and others, all at the same time, even though in different ways.

Why? Because we are too easily impressed by lofty political rhetoric and too little interested in the reality behind the words.

AMEN!

Vote for me, the other guy’s an asshole! 🙂

Vote Me, I will grab “free” stuff for you from evil rich bastards! 🙂

John Stossel: Politicians claim they make our lives better by passing laws. But laws rarely improve life. They go wrong. Unintended consequences are inevitable.

I wonder how unintended they are, really…But that’s me I’m much more cynical. 🙂

Most voters don’t pay enough attention to notice. They read headlines. They watch the Rose Garden signing ceremonies and hear the pundits declare that progress was made. Bipartisanship! Something got done. We assume a problem was solved.

Intuition tells us that government is in the problem-solving business, and so the more laws passed, the better off we are. The possibility that fewer laws could leave us better off is hard to grasp. Kids visiting Washington don’t ask their congressmen, “What laws did you repeal?” It’s always, “What did you pass?”

And so they pass and pass — a thousand pages of proposed new rules each week — and for every rule, there’s an unintended consequence, or several.

It’s one reason America has been unusually slow to recover from the Great Recession. After previous recessions, employers quickly resumed hiring. Not this time. The unemployment rate is still near 8 percent. It only fell last month because people stopped looking for jobs.

Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute understands what’s happening.

“Add up all the regulations and red tape, all the government spending, all the tax increases we’re about to get — you can understand why entrepreneurs think: “Maybe I don’t want to hire people. … I want to keep my company small. I don’t want to give health insurance, because then I’m stuck with all the Obamacare mandates.” We can see our future in Europe — unless we change. Ann Jolis, who covers European labor issues for The Wall Street Journal, watches how government-imposed work rules sabotage economies.

“The minimum guaranteed annual vacation in Europe is 20 days paid vacation a year. … In France, it starts at 25 guaranteed days off. … This summer, the European Court of Justice … gave workers the right to a vacation do-over. … You spend the last eight days of your vacation laid up with a sprained ankle … eight days automatically go into your sick leave. … You get a vacation do-over.”

It’s only “fair”, right? 🙂

Such benefits appeal to workers, who don’t realize that the goodies come out of their wages. The unemployed don’t realize that such rules deter employers from hiring them in the first place.

And the media sure as hell isn’t going to tell them. Those Evil Capitalist bastards!

In Italy, some work rules kick in once a company has more than 10 employees, so companies have an incentive not to hire an 11th employee. Businesses stay small. People stay unemployed.

“European workers have the right … to gainful unemployment,” says Jolis.

Both European central planners and liberal politicians in America are clueless about what really helps workers: a free economy.

Because they want everything to be “fair” which ends up being very authoritarian. The very opposite of free.

Funny how that worked out… 🙂

The record is clear. Central planners failed, in the Soviet Union, in Cuba, at the U.S. Postal Service and in America’s public schools, and now they stifle growth in Europe and America. Central planning stops innovation.

Yet for all that failure, whenever another crisis (real or imagined) hits, the natural instinct is to say, “Politicians must do something.”

In my town, unions and civil rights groups demand a higher minimum wage. That sounds good to people. Everyone will get a raise!

The problem is in what is not seen. I can interview the guy who got a raise. I can’t interview workers who are never offered jobs because the minimum wage or high union pay scales “protected” those jobs out of existence.

The benefit of government (SET ITAL) leaving us alone (END ITAL) is rarely intuitive.

Because companies just want to make a buck, it’s logical to assume that only government rules assure workers’ safety. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration sets safety standards for factories, and OSHA officials proudly point out that workplace deaths have dropped since it opened its doors.

Thank goodness for government, right? Well, not so fast. Go back a few years before OSHA, and we find that workplace deaths were dropping just as fast.

Workers are safer today because we are richer, and richer societies care more about safety. Even greedy employers take safety precautions if only because it’s expensive to replace workers who are hurt!

Government is like the person who gets in front of a parade and pretends to lead it.

In a free society, things get better on their own — if government will only allow it.

And this government most certainly won’t. But that’s what the American people wanted, so let them lie down in that bed of mediocrity and socialist utopias.

Maybe all the bed bugs will finally shock them, but I doubt it.

Unenlightened Narcissism has a way of blind the stupid to reality and that is surely the main focus these days.

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Ponying Up

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

No hyperbole here… 🙂

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

No big deal.

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

No big deal.

But Ryan wants to kill your grandma! 🙂

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

But you’re a pathetic racist for criticizing it.

 Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

 Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

The Vain Hope of Change

“Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal.”
― George Orwell, 1984

Thomas Sowell: It bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a “socialist.” He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.

What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots, but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector.

Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong. This is far preferable, from Obama’s point of view, since it gives him a variety of scapegoats for all his failed policies, so that he no longer has to use President Bush as a scapegoat all the time.

But he still has him to use as the catch-all for everything anyhow. And it, after all, all about HIM. You little people only matter if you are going to a) give him money or b) vote for him regardless of anything he says or does.

Government ownership of the means of production means that politicians also own the consequences of their policies, and have to face responsibility when those consequences are disastrous — something that Barack Obama avoids like the plague.

Thus the Obama administration can arbitrarily force insurance companies to cover the children of their customers until the children are 26 years old. Obviously, this creates favorable publicity for President Obama. But if this and other government edicts cause insurance premiums to rise, then that is something that can be blamed on the “greed” of the insurance companies.

And his surrogates in the Liberal Media also writes do pieces to back him up.

The same principle, or lack of principle, applies to many other privately owned businesses. It is a very successful political ploy that can be adapted to all sorts of situations.

One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.

And thus they also ignore his very Orwellian moves, words, and actions.

Doublethink: The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.

To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.

-George Orwell

Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely — and correctly — regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg’s great book Liberal Fascism cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists’ consistent pursuit of the goals of the Left, and of the Left’s embrace of the fascists during the 1920s.

Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the Left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W. E. B. Du Bois, as a man of the Left.

It was in the 1930s, when ugly internal and international actions by Hitler and Mussolini repelled the world, that the Left distanced itself from fascism and its Nazi offshoot — and verbally transferred these totalitarian dictatorships to the Right, saddling their opponents with these pariahs.

What socialism, fascism, and other ideologies of the Left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people — like themselves — need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, i.e., the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.

Like the immigration fiat just handed down and high handed and high minded way they think of themselves for doing it.

‘This is Not Amnesty’: Pres. Obama Defends New Immigration Policy in White House Speech

Yes, it is. It’s nothing but, but he has to play his games with words and let his minions pound you with them and your “racism” because you disagree with The First Black President!

President Barack Obama says his plan to stop deporting younger illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children will make the system ‘more fair, more efficient and more just.’ (The Blaze)

The vision of those of the Left is not only a vision of the world, but also a vision of themselves as superior beings pursuing superior ends. In the United States, however, this vision conflicts with a Constitution that begins, “We, the People . . . ”

That is why the Left has for more than a century been trying to get the Constitution’s limitations on government loosened or evaded by judges’ new interpretations, based on notions of “a living Constitution” that will take decisions out of the hands of “We, the People,” and transfer those decisions to our betters.

The self-flattery of the vision of the Left also gives its true believers a huge ego stake in that vision, which means that mere facts are unlikely to make them reconsider — regardless of what evidence piles up against the vision of the Left, and regardless of its disastrous consequences.

Only our own awareness of the huge stakes involved can save us from the rampaging presumptions of our betters, whether they are called socialists or fascists. So long as we buy their heady rhetoric, we are selling our birthright of freedom. (NRO)

AMEN.

The U.S. has never before had a President who thinks so little of the American people that he imagines he can win re-election running on the opposite of reality. But that is the reality of President Obama today.

Waving a planted press commentary, Obama recently claimed on the campaign stump, “federal spending since I took office has risen at the slowest pace of any President in almost 60 years.”

Peggy Noonan: “There is, now, a house-of-cards feel about this administration.  It became apparent some weeks ago when the President talked on the stump – where else? – about an essay by a fellow who said spending growth [under Obama] is actually lower than that of previous Presidents.  This was startling to a lot of people, who looked into it and found the man had left out most spending from 2009, the first year of Mr. Obama’s Presidency.  People sneered: The President was deliberately using a misleading argument to paint a false picture!  But you know, why would he go out there waiving an article that could immediately be debunked?  Maybe because he thought it was true.  That’s more alarming, isn’t it, the idea that he knows so little about the effects of his own economic program that he thinks he really is a low spender.”

Or more like someone who is so Orwellian that he wants you to believe a complete falsehood as the truth. And many liberals do buy into it because this an ideological falsehood not a factual falsehood. As Mr. Sowell pointed out and I have pointed out on many occasions Liberals do not response favorable to ACTUAL facts.

What this shows most importantly is that the recognition is starting to break through to the general public regarding the President’s rhetorical strategy that I’ve have been calling Calculated Deception.  The latter is deliberately using a misleading argument to paint a false picture.  That has been a central Obama practice not only throughout his entire presidency, but also as the foundation of his 2008 campaign strategy, and actually throughout his whole career.

Rest assured, Ms. Noonan, that the President is not as nuts as he may seem at times.  He knows very well that he is not a careful spender.  His whole mission is to transform the U.S. not into a Big Government country, but a Huge Government country, because only a country run by a Huge Government can be satisfactorily controlled by superior, all wise and beneficent individuals like himself. 

The analysis by Internet commentator Rex Nutting on which Obama based his claim begins by telling us “What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress.”  Not exactly.

The previous administration, or President, proposes a budget.  The previous Congress approves a budget.  And what Congress approves can be radically different from what the President proposes. (Forbes)

The Democrat controlled Congress passed the budget in 2008 for 2009 and has refused to pass another budget since 2009. The Republicans pass one and the Democrats ignore it, or demonize it or both.

That’s is called “obstructionist” by the Liberals. Because you are obstructing their attempts to take over every facet of your life! And that’s the Republican’s Fault! The Teap Party’s Fault! ,The “rich”!, “The right wing”,”Greedy” Corporate America’s Fault!

The President has put a budget for the last two years that was mere showpiece and it has been shot down twice in a row with zero votes for it because it wasn’t a serious proposal and was never designed to be one. But  you have to keep up the facade of it’s the Republicans fault for not passing the President’s budget that is the problem, not that the Democrats not passing the Republican’s (or even negotiating) is the problem.

It’s all in how they want you to look at it.

Reality is just a game. A political game. A game to be played to win.

“Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal.”
― George Orwell, 1984

Uncle Obama - Don't Interrupt Me While I'm        Circumventing Congress

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Brian Farrington

Hope That Changed

If any day should make you want less government and less spending this should be the day.

Unless, you’re a Liberal that is.

Carolyn Kaster / AP

Carolyn Kaster / AP
MR “HOPE & CHANGE”. The “UNITER” The President for  all America, not just RED or Blue.
Mr,. Post-Partisan. Post-Racial. Mr. “fair”.
Mark Steyn: In the end, free societies get the governments they deserve. So, if the American people wish to choose their chief executive on the basis of the “war on women,” the Republican theocrats’ confiscation of your contraceptives or whatever other mangy and emaciated rabbit the Great Magician produces from his threadbare topper, they are free to do so, and they will live with the consequences.
Look what “Hope and Change” brought us… 😦
According to the Congressional Budget Office (the same nonpartisan bean-counters who project that on Obama’s current spending proposals the entire U.S. economy will cease to exist in 2027) Obama’s Buffett Rule will raise — stand well back — $3.2 billion per year. Or what the United States government currently borrows every 17 hours.So in 514 years it will have raised enough additional revenue to pay off the 2011 federal budget deficit. If you want to mark it on your calendar, 514 years is the year 2526. There’s a sporting chance Joe Biden will have retired from public life by then, but other than that I’m not making any bets.At the current pace of spending government will have spent by then  – $65,528,575,000,000,000.00

Anyone for more taxes and spending? 🙂

What the president meant to say was: “It will help us close our deficit … for 2011 … within a mere half-millennium!” (Pause for deafening cheers and standing ovation.)

The current federal debt burden works out at about $140,000 per federal taxpayer, and President Obama is proposing to increase both debt and taxes.

Are you one of those taxpayers? How much more do you want added to your $140,000 debt burden? As the Great Magician would say, pick a number, any number. Sorry, you’re wrong. Whatever you’re willing to bear, he’s got more lined up for you.

Your share of federal deficit grows by $50 per day.

The Obama No-Plan plan means the end of everything. That really ought to be the only slogan the Republicans need this fall:

What’s your plan? And all you hear are crickets chirping.

But don’t worry, they’re federally funded crickets, chirping at a research facility in North Carolina investigating whether there’s any correlation between chirping crickets and the inability of America’s political institutions to effect meaningful course correction.

Hey, relax. The Buffett Rule will pick up the tab.

And your kids and grandkids and descendents ad infinitum, well, they are just a wealth waiting to be taxed to death for their own good and for the almighty “fairness”.

Andrew Malcolm: Has anyone seen Barack Obama recently?

You know, the optimistic hopeful fellow with the charming smile who promised so many positive things four and five years ago, how he was going to change the harsh, partisan tone of our nation’s capital and bring the country together as its first African American president.

Even allowing for political hyperbole, his empty resume and the invisible witnesses from the past, Obama was such a Real Good Talker that even some who didn’t vote for him still had hope that he could change some things for the better in what seemed a sadly-splintered society.

WTH did that Obama go? Have you listened recently to this Chicago Doppelganger who’s replaced him? This 2012 Obama is strident and mean, even deceitful, divisive, telling half-truths after half-truths. He’s using Air Force One as his personal Brinks truck with wings to collect cash all over the country, disguising the trips as official.

He tries to intimidate the Supreme Court, an equal branch of government, when its thinking might stray from his. He distorts history, and if no one calls him, then it’s true. If he’s caught, this Obama says you obviously mis-heard. Because, as everyone knows, he could never mis-speak.

The economy, like everything else adverse, is someone else’s fault. But if only we borrowed and spent a trillion dollars, unemployment would stay beneath 8%, Obama promised. It soared far above. It’s still above. No apology. No acknowledgment. Now, he hails any dip as proof of progress when, in fact, it comes because so many just give up seeking work.

He chastises House Republicans for their draconian budget when his Senate Democrats haven’t written a single one in three years; so, the fiscal drift abides. And wait till he exaggerates the frightening things the GOP wants to do, instead of presenting his own ideas.

Obama claims credit for the bottom half of a pipeline he had nothing to do with, when he killed the top half. He brags that domestic oil drilling is up when the part he’s responsible for is down.

He says no one should ever go to Las Vegas on the taxpayer’s dime. Then his wife, daughters and entourage do just that.

This year’s Obama talks of the importance of windmills, algae and green energy, but he takes a 17-SUV motorcade to a photo op with an electric car. He lambasts oil companies for getting the same legal tax incentives (he calls them “subsidies”) that other companies receive, hoping to aim anger at them so voters won’t notice that gas prices have doubled since his inauguration with Honest Abe’s Bible.

Take this Tuesday. The 2012 Obama flew to Florida for an official presidential speech on the economy, then three fundraisers. That way his campaign only pays a fraction of Air Force One’s $182,000 per flight hour cost. All presidents do that, though none have done near as many.

But read the four speeches. You can’t tell which is official and which is political. They’re all political. He can’t be a real president for one lousy speech? Why the phony presidential fig leaf? To chintz the United States of America out of a few thousand bucks when he plans to raise a billion?

The Buffet Rule? Americans have always admired the successful. The only thing wrong with rich people is we’re not one of them — yet. But now he’s pitting most of us against rich folks, which is him, come to think of it. The only way he’s bringing us together now is to resent their paying a smaller legal rate because theirs is a different kind of income.

And speaking of taxes, whch are due Tuesday, how can the president of the United States allow 36 of his own White House aides to fall $833,000 behind in their tax payments?

How is that what the first Obama offered, making him an example of American success? (Hint: His GOP opponent is far richer than Obama and earned it the old-fashioned way through work, not fronting books.)

OK, Obama wants political skirmishes all over on any petty thing so people won’t notice the absence of any conceivably positive record to run on. Risky when Americans start paying attention. But if that’s his only card. It’s all the Republicans’ fault, of course. That’s the candidate in him, the one that prefers performing for adoring crowds instead of performing Oval Office duties.

But whatever happened to the president part? The leader. The principled man who through his personal story, skills and charm was going to inspire, convince, cajole Americans as diverse as himself to work together for a common national success? That official part has merged with the political, like the four Florida speeches. Now, he’s just trying to fool everybody about everything.

In a way, this could be good news for Republicans. The duplicate Ernst Blofeld makes Mitt Romney look like Mr. Rogers.

But without real presidential leadership, Obama’s hand-picked harpie atop the Democratic National Committee feels empowered to assign a hired gun to dismiss his opponent’s wife, the cancer-surviving mother of five sons, as someone who’s never worked a day in her life. Are they that scared already?

Seriously? We’re going to pit now one kind of working woman against another? The guy who talks about having so many women in his life isn’t going to fire the women responsible for that? He thinks American women will buy this stuff?

OK, Obama was raised by grandparents because he didn’t always have a stay-at-home mom or dad. But this is a nation, not a dysfunctional family or a windy city party where factions are left to their own wards and Solyndras.

Obama is the guy who said his own wife was off limits politically, the guy whose mother-in-law has resided since Day One in the White House at taxpayer expense as a live-in nanny so the first lady can campaign for money and healthy foods? But a woman who stays at home with her kids at no public expense can be trashed because of her party?

We were never exactly fond of the Original Obama. But we’d take him any day over the twilight character that inhabits the Oval Office now.

But some how this will probably be “racist” and re-edited by NBC… 🙂

When Liberals Attack

“What he did was make an unremarkable observation about 80 years of Supreme Court history,” Carney told reporters during a White House briefing dominated by the President’s ‘threat’ to the Supreme Court.

“Since the 1930s the Supreme Court has without exception deferred to Congress when it comes to Congress’s authority to pass legislation to regulate matters of national economic importance such as health care, 80 years,” Carney said.

“He did not mean and did not suggest that … it would be unprecedented for the court to rule that a law was unconstitutional. That’s what the Supreme Court is there to do,” Carney said.

Wow! that’s some spin. Has the Planet starting moving backwards yet?

FAST & FURIOUS

Despite the so-called “ongoing,” year long internal investigation by the inspector general, Eric Holder has yet to be interviewed.

During an appearance in Chicago, the attorney general made the comment about the inspector general’s office at the Justice Department, which has been examining who is responsible for employing the risky tactic known as gun-walking.

Holder said he would talk to the inspector general investigators when they request it.

Insider ATF sources have told me the inspector general report is nearly finished, but that it hasn’t been made public because “they are trying to come up with a report everyone can agree on.” So, not only is the “ongoing” investigation from the DOJ inspector general not really “ongoing” at all, DOJ doesn’t plan to produce a factual report, but instead one that everyone can agree on. This isn’t surprising considering the inspector general, Cynthia A. Schnedar, is a good friend and former colleague to Eric Holder. She has also been leaking information in order to jeopardize Issa’s investigation. (Katie Pavlich)

MORE DOJ FUN

PHOENIX, Ariz. — The day after negotiations between the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and the U.S. Department of Justice fell apart, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery accused federal prosecutors of playing games, instead of handing over evidence to back their claims.

“I demand as the duly elected officer with responsibility for prosecutions, to be given that information immediately,” Montgomery said. “This posturing, this playing hide the ball in the context of civil litigation, is disgusting, particularly when it involves criminal prosecutions”

“Put up, or shut up,” he added.

Montgomery sent DOJ officials a letter on December 16, the day after they announced findings of racial profiling and discriminatory policing within MCSO, requesting documentation of ongoing instances of such claims.

Negotiations between MCSO and Justice Department officials crumbled on Tuesday when attorneys for Arpaio refused to agree to have an independent monitor oversee terms of an agreement.

A DOJ spokesperson said the monitor would ensure “fair and sustainable reforms.” but Arpaio’s attorneys said the monitor would infringe on Arpaio’s law enforcement authority.

Kind of remind you of de-segregation?

You need a Kindergarten monitor you “racist” “profilers”

We have to watch over you racists and make sure you’re being “fair” to minorities and illegals.

And of course, they are just playing games. They just want the perception out there and have no intention of actually backing it up.

Keep the pot stirred up.

Smearing people without any ethical standards is just so Liberal.

GIVE THE KING YOUR TITHE

A bill authored by a Southland lawmaker that could potentially allow the federal government to prevent any Americans who owe back taxes from traveling outside the U.S. is one step closer to becoming law.

Senate Bill 1813 was introduced back in November by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Los Angeles) to “reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes” .

In addition to authorizing appropriations for federal transportation and infrastructure programs, the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” or “MAP-21″ includes a provision that would allow for the “revocation or denial” of a passport for anyone with “certain unpaid taxes” or “tax delinquencies”.

Section 40304 of the legislation states that any individual who owes more than $50,000 to the Internal Revenue Service may be subject to “action with respect to denial, revocation, or limitation of a passport”.

The bill does allow for exceptions in the event of emergency or humanitarian situations or limited return travel to the U.S., or in cases when any tax debt is currently being repaid in a “timely manner” or when collection efforts have been suspended.

Like ObamaCare tax penalties (if the thing survives)?

You will tithe your King or else peasant!

President Obama ought to be a figure skater, the way he spins.  We’ve heard facts and figures distorted, stretched, embellished, exaggerated, diminished, overlooked, ignored, and otherwise rent meaningless by the Obama White House.  Why heck, you might even reach the conclusion that the future is bright, if you hear and grant any credence to the so-called “information” emerging from the president’s staff and spokespersons.  But it’s simply not true.

In 1930, 1931, 1932, and 1933, the Great Depression got underway with major contractions in the economy.  But then in the next three years, the economy grew by 11%, 9%, and 13%, respectively.  Compare that with the current economy, which while it’s not currently in recession, is not recovering.  In 2010, it grew by 3%, in 2011, it grew by 1.7%, and in 2012 it looks to grow by about 2%.  This is not a recovery – it’s treading water.

I believe that the economy is actually straining at the leash – champing at the bit – but what’s holding it back is the continued residence of President Obama at 1600 Pennsylvania.  Once he’s gone, business will take off like a cat with turpentine on its hiney.  And Americans know it, so they’re going to get out and vote for the GOP nominee in November.  And it doesn’t much matter who that is.  The president, as a result of his obfuscation, lies, and exaggerations, has angered people, and that makes him vulnerable to being beaten by a Ham Sandwich.

Recovery?  What Recovery? (Junkman-KFYI)

I love that segment. 🙂

Democratic officials Wednesday launched a two-pronged attack on states with new laws requiring identification before voting, the highlight being a call to boycott Coke, Walmart and others that back a leading organization pushing for voter ID laws.

Coke was quick to react to the political boycott threat, pulling support from the targeted group just five hours after it was called. Walmart said that support for a group does not mean it backs every decision by those groups.

At issue: Liberal claims that some states are trying to keep minority voters from the polls via voter ID laws, a suggestion conservatives call silly.

“The Coca-Cola Company has elected to discontinue its membership with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our Company and industry.”

WIMPS!

ALEC by the way is the same origination that the AFL-CIO said was behind George Zimmerman and the Trayvon Martin shooting.

“When you look at whose behind it, you find that the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a very conservative think tank comprised of corporations and very conservative representatives at the state level are behind this.”

So do I smell a new Liberal Meme and boogeyman? 🙂

PHOTO ID VOTING

The group complained that some states want to limit the time allotted for early voting, bar ex-felons from voting and require government identification to vote. Polls show that most Americans back the laws. But Clyburn compared them to segregation era “Jim Crow” laws and he said that he is “very, very anxious” that the conservative Supreme Court “as it is presently constituted” will support the new anti-voter fraud laws.

Jim Crow, really?  Gee, getting on a plane requires a picture ID (or a Passport for international) must be hell for Liberals but then again they want to prevent you from going anyhow if you haven’t paid your tithe to the king. 🙂

You need an ID for the following (not comprehensive):

obtain a bank account

College Entry (gee I thought they had none?)
obtain a credit card
obtain a passport
write a check
make a credit card purchase
apply for a loan to purchase anything
to prove your age
to get married
to receive a marriage license
to drive
to buy a house
to close on a house
to get medical care
to get on a plane
to get insurance on anything
to get a job
to get a post office box
to get a hunting license
to get a fishing license
to get a business license
to cash a paycheck
rent an apartment
rent a hotel room
rent a car
rent furniture
rent tools and equipment
receive welfare
receive social security
receive food stamps
buy cigarettes
buy alcohol
buy a bus ticket
buy a cell phone
buy any antihistamine
go in to a casino
go in to a bar
go to college
have your water turned on
have your electricity turned on
have your cable turned on
have your gas turned on
obtain trash pick up service
pick up a package from the post office
pick up a package from fed ex
pick up a package from ups
pick up a prescription

Even grandma (who conservatives want to throw off a cliff :)), who is retired and needs to cash her check, has some form of government I.D.

2012-03-16-digest-cartoon-2

The Democrats have to protect their dead voters, ACORN staffers, and Illegal Alien Voters.

“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and change the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution.” — Saul Alinsky

“A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage — the political paradise of communism.”  p.10 Rules for Radical, Saul Alinksy

“An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent… He must create a mechanism that can drain off the underlying guilt for having accepted the previous situation for so long a time. Out of this mechanism, a new community organization arises….
     “The job then is getting the people to move, to act, to participate; in short, to develop and harness the necessary power to effectively conflict with the prevailing patterns and change them. When those prominent in the status quo turn and label you an ‘agitator’ they are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to agitate to the point of conflict.” p.117

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 

State of the Union

I enjoyed “Chopped” last night, amusingly it was a “Redemption” episode where they brought back contestants there previously chopped.

The winner, a guy who was previously homeless and has kicked and scratch and worked himself up to being a chef. He got beat one the first show. But now he was back to try again.

He fought hard and he won.

How the perfect anti-Obama. Redemption and Hard Work Rewarded. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Republican National Committee has compiled this video comparing lines President Obama used tonight in his State of the Union Address with lines he used in previous addresses before Congress:

Obama 2010

: “It’s time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs.

Obama 2012

: “Colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down.”

***

Obama 2010

: “And we should continue the work by fixing our broken immigration system.”

Obama 2011

: “I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration.”

Obama 2012

: “I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration.”

***

Obama 2010

: “We face a deficit of trust.”

Obama 2012

: “I’ve talked tonight about the deficit of trust . . .”

***

Obama 2010

: “We can’t wage a perpetual campaign.”

Obama 2012

: “We need to end the notion that the two parties must be locked in a perpetual campaign.”

The good news is that after a couple years these sorts of speeches begin to write themselves. (KFYI)

So I didn’t miss much apparently. 🙂

2009: “I will be held accountable,” Obama said. “I’ve got four years and … A year form now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress, but there’s still going to be some pain out there … If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

So it’s 3 years later. Leave already… 🙂

But as we all know Liberals can say things like that but when it come to fruition they have forgotten they even said it and when you remind them they blow it off because they didn’t mean it then and they don’t mean it now.

And the new sound bites, lofty rhetoric, they don’t mean that either. Never did.

They just want you to buy it on the moment, then forget it, just like they do.

It’s not like they have principles or anything.

Thomas Sowell: This may be the golden age of presumptuous ignorance. The most recent demonstrations of that are the Occupy Wall Street mobs. It is doubtful how many of these semi-literate sloganizers could tell the difference between a stock and a bond.

Yet there they are, mouthing off about Wall Street on television, cheered on by politicians and the media. If this is not a golden age of presumptuous ignorance, perhaps it should be called a brass age.

No one has more brass than the President of the United States, though his brass may be more polished than that of the Occupy Wall Street mobs. When Barack Obama speaks loftily about “investing in the industries of the future,” does anyone ask: What in the world would qualify him to know what are the industries of the future?

Why would people who have spent their careers in politics know more about investing than people who have spent their careers as investors?

Presumptuous ignorance is not confined to politicians or rowdy political activists, by any means. From time to time, I get a huffy letter or e-mail from a reader who begins, “You obviously don’t know what you are talking about…”

The particular subject may be one on which my research assistants and I have amassed piles of research material and official statistics. It may even be a subject on which I have written a few books, but somehow the presumptuously ignorant just know that I didn’t really study that issue, because my conclusions don’t agree with theirs or with what they have heard.

At one time I was foolish enough to try to reason with such people. But one of the best New Year’s resolutions I ever made, some years ago, was to stop trying to reason with unreasonable people. It has been good for my blood pressure and probably for my health in general.

A recent column that mentioned the “indirect subsidies” from the government to the Postal Service brought the presumptuously ignorant out in force, fighting mad.

Because the government does not directly subsidize the current operating expenses of the Postal Service, that is supposed to show that the Postal Service pays its own way and costs the taxpayers nothing.

Politicians may be crooks but they are not fools. Easily observed direct subsidies can create a political problem. Far better to set up an arrangement that will allow government-sponsored enterprises — whether the Postal Service, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the Tennessee Valley Authority — to operate in such a way that they can claim to be self-supporting and not costing the taxpayers anything, no matter how much indirect subsidy they get.

As just one example, the Postal Service has a multi-billion dollar line of credit at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Hey, we could all use a few billions, every now and then, to get us over the rough spots. But we are not the Postal Service.

Theoretically, the Postal Service is going to pay it all back some day, and that theoretical possibility keeps it from being called a direct subsidy. The Postal Service is also exempt from paying taxes, among other exemptions it has from costs that other businesses have to pay.

Exemption from taxes, and from other requirements that apply to other businesses, are also not called subsidies. For people who mistake words for realities, that is enough for them to buy the political line — and to get huffy with those who don’t.

Loan guarantees are a favorite form of hidden subsidies for all sorts of special interests. At a given point in time, it can be said that these guarantees cost the taxpayers nothing. But when they suddenly do cost something — as with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — they can cost billions.

One of the reasons for so much presumptuous ignorance flourishing in our time may be the emphasis on “self-esteem” in our schools and colleges. Children not yet a decade old have been encouraged, or even required, to write letters to public figures, sounding off on issues ranging from taxes to nuclear missiles.

Our schools begin promoting presumptuous ignorance early on. It is apparently one of the few things they teach well. The end result is people without much knowledge, but with a lot of brass.

Bravo!

Now does that sound like Liberalism today and Obama in particular… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Larry Wright

Thanksgiving 2011

I am just thankful to be alive.

After yesterday’s car accident that totaled my car what else is there to say.

The false accusations of  “sexual harrasment” at Fry’s Electronics an hour earlier is another story for another day.

What a day!! 😦

So I turn it over to one of my favorite writer, Thomas Sowell.

“Alice in Wonderland” was written by a professor who also wrote a book on symbolic logic. So it is not surprising that Alice encountered not only strange behavior in Wonderland, but also strange and illogical reasoning — of a sort too often found in the real world, and which a logician would be very much aware of.

If Alice could visit the world of liberal rhetoric and assumptions today, she might find similarly illogical and bizarre thinking. But people suffering in the current economy might not find it nearly as entertaining as “Alice in Wonderland.”

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the world envisioned by today’s liberals is that it is a world where other people just passively accept whatever “change” liberals impose. In the world of Liberal Land, you can just take for granted all the benefits of the existing society, and then simply tack on your new, wonderful ideas that will make things better.

For example, if the economy is going along well and you happen to take a notion that there ought to be more home ownership, especially among the poor and minorities, then you simply have the government decree that lenders have to lend to more low-income people and minorities who want mortgages, ending finicky mortgage standards about down payments, income and credit histories.

That sounds like a fine idea in the world of Liberal Land. Unfortunately, in the ugly world of reality, it turned out to be a financial disaster, from which the economy has still not yet recovered. Nor have the poor and minorities.

Apparently you cannot just tack on your pet notions to whatever already exists, without repercussions spreading throughout the whole economy. That’s what happens in the ugly world of reality, as distinguished from the beautiful world of Liberal Land.

The strange and bizarre characters found in “Alice in Wonderland” have counterparts in the political vision of Liberal Land today. Among the most interesting of these characters are those elites who are convinced that they are so much smarter than the rest of us that they feel both a right and a duty to take all sorts of decisions out of our incompetent hands — for our own good.

In San Francisco, which is Liberal Land personified, there have been attempts to ban the circumcision of newborn baby boys. Fortunately, that was nipped in the bud. But it shows how widely the self-anointed saviors of Liberal Land feel entitled to take decisions out of the hands of mere ordinary citizens.

Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner says, “We’re facing a very consequential debate about some fundamental choices as a country.” People talk that way in Liberal Land. Moreover, such statements pass muster with those who simply take in the words, decide whether they sound nice to them, and then move on.

But, if you take words seriously, the more fundamental question is whether individuals are to remain free to make their own choices, as distinguished from having collectivized choices, “as a country” — which is to say, having choices made by government officials and imposed on the rest of us.

The history of the 20th century is a painful lesson on what happens when collective choices replace individual choices. Even leaving aside the chilling history of totalitarianism in the 20th century, the history of economic central planning shows it to have been such a widely recognized disaster that even communist and socialist governments were abandoning it as the century ended.

Making choices “as a country” cannot be avoided in some cases, such as elections or referenda. But that is very different from saying that decisions in general should be made “as a country” — which boils down to having people like Timothy Geithner taking more and more decisions out of our own hands and imposing their will on the rest of us. That way lies madness exceeding anything done by the Mad Hatter in “Alice in Wonderland.”

That way lie unfunded mandates, nanny state interventions in people’s lives, such as banning circumcision — and the ultimate nanny state monstrosity, ObamaCare.

The world of reality has its problems, so it is understandable that some people want to escape to a different world, where you can talk lofty talk and forget about ugly realities like costs and repercussions. The world of reality is not nearly as lovely as the world of Liberal Land. No wonder so many people want to go there.

AMEN.

Now stay safe.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

The Partisan Bunker

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now is that “transparent” enough for you??

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So is it now “transparent”?

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

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

Democrats are more insistent on revenues now.

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

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

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

So how’s that “transparency”? 🙂

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

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

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

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

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

Deep….Deep….Deep….

The Partisan Bunker is open and ready for you…

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler



Obama 2.0

Obama smiled and interjected, “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected.”

The Obama administration promised the Recovery Act (“the stimulus”) would prevent the jobless rate from going over 8%.

It’s been over 8% SINCE and the $800 billion was flushed down the toilet to temporarily save Union jobs and state budgets only.

“If you were looking for a bunch of partisan rhetoric, I’m probably not  your guy,” President Obama said at a fundraiser in Miami. (He’ll leave that to he’s apparatchiks and the media).

<<Industrial Strength Barf Bag Please>>

It’s Obama 2.0!!

But it’s incumbent 🙂 upon you to forget everything you know for the last 3+ years and go for the rock-star Obama because he’s such a great speaker and a really swell guy!

Screw the fact that unemployment has been over 8% SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!!

ObamaCare

Libya

Unemployment

Choking Regulations

Class Warfare

“Throwing Grandma off a Cliff”

“You gotta pass the bill to know what’s in it” (Pelosi)

“I want to be the President not just of Blue States…” 🙂

The Democrats haven’t passed a budget in 776 days!

The 72 rounds of golf

The lies, distortion, and just outright socialism.

Bill Ayers

Jeremiah Wright

The Obama Economic Team’s revolving door of failures in Keynesian Economics.

Quantitative Easing (aka make the dollar’s exchange rate worse so they look better)

IRS, TSA, EPA, Cap & Trade, and Amnesty.

Forget all about it.

It’s Obama 2.0: The Reboot.

And the Liberal Media will be more than happy to play along.

Oh, and if you are going to challenge the Annoited One for his re-coronation as Bob Bechel said on Hannity last night expect it to get very personal, “they will be the issue”.

The Democrats won’t talk about the issues. Oh Hell no!

They will just use fearmongering and they will get out all the Ad Hominem Nukes they have in their arsenal and build all new ones.

And they won’t wait for the Republicans to nominate someone, they will nuke them all and when the winner is chosen that person will be under 24/7/365 all out bombardment.

The person they were rude to in pre-school over a crayon will be dragged out to say how evil they are.

There will be plenty of lies to boot.

It will be a War of Armageddon.

It’s not like Democrats have an standards for morals or ethics. That just gets in the way of them getting what they want, when they want it, because they want it.

And what they want is an Obama Presidency where they can just chuck all consideration and just go for it. If he’s not running for re-election after 2o12 and ObamaCare comes online in 2013 and 2014, Socialist Utopia awaits!!! No holds barred!

And they will do or say anything to get it.

So the Republican better get ready for an all out war of armageddon. The Democrats are arming themselves.

And the hoped for $1 Billion Dollars (the largest campaign cash reserve in history) and a very compliant Liberal Media will be very helpful to their cause.

The main thing standing in their way is….YOU!

You, the American Voter, can still stop them. You have to stop them.

Or your future, your kids future is gone.

That’s not fearmongering. That’s the truth.

$15 Trillion in Debt and the Democrats want to spend even more.

ObamaCare will destroy your job.

Every 7.2 seconds for the next 18 years a baby boomer retires looking for their pot of government gold. Only there is no gold left now, let alone for your kids.

So your kids will be supporting the unsustainable.

And the Democrats don’t care.

Seriously, they don’t care. As long as they have the power to control you they don’t care what you think because they want to control that to.

Simple, really.

Oh, and if you don’t vote for them, YOU’RE A RACIST! 🙂

The Republicans are far from perfect. They are wimps and “old boys”. But compared to the Democrats, there is no choice.

There is no time.

Now or Never.

Obama 2.0 or America 2.0

Your Choice.

Choose wisely.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Tough

Couldn’t have said it better.

Jedidiah Bila: I spend quite a bit of time calling out some on the left. I detest big-government policies that simultaneously snatch our liberty and rob us blind. I find class warfare to be profoundly un-American. I have no patience for leftists who demand civility while spewing hateful rhetoric, or those who insist that feminism, diversity, and compassion are enemies of conservatism. And I don’t like left-wing liars who utilize scare tactics to distort everything from Paul Ryan’s Medicare proposal to Jan Brewer’s effort to enforce an immigration law that the federal government should be enforcing already.

I’ve also had tough words for some in the GOP. I have rejected weak deals that do nothing in the way of seriously addressing this country’s deficit and debt. And I have repeatedly stood firm against business-as-usual Republicans who compromise even when it’s not in the best interest of the country.

I now see two trends developing on the right with respect to 2012 that I’d like to address.

First off, I’ve received many emails from Republicans who feel that GOP contenders shouldn’t boldly criticize each other and that conservatives shouldn’t strongly critique 2012 candidates. I beg to differ.

When it comes to a 2012 primary season, it is imperative that candidates hold each other accountable for their records, for any disparity between their actions and words, for promises made and not kept, and for any and all inconsistencies. I want grassroots conservative bloggers, columnists, television commentators, and talk radio hosts calling it like they see it, putting those records front and center, and having a zero-tolerance policy for phonies and do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do nonsense. That is the only way to try to ensure that the strongest, most capable, most genuinely conservative candidate rises to the top. I want candidates challenging the heck out of each other. And I want us challenging them, too.

Secondly, I’ve had about enough of folks on the right trying to discourage candidates from running by insisting right off the bat that they could never win. Candidates are labeled unelectable, unpresidential, too polarizing, not polished enough, too unconventional, or some other absurd description. And so I ask — what are you folks so afraid of? Why are you so terrified of Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, and others entering the race and showing voters what they’ve got? Whether or not they are able to adeptly articulate their message and/or possess a proven commitment to conservatism will be heard by voters. The American people will make their decision. And I have to question the motives of anyone who wants to silence a candidate before the battle has even begun.

Conservatives, 2012 isn’t a fight we can afford to lose. And it’s not just about defeating Barack Obama. It’s about supporting someone who can be trusted to get this country back on track. You and I both know that plenty of politicians with GOP labels stamped on their foreheads are in no way committed to principled conservatism, and can in no way be counted on to exhibit strong leadership when it comes to fiscal responsibility, entitlement reform, and reawakening the values that built this country. By challenging candidates — and by them challenging each other — American voters will begin to separate the men from the boys, the women from the girls.

And to those who love telling potential GOP candidates to sit down and shut up before they’ve even stepped up to the plate, I remind you that this is America. That’s not what we’re about. I, for one, am ready to hear from everyone gutsy enough to play.

AMEN!

The Left and the Leftist Media are going to hate you no matter what you do or what you say. Period.

You could farther left than Barack Obama (if that’s possible) and they’d still hate you. And so would anyone who would have voted for you.

So have some balls. Stir straight into the Hurricane of Hate.

Case in Point: McDonalds.

Under assault for year by the Food Police.

They attack them, they change their ways. They attack them for something else. They change. They attack them again and again and again.

It’s much like Israel to Hamas and The Palestinians, their very existence pisses them off!

Now that Osama bin Laden is dead, we can turn our attention to another remorseless enemy who for years has sown death and destruction among blameless innocents. I refer, of course, to Ronald McDonald.

The McDonald’s mascot may qualify as one of the more annoying characters on the planet. But to his credit, he doesn’t compound his unappealing personality by bossing you around. In that respect, he is far less objectionable than the people who make a fetish of finding him objectionable.

Last week, they took out ads in several newspapers blaming the clown for childhood obesity and demanding that McDonald’s “stop marketing junk food to kids.” The signers range from the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an anti-meat group that the American Medical Association has accused of “perverting medical science,” to alternative-healing huckster Andrew Weil.

The general rule of critics is that McDonald’s can do nothing right. Some years ago, they insisted that the company get rid of the beef tallow in which it cooked French fries. It did so, in favor of a supposedly healthier oil containing trans fats. A few years later, the activists demanded that it abandon trans fats, which it soon did.

How much credit did it get for those changes? Not much. The class of people who detested McDonald’s went right on detesting it.

These ads are part of a larger campaign against everything McDonald’s represents. Were the company to retire Ronald McDonald, its enemies would step up their calls for an end to Happy Meals. Get rid of Happy Meals, and they would demand that McDonald’s thoroughly revamp its menu to incorporate their superior notions of nutrition.

Ultimately, the only way to please the critics is to become something unrecognizable. Or, better yet, disappear from the planet. New York Times food columnist Mark Bittman, who is to sanctimony what Saudi Arabia is to oil, believes “anything that discourages people from eating at McDonald’s could be seen as wonderful.”

Wonderful, that is, to enlightened souls who avoid it at all costs. But it’s clear that McDonald’s comes much closer to what paying consumers actually want than what its detractors prefer. It has 32,000 restaurants, serving 64 million people a day. Last year, it had revenues of $24 billion, more than the gross domestic product of some countries.

The food moralists imagine that McDonald’s marketing magic renders its targets helpless to resist. Ronald McDonald might as well be rounding up kids at gunpoint and forcing them to choke down

But children young enough to be seduced by Ronald McDonald or Happy Meals rarely visit restaurants without parents. These adults are free agents experienced at saying “no” to protect the interests of their sometimes ungrateful offspring.

Parents who dislike McDonald’s sales tactics have a wealth of dining alternatives. And anyone who wants a low-fat, low-calorie meal can easily find it underneath the Golden Arches: Health magazine ranks McDonald’s among the 10 healthiest fast-food restaurants.

It may be argued that many parents are too weak or ignorant to make sound decisions about the food their kids eat. If so, McDonald’s and its unstoppable brainwashing machine could vanish tomorrow without making the slightest difference in obesity or other diet-related ailments.

People don’t like cheap, tasty, high-calorie fare because McDonald’s offers it. McDonald’s offers it because people like it. In McDonald’s absence, patrons would seek it out at other fast-food places, sit-down establishments or grocery stores.

We live in an age of inexpensive, abundant food carefully designed to please the mass palate. Most of us, recalling the scarcity, dietary monotony and starvation that afflicted our ancestors for hundreds of millennia, count that as progress. But those determined to save human beings from their own alleged folly see it as catastrophic.

What is apparent is that the militant enemies of fast food would like it treated as a public health menace along the lines of tobacco. They want broad measures to restrict, discourage and punish the companies that sell it.

Ronald McDonald is merely a convenient symbol. Their true target is a capitalist economy that gives companies far too much latitude in appealing to customers and allows government far too little control over our food choices.

The idea of using government power to dictate what we eat will strike many Americans as a gross intrusion on personal freedom. But McDonald’s enemies? They’re lovin’ it. (Steve Chapman-Chicago Tribune)

Add in Liberal obsession with Oil Companies and you see where this is headed.

Liberals just want to control everything and everybody. They just consider themselves why smarter than you so you must be herded like cattle to do and to think what they want you to think.

So to have GOP Presidential Candidates cow-towing to the Media and the Left, trying to be “reasonable” and “accommodating” and “compromising” just drives me bat-crazy.

Stand Up. Be a Man (or woman) and Say what you believe and don’t Equivocate just to placate the Leftists. They won’t be.

Pure and Simple.

Now Just Do it!

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

The Blame Game

The Capitol Hill rhetoric reached new levels of ugliness Tuesday as negotiations over some semblance of a federal budget gave way to finger-pointing, with Democrats blaming Tea Party freshmen for a potential government shutdown and Republicans calling those claims a fantasy.

Over the past few days, Democrats have pounded the argument that Congress would have been able to work out a budget deal long ago if not for the extreme demands of Tea Party-aligned lawmakers.

Sen. “Up-Chuck” Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Democratic Senate leadership, got on a conference call with reporters Tuesday morning without realizing the reporters were already listening in. Schumer thought he was on a private line with four Democratic senators who were to talk with reporters about the current budget stalemate.

Schumer instructed the group, made up of Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Tom Carper of Delaware, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, to tell reporters that the GOP is refusing to negotiate.

He told the group to make sure they label the GOP spending cuts as “extreme.”

“I always use extreme, Schumer said. “That is what the caucus instructed me to use.”

Someone must have finally told Schumer that the media were listening and he stopped talking midsentence.

Here’s a bit more of what he said about House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, according to my notes.

“The main thrust is basically that we want to negotiate and we want to come up with a compromise but the Tea Party is pulling Boehner too far over to the right and so far over that there is no more fruitful negotiations,” Schumer said on the call. “The only way we can avoid a shutdown is for Boehner to come up with a reasonable compromise and not just listen to what the Tea Party wants. “

Schumer described Boehner as “in a box,” over the budget negotiations.

“Unfortunately, there are a number of new people in the Congress who think that a compromise is a sellout,” House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday. He said there’s still room for compromise, but accused the “perfectionist caucus” — his latest term for the Tea Partiers — of dragging down the Republican leadership. Hoyer said he put the odds of a shutdown at “five or six” on a scale of 10.

“While Chuck Schumer and the Democratic caucus have been busy in a backroom crafting their ‘blame the Tea Party’ talking points, according to Rasmussen, 69 percent of Americans remain ‘angry’ or ‘very angry’ with the government,” said Mark Meckler, national coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots.

“Why? It’s not that complicated, and it’s definitely not because the American public thinks the government isn’t spending enough money,” he added. “It’s because the majority of the American voters sent a clear message to Washington D.C. in November to get their fiscal house in order, and to make the cuts that will put this country on a sustainable path. Clearly people like Chuck Schumer didn’t listen.” (Washington Examiner and Fox)

It’s not that they did listen. They don’t care. It’s all politics. It’s all about 2012. It’s all about getting their power back so that they can continue their self-serving, monetary drug-addict behavior.

It’s all very arrogant, and very much about THEM.

The petulant drug addicts don’t want to change their ways. Period.

So they are kicking a screaming and whining like children.

And plotting who’s going to take the fall for what they don’t want to do.

Make no mistake — THE DEMOCRATS ARE CHEERLEADING A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN.

They remember how they pinned it on the Republicans the last time so they went back to that playbook.

And the Ministry of Truth Media will be more than happy to do 24/7 blame the Republicans broadcasts. They are probably writing and producing them now.

Be clear — THE DEMOCRATS ARE NOT INTERESTED IN ANY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY KIND.

And the Republicans are still too timid (Much like Obama’s foreign policy) to stand up to it.

The Tea Party is less timid, so that’s why they are the big target.

So since you can’t or won’t get anything done, time to point fingers and blame someone else!

“Make no mistake, if the government ends up shutting down, it will be because Senate Democrats refused to offer a real proposal that cuts spending and because the White House flatly refused to lead,” House Republican Leader Eric Cantor’s office said in a memo Tuesday.

As talks sour, both sides claim they can’t be held accountable since neither has a complete majority in Washington.

“It’s self-evident we don’t control Washington, or we wouldn’t be having this problem,” Hoyer said, arguing that Democrats would not be to blame if the government shuts down.

So it’s not their fault, so it must be The American People’s fault for wanting them to cut spending and live with their means.

We are the truly evil ones.

We want to make the monetary drug-addicts to something about their addiction.

And that’s just too hard for them. They just can’t do it.

So it’s our fault for wanting them to. 😦

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Armageddon 2.0

Wanna know you when can tell the Hysterical, Fear-Mongering, Chicken-Little, “Grandma will die Homeless on the street and the kids will be eating dog food” Left Has returned and will be celebrated by the Liberal Media??

We have our first Nazi reference by the Left! 🙂

Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen is comparing Republicans who he says lie about health care to Nazis. Remember all the talk of toning down the rhetoric? Apparently that was soooo last week.

Speaking late Tuesday night, before Wednesday’s vote to repeal health care reform legislation, Cohen said “They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels. You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That’s the same kind of thing. The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it — believed it and you have the Holocaust. We heard on this floor, government takeover of health care…the biggest lie of 2010 was a government takeover of health care because there is no government takeover.”

So Armageddon cometh again!

It just took a two year break while the Democrats were in control. 🙂

The reference to Nazis was roundly criticized on Wednesday, with repeated references to recent calls for more civil discourse. But reached by The Washington Post, Cohen said “I don’t think calling out liars is uncivil. No reason to apologize. You have a duty to respond. if they were telling the truth and I said they were lying, then I would apologize.” (Nashville Biz Journal)

Now that’s toning down your rhetoric! 🙂

Wanna see more hate: CNN’s Anderson Cooper ran a blog during his show yesterday and the “respectful” Left was out in force. It’s entertaining to a cynic.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/19/democrat-compares-republican-lies-to-nazi-join-the-live-chat/

One reader comment on ABCNews website proposed this defense of the Congressman:

Did you read it/ Did you listen to his speech? There was no hate speech.

Also, why does the author of this article misquote the Representative?

Meanwhile a VIDEO of the Congressman saying EXACTLY what was quoted is running on the same page!!

Now that’s the Left for you! Hysterical. 🙂

“I want to just advise people watching at home playing the now-popular drinking game, if you take a shot whenever the Republicans say something that’s not true, please assign a designated driver,” Rep. Anthony (The Whiner) Weiner (D-N.Y.) said.

Funny how the “new tone” sounds just like the hysterical old tone? Funny That.

And expect it to get MUCH,MUCH,MUCH worse as the 2012 elections get closer.

It’s going to be 24/7 Armageddon 2.0.

Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

(to quote “Ghostbusters!”) 🙂

Just watch and be mesmerized! 🙂

Brit Hume- Fox News: “That House vote to repeal Obamacare will have little legislative effects since there is virtually no chance the repeal will become law,” Hume said. “But, it will have political significance as a demonstration to the continuing resistance to the program. The repeal passed the House by far larger margin than the bill itself did when it was rammed through last March. In a sense it becomes a race against time.”

That race against time, as he explained, is one that will have to show progress made in dealing with the legislation before people adapt and it becomes a third-rail issue.

“That’s because once a sweeping set of government policies is put in place, Americans begin to adapt. They come to depend on whatever benefits the program provides, and they learn to live with burdens that it imposes. Businesses factor in the reality of their plan and change procedures accordingly. Once that process is completed, it is more difficult to undo the law. It may have been highly disruptive when it passed, but after a while repealing it becomes disruptive as well. And with billions in insurance subsidiaries flowing to millions of people, Obamacare could become politically untouchable, but it will be years before Obamacare is fully in effect. By that time, it should be clear that the bill does almost nothing to reduce the cost of health care, plus the mandate forcing everyone to buy health insurance, whether they want it or not, could make the measure more unpopular than it is now. And there is no uncertainty that mandate will be upheld by the courts. So in short, it’s clear time is a factor in this struggle but not so clear whose side time is on,” he said.

In the end, he admitted the bill will change the American health care system, but does nothing to “bend the cost curve.”

“I think we will be legislating this issue of health care and health care reform for years to come as partly because the bill does nothing to address the cost question,” he added. “And my sense is that when it’s all said and done, we will have a health care system that doesn’t look like the old one, but doesn’t look very much like this one either.”

A Final thought, provided by a Twitter repost on Obama’s kissy-kissy State Dinner for China’s President: 2009 Nobel Peace Prize winner holds State Dinner for man who has 2010 winner under House Arrest.

‘Nuff Said!

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Rhetoric Uber Alles

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

“Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions,” Palin wrote in an early morning post on her Facebook account on Wednesday. “But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.”

“There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently,” Palin wrote on Facebook. “But when was it less heated? Back in those ‘calm days’ when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols?”

The ‘calm days’ where when the Liberal were in complete control and could do anything they wanted and could ignore you’re ignorant, racist, moronic opinions to the contrary. 🙂

The fact that isn’t the reality anymore just makes them mad.

And they will never give up their hunt for what they perceive as political advantage.

“Whether [political rhetoric] caused what happened in Tucson or not, it’ll cause the next tragedy,” Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) predicts on FOX News.

So even if this one isn’t caused by heated political rhetoric (though that’s all we, the left, have been saying for 5 days now) it WILL cause the next one so we have to stamp out the hateful rhetoric of the right before it’s too late!!

Sadly, shamefully, within just minutes, a nasty political spin was kicking in without any brake for decency or evidence. Conservatives were to blame.

CNN broke in with this horrible news at about 1:30 Eastern time, and within an hour, CNN put on the local political cartoonist, David Fitzsimmons, who announced that the shooting was “inevitable” considering “The Right in Arizona, and I’m speaking very broadly, has been stoking the fires of a heated anger and rage successfully in this state.” The state also had a conservative “fetish” for guns that added to the inevitability, he claimed. (Brent Bozell)

Rep. Jim Clyburn wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine – a move aimed directly at talk radio – while Media Matters CEO David Brock asked Rupert Murdoch to rein in or possibly even fire Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.

There has been no shortage of individuals and institutions that have sought to capitalize on the shootings in Tucson. Add Vermont senator Bernie Sanders to that list.

This afternoon Sanders sent out a fundraising appeal, seeking to raise money to fight Republicans and other “right-wing reactionaries” responsible for the climate that led to the shooting.

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!!

Meanwhile, many proud liberals, not to mention dedicated journalists, see no problem with fueling a mass panic over our “political discourse.” The fact that liberal rhetoric and images are often just as “extreme” is irrelevant. Also irrelevant is any violence that might be linked to such rhetoric. And the fact that the shooting suspect’s motivations may lay in a reality of his own design? That’s irrelevant too.

These critics’ aim is simply to exploit this horror as an opportunity to yell “shut up” at their political opponents. (Jonah Goldberg)

“Every time you listen to them, they are furious. Furious at the left. With anger that just builds and builds in their voice and by the time they go to commercial they are just in some rage every night with some ugly talk. Ugly sounding talk and it never changes,”< MSNBC’s Chris> Matthews said.

So the vitriol and hatred 24/7 on his own show and his own network, MSDNC are exempted, of course. they are as pure and virtuous as the snow covering 49 states right now (go global warming!!)

I guess that was the “tingle” up his leg this time. 😦

And then there’s the hatefest called the Westboro Baptist Church:

WBC WILL PICKET THE FAG-INFESTED, PERVERT-RUN TUCSON HIGH MAGNET SCHOOL (aka 9 year old Christina Taylor Green’s School). KILLED FOR YOUR REBELLION WHEN GOD SENT THE SHOOTER TO DEAL WITH IDOLATROUS AMERICA. (directly from their website by the way)

You know, she was Catholic! Now that’s Just Evil!  And “better off dead

And that’s hardly it. Just the most disgusting.

But don’t worry, it was FOX News and Talk Radio that cause the vitriolic political rhetoric! 🙂

This flood of slanderous sludge is designed for nakedly political benefit: to paint a permanent black mark on conservatives as accessories to murder, and criminalize any expression of conservatism as a dangerous anti-government conspiracy.

Then we need to ban Jodie Foster, after all she was the reason that President Reagan was shot in 1981.

And we need to ban Fan Club groupies because that who killed the Tejano superstar singer Selena.

Mark David Chapman killed John Lennon over “Catcher in the Rye” by J.D. Salinger

And Trenchcoats, as in The “trenchcoat mafia” of the two sick kids who shot up Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado.

BUT NOT Major Hassan who shot up Fort Hood Army base yelling “Allah Ackbar!” as he kills people!

Oh no! That would be “jumping to conclusions”!!!! (according to the President, the media and the left for months afterwards)

A guy who is a radicalized muslim is just a lone nutjob but a marijuana-toking mentally unstable kid who shoots up a Tucson strip mall is doing it because of right winger extremists!

<<barf bag please>>

It’s apparent from evidence found by the authorities and from interviews with the alleged killer’s friends and acquaintances that Loughner has fixated on Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords since 2007, long before anyone heard of the “tea parties” or, in most cases, Palin. Moreover, his grievance with Giffords appears to be unrelated to any coherent — or even incoherent — ideological platform. Rather, it drew on the bilious stew of resentments this young man cultivated as he lost his grip on reality. (Jonah Goldberg)

But that matters not a whit to the Left. It’s irrelevant.

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!

Then there’s the Pima County Sherriff:

Political Cartoon

The sheriff is widely known for calling Arizona’s tough immigration law “racist” because he said it required local law enforcement to engage in racial profiling. He refused to enforce it.

To date, there is no public evidence that accused shooter Jared Loughner was in any way motivated by the national rancor over illegal immigration and the Arizona law (though open-borders extremists from the Justice Department on down most certainly wish it were so). When he complained about non-English speakers, Loughner’s nonsensical diatribes were aimed at illiterates in general — not illegal aliens — and “grammar control” by the government.

No matter. Dupnik vehemently singled out “people in the radio business and some people in the TV business” like Rush Limbaugh for creating the New York Times-patented “Climate of Hate.” Sounding more like an MSNBC groupie (which, surprise, he confesses to be) than a responsible law enforcement official, Dupnik baselessly suggested that the shooting was part of a larger conspiracy and railed against “vitriol” from limited-government activists who are stoking “anger against elected officials.”

Dupnik’s mouth has done more to stoke self-inflicted ire against elected government clowns than anything the right could muster against him. Had the hyper-partisan Democrat been more in tune with his job than the media airwaves, the murderous, maniacal gunman might have been stopped.

As Dupnik himself has now admitted, Loughner leveled death threats against others that were investigated by law enforcement — and then apparently shrugged off. Locals note that Loughner’s mother worked for the county and may have had some pull. Pima County College campus police reported five serious confrontations with the mentally unstable young man before he was kicked out of the school, which he decried as an unconstitutional “torture facility.” Classmates said they feared for their lives. His friends say he was a pothead, a 9/11 Truther and a UFO conspiracist so kooky that even flying-objects adherents spurned him.

Dupnik is now following the same ill-gotten path. But decent Americans understand that he and his civilian counterparts have traveled a smear too far. Despite desperate attempts by the progressive left to pin the massacre on the “harsh tone” of its political opponents, a vast majority of Americans reject the cynical campaign to criminalize conservatism, suppress political free speech and capitalize on violent crime for electoral gain.

At the risk of being accused of inciting violence, you might say they’ve done gone and shot themselves in the foot. (Michelle Malkin)

The Left just doesn’t care. They are going to take their shots no matter what. Sensitivity, compassion, and intellectual honesty are far too low on their priority list for them to care.

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

The Hypocrisy Manifesto

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

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

Political Cartoon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Political Cartoon

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

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

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

Their disrespect for the dead is beyond the pale.

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

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

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

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

But he tows the party line very well as always.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And it feels so good to HATE THEM!! 🙂

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

The News of The Day

My condolences to those killed in Tucson yesterday. And my best to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

This is not the way. Period.

But this is what all the divisive politics of the Left has wrought.

So now we have a new “crisis” for Obama to exploit.

What do you want to bet that later in the month we’ll have a push for Amnesty for Illegals in her name or the 9-year old girl that was killed in spray of bullets.

Yes, I am that cynical.

Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.”- Former Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel.

Am I that cynical? ‘Fraid so. We’ll see if it’s justified.

The Senior editor of The Leftist Huffington Post is talking about using this tragedy as a spring board for rebooting Obama’s image for 2012!!

As was the case with Clinton, Obama may be able to remind voters of what they like best about him: his sensible demeanor. Amid the din and ferocity of our political culture, he respectfully keeps his voice down, his emotions in check and his mind open.

That is the pitch, at least. The trick is to make it without seeming to be trying to make it.

In other words, fool them again!

Social Justice everyone. The Socialist Utopia.

Another potential “crisis” is Gun Control.

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”– Adolf Hitler

Candidate Obama in 2008: “You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

The shooters’ YouTube page, in which he lists both The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf among his favorite books, is still operational. Incidentally, Congresswoman Giffords is Jewish.

So watch out, it’s another Liberal “Crisis” so you’ll lose even more freedom for it.

The sheriff blamed the vitriolic political rhetoric that has consumed the country, much of it centered in Arizona.

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

It’s all cracker’s fault! Damn those Tea Party ‘terrorists’.

We need Amnesty Now!

Sad isn’t it.

Or maybe the Christina Green (The 9 year old killed by the gunman) Memorial Gun Ban?

I wonder if the Democrats will run Rep. Giffords for Vice-President in 2012 or President in 2016?

Oooh, now that was  cynical thought! 🙂

The List:

-John Roll, 63, a federal district court judge.

-Gabriel Zimmerman, 30, Giffords’ director of community outreach

-Dorwin Stoddard, 76, a pastor at Mountain Ave. Church of Christ.

-Christina Greene, 9, a student at Mesa Verde Elementary

-Dorothy Morris, 76

-Phyllis Schneck, 79

Maybe, just maybe, some of the divisive rhetoric will be toned down….

Nah, I doubt it. Liberals are addicted to it.

But may the victims rest in peace and may we all learn the real lessons of this tragedy and not just more political advantage.

But I doubt it.

Mr “Boycott my State” because we all racist Rep. Grijalva:

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who represents a district adjacent to Gabrielle Giffords’s, said that Saturday’s shooting is a consequence of the vitriolic rhetoric that has arisen over the past few years among extreme elements of the Tea Party.

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

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

Grijalva said that his family has been provided with protection and that he expects further precautions will be taken by Capitol Police when he returns to Capitol Hill.

“Her whole future’s ahead of her,” Grijalva said of Giffords. “She’s a moderate; I’m not. She’s my friend. Our difference of opinion did not interfere with our friendship.” (Huffington Post)

You see, the Tea Party and “Right Wing Extremist” made him do it. So we must clamp down on them!

Let’s watch and see, shall we.

So how long before it’s George W. Bush’s Fault?? 🙂

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

Illinois, one of the 3 states most identified with potential State Bankruptcy has a new plan to erase it’s $15 Billion deficit.

The state is run by Liberals.

So what do you suppose that could be?

Gov. Pat Quinn and the leaders of both houses of the Illinois General Assembly have agreed on raising the state income tax.

The Democratic leaders in the Illinois General Assembly believe this income tax increase, a corporate tax hike, and a $1-per-pack tax increase on cigarettes would erase the state’s $15 billion budget deficit.

What it will erase is anyone wanting to live in Illinois or locate a business there.

But, they are Liberals after all, they can only think along a very narrow Tax and Spend, evil Corporation line after all.

So Indiana and Iowa , Missouri and Wisconsin expect lots of refugees.

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

OBAMACARE UPDATE from THE CBO

The Liberals and The Leftist Media who are so in love with the CBO because they were saying that repealing Health Care would cost billions. Well, I doubt they will be touting this one : (Thanks to American Spectator)

The Congressional Budget Office, in an email to Capitol Hill staffers obtained by the Spectator, has said that repealing the national health care law would reduce net spending by $540 billion in the ten year period from 2012 through 2021. That number represents the cost of the new provisions, minus Medicare cuts. Repealing the bill would also eliminate $770 billion in taxes. It’s the tax hikes in the health care law (along with the Medicare cuts) which accounts for the $230 billion in deficit reduction.

CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have not yet developed a detailed estimate of the budgetary impact of H.R. 2, the Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act, which would repeal the major health care legislation enacted in March 2010. Yesterday, we released a preliminary analysis of that legislation indicating that, over the 2012-2021 period, the effect of enacting H.R. 2 on the federal budget as a result of changes in direct spending and revenues is likely to be an increase in deficits in the vicinity of $230 billion, plus or minus the effects of forthcoming technical and economic changes to CBO’s and JCT’s projections for that period.

We have been asked to provide the revenue and direct spending components of that total.  Extrapolating the estimated budgetary effects of the original health care legislation and accounting for the effects of subsequent legislation, CBO anticipates that enacting H.R. 2 would probably yield, for the 2012-2021 period, a reduction in revenues in the neighborhood of $770 billion and a reduction in outlays in the vicinity of $540 billion, plus or minus the effects of forthcoming technical and economic changes to CBO’s and JCT’s projections.

CBO will post a Director’s blog with this information on the CBO website shortly.  Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sandy

Edward “Sandy” Davis
Associate Director for Legislative Affairs
Congressional Budget Office

WHOOPS! 🙂

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

UNION UPDATE

The Grand Rapids Education Association, a local affiliate of Michigan’s largest teachers’ union, is attempting to pick off one-by-one 90-some members that have refused to pay their dues.

About 18 months ago, the school board voted to no longer deduct dues from employees’ paychecks, which meant union members had to physically write a check to the union. Many saw it as their opportunity to protest the obnoxious behavior of union leaders during a previous contract negotiation period. The union president, Paul Helder, was particularly pompous during negotiations, claiming the union was fighting a “war on terrorism.” He even established “War Time Committees” to organize the fight against the school board and administrators.

Marjorie Hayward objected to her president’s behavior and refused to pay up. So the union took her to small claims court.

The judge, citing the fact that Michigan is not a right-to-work state, ruled she has to fork over the money, regardless of whether or not the union is representing her interests.

Let that marinate for a bit – because of current Michigan law, the union has the right to take a school employee to court and extract money out of her. Isn’t that grand?

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

As if the $6 billion budget shortfall that he presided over didn’t really exist – a deficit that is expected to expand to a whopping $24.5 billion over the next eighteen months – outgoing Governor Arnold Governor Schwarzenegger had just called the legislature in to a “special session,” but then had called a press conference to announce his “really big plan.” For a second and final time before leaving office, he was going to try and legislate a state-wide ban on plastic grocery bags. This, he explained, would help save the planet, but would also help create so-called “green jobs.”

Indeed, this was a matter of “ideology trumping reality.” And never mind that Rome is burning -California will “be green.”

You may be broke, but you can still be “green”!

You just can’t make this stuff up.

But ideology still trumps reality in California, even in this new, “post Arnold” era. And so it was that, less than twenty-four hours after his inauguration, Governor Jerry Brown began laying the groundwork for raising taxes in California, rather than cutting government spending.

The problem with the state budget, so the Governor reasoned, was not that politicians had spent too much or that government agencies are wasteful. No, no, Californians aren’t taxed enough – they’ve been given an “unfair” break on their property taxes via the state’s famous, 32-year-old “Proposition 13,” and if that could be undone, then the state budget would be fixed.

Proposition 13, in case you’ve forgotten, was a landmark ballot proposition that drew a record number of voters to the precincts in 1978. The law passed in a landslide, and imposed a statewide limit on the rate at which local counties and cities could levy property taxes.

So all we have to do is spend our way to prosperity!

Sound familiar?

It’s a tragic day after in more ways than one.

It’s all About Me

Political Cartoon by Robert Ariail

YES WE CAN! 🙂

Political Cartoon by Steve Kelley
Jonah Goldberg: Most theories for why the president came unglued like a papier-mache doll in a steam bath during his press conference this week center on the fact that he can’t stand having his liberal bona fides questioned.

When Iran unveils its nuclear program or slaughters dissidents in the streets of Tehran, Barack Obama keeps a steadier hand than G. Gordon Liddy’s over a candle. Question his citizenship, his patriotism, even his jump shot, and he’s all Vulcan poise. But if you doubt his commitment to The Cause, he turns into Charlie Sheen without his Ritalin.

There are other theories, of course. He was just pretending to be mad so he could seem more moderate as he preps his 2012 bid for re-election. He hates giving Republicans what they want. Obama’s “political immaturity,” as South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said in an interview with National Review Online, leads to “whining” when he can’t have his way.

All of these theories are possible, and none of them are mutually exclusive. But there’s one more possible reason for his dyspepsia. This week Obama lost his argument with Hillary Clinton.

It’s largely forgotten now, but during their lengthy primary battle, the two committed liberals’ greatest disagreement wasn’t over policy or their shared disdain for George W. Bush. It was over their different visions of the presidency.

For example, in a Nevada debate, Obama admitted that he wasn’t a particularly organized person. But that was OK because the core role of the president shouldn’t be organizational but inspirational. “It involves having a vision for where the country needs to go … and then being able to mobilize and inspire the American people to get behind that agenda for change.”

Pshaw, responded Hillary, the president is really a “chief executive officer” who must be “able to manage and run the bureaucracy.”

This disagreement was symbolized by their respective role models. Obama likened himself to Martin Luther King Jr. and John F. Kennedy, inspirational leaders who led through rhetoric. Clinton sided with Lyndon Johnson, the guy who spun the shining words into actual legislation and got it passed, often on a bipartisan basis.

The debate played itself out by proxy in liberal magazines and in snippets of speeches and short outbursts on the stump, with most liberals siding with Obama over Clinton. Some even suggested she was a racist — or at least race-baiting — for daring to suggest that all he offered was the ability to give a good speech.
But even some of Obama’s biggest fans admitted that his devotion to the magical power of words stemmed from the fact that he had little else going for him. “Barack Obama could not run his campaign for the presidency based on political accomplishment or on the heroic service of his youth,” David Remnick wrote in the New Yorker after Obama won the general election. “His record was too slight. His Democratic and Republican opponents were right: he ran largely on language, on the expression of a country’s potential and the self-expression of a complicated man who could reflect and lead that country.”

Fast-forward to this week. Obama’s undisciplined diatribe against the “purists” in his own party who oppose compromise amounted to an abject admission that Hillary was right all along.

“Measuring success” by the no-compromise standard, Obama declared, means “we will never get anything done. People will have the satisfaction of having a purist position and no victories for the American people. And we will be able to feel good about ourselves and sanctimonious about how pure our intentions are.” But, he suggested, liberals will make little progress.

Obama then went on a stem-winder about how “this is a big, diverse country. Not everybody agrees with us. I know that shocks people. The New York Times editorial page does not permeate across all of America.”

All true. And the Democrats are being foolishly purist, as we saw Thursday when House Democrats voted to reject the tax compromise.

But denouncing purists and accepting that significant swaths of America aren’t going to be persuaded by your rhetoric is an admission that the Obama vision of the presidency either doesn’t work or that Obama isn’t up to the job of making it work.

Indeed, even on health-care reform, his signature accomplishment, Obama failed to mobilize and inspire the American people to his side. He got that passed with LBJ-like legislative skullduggery and sleight of hand, not “yes we can!” rhetoric.

Admitting you’re wrong is part of growing up, and growing up can be painful. At least it certainly looked painful watching it on TV.

So you bring in the smoothest talker you know, even if you’ve dissed him in the past — Bill Clinton. Then you make a poor excuse and go off to the White House Christmas Party (where it’s all about you) and leave Billy boy there to do your job for you because you have “communication” issues.
Political Cartoon by Ken Catalino
GLOBAL WARMING UPDATE
Mother nature kicked the Global Warming nuts in the gonads yet again.
They met in London, it’s a record snowfall. The meet in Copenhagen, it’s a record snowfall.
They meet in Cancun.
As negotiators from nearly 200 countries met in Cancun to strategize ways to keep the planet from getting hotter, the temperature in the seaside Mexican city plunged to a 100-year record low of 54° F. Climate-change skeptics are gleefully calling Cancun’s weather the latest example of the “Gore Effect” — a plunge in temperature they say occurs wherever former Vice President Al Gore, now a Nobel Prize-winning environmental activist, makes a speech about the climate. Although Gore is not scheduled to speak in Cancun, “it could be that the Gore Effect has announced his secret arrival,” jokes former NASA scientist Roy W. Spencer.
The reaction:
ClimateGate was “bad enough,” says Duncan Davidson in Wall Street Pit, but Cancun’s weather is particularly “inconvenient” for global-warming alarmists.
The Inconvenient Truth and Mother nature Strikes Again. But don’t worry, the Left is completely deaf to these signs.

Bolivian President Evo Morales called Thursday to save the Kyoto Protocol and to create an international climate justice tribunal.

‘The planet is wounded,’ Morales, Bolivia’s first president of indigenous descent, said in Mexico’s Caribbean resort city of Cancun.

‘We have an enormous responsibility with life and with humanity,’ he told the UN Climate Conference in a 20-minute speech.

Morales asked industrialized nations to approve a second round of commitments to the Kyoto Protocol, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions after 2012.

‘If we send the Kyoto Protocol to the bin, we will be responsible for ‘ecocide,’ and thus for genocide, because we would be attacking humanity as a whole,’ he said.

A World Court of Global Warming. Gee, I wonder who they’d go after?
The biggest polluter on the planet, China?
Or the the most politically advantageous? –US.
Hmmm… 🙂

(CNN) — Delegates at the United Nations climate change conference in Cancun, Mexico, approved an agreement early Saturday morning, despite objections from Bolivia.

The agreement includes plans to create a $100 billion fund to help developing nations deal with global warming and increase efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation.

Criminal Courts, taxes, and redistribution of funds….Sounds familiar somehow. 🙂

Bolivia’s government, meanwhile, claimed rich nations “bullied and cajoled” other countries into accepting a deal on their terms.

Anyone seeing the contradictions yet?

“For us, this is not a step forward. It is a step back, because what is being done here is postponing without limit the discussion on the Kyoto Protocol,” Bolivian Ambassador Pablo Solon told delegates early Saturday.

The agreement does not specify what will happen once the Kyoto Protocol expires, postponing the debate until the next scheduled climate talks in South Africa in 2011.

“It is less than what is needed, but it represents a significant step in the right direction,” <Mexican President> Calderon told delegates.

Sounds oddly familiar somehow? 🙂