7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cow-towed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.

mountain

So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.

David_Petraeus

And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up with little to no sense of shame.

disagree

2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.extremists

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?

No.

As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?

HELL NO!

2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and go away.

HELL NO!

They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

And these zombies have Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.

FEAR IS HOPE!

My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.

truth

Econ 101

America’s 18- to 34-year-old “millennials” have been tutored in group-think schools that extol socialism. Now they lionize Bernie Sanders, whose class-warfare prescriptions include taxing away all but maybe 1% of the nation’s 0.0001% billionaires’ wealth, then going after Wall Street, Big Business, millionaires and upper middle classes – and giving the “revenue” to those who “need” or “deserve” it more.

The entire process revolves around three central questions. Which ruling class elites get to determine who loses, who wins, by how much? Who grants them the power to do so, and holds them accountable? And what happens when the inevitable discontent over their autocratic decisions boils over?

Interestingly, many of the same generation have flocked to see films that glorify individual liberty and defiance of centralized government control. InThe Hunger Games, a few small gestures of disobedience grew into a revolution against Capital elites who lived well and ruled imperiously, while subjugated masses in the Districts starved in poverty and sent their children to die in televised “hunting games.”

In Divergent, a Faction system preserves a society that primarily benefits the ruling Erudites by stifling individuality. The heroes and heroines refuse to confine their lives and ambitions to only one of the other four factions in which they were placed at age sixteen. Again, the ruling class lives far better than the ruled masses. (Ponder the politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists in counties around Washington, DC.)

Are so many millennials really willing to let ruling classes confiscate wealth, impose penalties, determine appropriate welfare payments, and dole out favors? Has their “education” made them incapable of understanding the blessings of liberty, free enterprise capitalism, reliable and affordable fossil fuel energy, and entrepreneurial opportunities? Have instructors so brilliantly presented socialism through rose-colored glasses that young voters are blissfully unaware of its abject failures and horrid excesses?

Are millennials perhaps a little schizophrenic – loving liberty in theory and celluloid, but content to live reality in the Districts, among the Amity and Abnegation Factions, while enjoying the bread and circuses (welfare payments and show trials for humbled banker and corporate bigwigs) bestowed upon them? Or perhaps they simply assume they will be among the Capital’s Erudite and Candor classes, governing the rest of America, in the name of justice, fairness, diversity and equality?

They clearly view free or low-cost college tuition, child care, healthcare, food and housing – along with “living wages” of $15 per hour for entry-level jobs … and six-figure incomes after college – as “constitutional rights.” But when they “feel the Bern,” have they pondered how this system must necessarily work in the Real World, where they will feel the actual burn?

As the late Southern Baptist pastor and author Adrian Pierce Rogers succinctly explained, the hard reality is that “government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn’t first take from somebody else. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving.”

That is precisely what Senator Sanders’ wealth taxation and redistribution scheme proposes to do. The problem, as former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher astutely observed, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Even in the wealthy United States, “eventually” would come quickly, because socialism destroys the incentive to work, innovate, invest, take risks and create new wealth.

Ultimately, nations are left with a large and growing population of have-nots who demand more – when there is no “more” to be had. That is whatItaly, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Venezuela and other socialist, populist, egalitarian paradises are now discovering.

They used to provide all kinds of free stuff. Today they are basket cases – struggling with anemic growth, recession and bankruptcy. Their government bonds have turned to “junk” that no sane investor wants.

Today, 59% of young Greeks are unemployed. Youth unemployment is 56% in Spain, 42% in Italy, 38% in Portugal. In Brazil, electricity rates soared 51% last year, food prices rose 15% and overall inflation stood at 11% – a vast improvement over its 5000% annual inflation rate (!) in the early 1990s but still awful. In all of Latin America, only Argentina at 27% and Venezuela at 200% had worse inflation.

American students are immersed in “sustainability” studies and projects, mostly based on still persistent notions that we are running out of essential resources and destroying Planet Earth. Those ideas are the foundation of policies and regulations that perpetuate what really is unsustainable: unemployment, government spending, anti-growth policies, and the anger and unrest they cause.

It may be, as Winston Churchill once observed, that “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.” However, he continued, “the inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery and scarcity.” Unfortunately, simple, basic truths like this are rarely taught in our schools.

Students today want equality of outcomes, rather than of opportunities that yield positive outcomes by dint of hard work. If millennials applied their socialist principle to grades – with all scores on exams and projects averaged out among smart and less talented, hard-working and deadbeat students – shiftless classmates would be happy to coast along, once ambitious scholars would exert far less effort, and all would soon flounder in a sea of F’s.

Similarly, socialist policies stifle the innovation, economic growth and job creation that young people need if they are to get beyond minimum-wage service jobs, and out of their parents’ basements.

Free tuition? City University of New York had that for awhile, until 1976, when it ran out of money and the city nearly went bankrupt. Even Sanders admits his plan would cost some $750 billion over ten years. But perhaps it would work if half of the administrative positions were eliminated, faculty salaries got a 25 or 35% trimming, and sabbaticals came just once a decade.

Surely the “progressives” who rule our campuses – and try to ban and silence speakers like Ben Shapiro – would support this “pro-free-stuff” approach. Surely, the next generation of Erudite and Candor classes in The Capital would be content with salaries that are no higher than those of the masses they govern.

Moreover, the bills must eventually be paid. Millennials may get free stuff today. But they and their children and grandchildren will pay for their freebies many times over, through higher taxes, increasing control over their lives, higher inflation, fewer jobs at reduced salaries, and lower living standards.

Then there is the matter of accountability. Government is very good at fining and jailing citizens and businessmen for violating any of the thousands of regulations that carry criminal sanctions, even if the “perpetrator” did not intend to violate the rule or had no clue that such a rule could possibly exist. But government expects and demands that its own incompetent or criminal actions be ignored.

Thus a rancher is prosecuted for “terrorism” for accidentally burning 139 acres of national forests, but government officials get off scot free when they torch 160,000 acres a couple miles away. Citizens go to prison for inadvertently “impacting” a wetland, but EPA bureaucrats receive “get out of jail free” cards when they deliberately open an abandoned mine and unleash 3,000,000 gallons of toxic sludge. IRS directors simply “take the Fifth” after targeting conservative groups, an OPM director resigns rather than testify before Congress about her screw-ups, and VA incompetence is ignored – while private citizens are hounded and threatened until they cave in or run out of money to defend themselves.

The more government control and socialist wealth redistribution we get, the worse these abuses become. Will the Bernie Sanders voters demand accountability? Or do they simply not care when ruling elites and fellow socialists violate laws and abuse their public trust, to advance agendas or protect themselves?

All these questions would make for very interesting discussions with socialist candidates and voters. (Townhall)

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden

The Sheeple Have Voted

And Hillary wins Iowa by .2% on a 64-1 series of “coin flips”. Seriously? You can’t make up shit up. The corruption is even deeper than this massive cynic thought.

The Democrats narrowly voted for the Massively Corrupt Liar that would make Baron Munchhausen look like Mother Teresa over the All-Proud Socialist and they are too ignorant to understand it.

It will separate the corrupt Democrats who go for Hillary versus the foolish ones who go for Sanders and that Democrats don’t care about the Truth in anyway, shape or fashion…

So with that in mind.

bernies Fairy Tales

be

Not only do Democratic billionaires spend more on campaigns then Republicans do, as Katie Pavlich noted yesterday, but Democrats also represent the nation’s richest congressional districts, while Republicans represent the middle class.

They also win with coin flips (and some cash under the table I’m sure). Seriously?

With as many times as outgoing Majority Leader Harry Reid mentioned the Koch brothers in Senate floor speeches this year, you’d think that they were the ones who spent the most money during the 2014 midterm elections. Think again. Out of all the billionaires who donated money to causes or campaigns for the midterms, the top two were Democrats and they outspent everyone else on the list, combined. David Koch isn’t even near the top. More from POLITICO

And Bloomberg is considering running for President to preserve his Elitist status. 🙂

Billionaire Tom Steyer’s pet issue is global warming. With the amount of money Steyer spent, a whopping $74.3 million, and the results he received in return, he got trounced. Michael Bloomberg has of course been focused on gun control.  Neither one of these topics is popular with the majority of American voters and the results of the election, a Republican landslide, prove it.

And don’t forget George Soros. 🙂

I look forward to the left continuing their charade about money being a problem in politics. 

According to 2012 U.S. Census data, Democrats represent seven of the nation’s ten richest congressional districts including, California 18 (median household income $100,917), California 17 (median household income $100,652), Virginia 11 (median household income $98,815), New York 3 (median household income $96,626), Virginia 8 (median household income $92,918), California 33 (median household income $92,111), and Maryland 8 (median household income).

Meanwhile, Democrats also represent nine of the nation’s ten poorest congressional districts, including New York 15 (median household income $23,314), Mississippi 2 (median household income $29,981), Michigan 13 (median household income $30,273), Alabama 7 (median household income $31,080), Florida 5 (median household income $31,116), Ohio 11 (median household income $31,331), Arizona 7 (median household income $32,259), North Carolina 1 (median household income $32,488) , and California 34 (median household income $32,714).

And not only is the Democratic Party sharply divided between those that represent rich and poor congressional districts, but income inequality within Democratic congressional districts is far greater than it is within Republican ones. Of the top ten congressional districts with the highest levels of income inequality, Democrats represent nine of them.

The policy preferences of the Democratic Party reflect their top bottom divide. Just look at the cause of the last recession: housing. 

Citibank, who was Hillary Clinton’s biggest donor while she was in the Senate, made billions on subprime loans to poor households in the run up to the recession, then received billions in taxpayer bailouts when those loans went bad.

Now that Citibank has paid off the Obama administration, Obama is again pushing banks to make subprime mortgages to poor households again. 

The rich Democrats on Wall Street get richer, Democrats can tell their poor constants they are “doing something” to make housing cheaper, and middle class American taxpayers get stuck with the bill. 

Hope & Change!

The rich get richer and the poor get excuses and “white privilege”.

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Why They Do it

Global Warming: The United Nations climate summit was billed as the meeting that would save the world. But that’s not what the conference delegates want — their goal is to fundamentally transform the world.

Obama said in 2008 that he planned to “Fundamentally Transform America.” He has remained true to that promise.

In the days leading up to the 21st session of the Conference of Parties to the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, hardly a living person could avoid hearing the desperate talk about the Paris summit being our last chance to save the world from global warming . It was all a pretense, however, because what the global warming alarmist community says it wants isn’t what it truly hungers for.

Like most things with Liberals, deceit and fear is the only way for them.

The U.N.’s many climate meetings and its interest in climate through the years have nothing to do with warming, climate, weather or the environment.

The goal has always been to wreck capitalism , punish prosperous economies that became rich through free markets, reward poorer nations that are impoverished by policies that starve markets, and reshape the world in the image of left-wing thought.

Don’t believe it? It’s right there in the U.N.’s own documents.

The “Draft conclusions proposed by the Co-Chairs,” distributed on Dec. 5, confirms that the parties of a climate agreement are united in “emphasizing the importance of promoting, protecting and respecting all human rights, the right to development, the right to health, and the rights of indigenous peoples, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable climate situations (and under occupation).”

The draft also underscores the need to promote “gender equality and the empowerment of women, while taking into account the needs of local communities, intergenerational equity concerns, and the integrity of ecosystems and of Mother Earth, when taking action to address climate change.”

Yes, that’s Mother Earth with an upper-case M and upper-case E.

The same document refers as well to “the imperatives of a just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities.”

All of these issues being “emphasized” and “taken into account” are goals the political left has pursued for decades, and all require more government intervention into private affairs. This is what the global warming scare is about. It’s not about rescuing cities from encroaching seas, saving populations from drought, preventing “dirty weather ” or protecting polar bears.

Look at those around the world who are advancing the global warming scare. The movement is led, and followed by, figures from the political left who loathe capitalism, are repulsed by the wealth in advanced economies and want to exercise control over their fellow humans. The talk about climate change is a smoke screen to cover their true ambitions.

The Paris climate summit was to end this weekend, with a deal likely struck. The nabobs will claim victory, but that won’t end the hectoring. By the time spring rolls around, they’ll again be claiming the 2016 Morocco summit will be the last chance to save the world. (IBD)

And they did.

Do it our way, give us you life, or else!

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Follow The Money

Environmentalists like to claim skeptics are making money off hampering global warming regulations, but those same activists are making a lot of money promoting global warming alarmism.

A recent video from The Guardian claims that there is little money or power to be gained from environmental activism. The money behind activism pales in comparison to those of their fossil fuel-financed opposition, according to the video. The video even claims that “most of the money in solar and wind power comes from savings to the consumer.”

In the case of Al Gore, prominently featured in the video, the former vice president has levied his global warming activism from a net worth of $700,000 in 2000 into an estimated net worth of $172.5 million by 2015. He’s not alone in his financial endeavor.

Funding of science, in this particular case, climate change science, is dominated by the federal government. We assert that this will cause recipients of [government] grants to publish findings that are in-line with government policy preferences (i.e., don’t bite the hand that feeds you),” Chip Knappenberger, the assistant director of the Center for the Study of Science at the libertarian Cato Institute, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an email.

After a while, the scientific literature becomes dominated by these types of research findings which then produces a biased knowledge base,” Knappenberger said. “This knowledge base is then ‘assessed’ by intergovernmental and federal science committees (i.e., IPCC, USGCRP) to produce authoritative reports that supposedly represent the scientific ‘consensus,’ which is then tapped by the federal government in determining policy and setting regulations, such as the CPP [Clean Power Plan].”

A Cycle of Financial and Political Incest. One feeds the other.

Studies that receive financial support from the public sector don’t have to disclose it as a conflict of interest, even when that support is in the millions of dollars. Recent studies that the Environmental Protection Agency is using to support the scientific case for its Clean Power Plan saw the EPA itself give $31.2 million, $9.5 million, and $3.65 million in public funds to lead authors according to EPA public disclosures.

The author who received $3.65 million, Charles Driscoll, even admitted to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the result of his study was predetermined, saying “in doing this study we wanted to bring attention to the additional benefits from carbon controls.”

Universities typically received about 50 percent of the money that their researchers get in public funds if their research finds positive results, making them deeply dependent upon federal funding and likely to encourage studies which will come to conclusions that the government wants.

Even counting only private money, environmental groups massively outspend their opposition. Opposition to global warming activism only raises $46 million annually across 91 conservative think tanks according to analysis by Forbes. That’s almost 6 times less than Greenpeace’s 2011 budget of $260 million, and Greenpeace is only one of many environmental groups. The undeniable truth is that global warming activists raise and spend far more money than their opponents.

And money talks and Bullshit Science walks away with “consensus”.

Attempts by governments to encourage solar and wind power have created incentives for corruption that even environmentalists acknowledge. The push to encourage “green” systems has already led to serious corruption, such as the Solyndra scandal, which “crowds out” investment dollars that could be better spent on more workable solutions. (Libertarian Republic)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

THE NARRATIVE IS THE NARRATIVE.

The End. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

7 Ways Not to Leave Your Lover- The Government

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

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

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

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

But it makes it look like you “care”.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So you’re better off being poor.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More Democrat Voters!

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

Budget Overrides, for one. 🙂

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

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

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

So you are the frog. They are the heat.

Eventually, they want you to boil.

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

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

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

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

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

The Circle is complete.

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

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

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

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

The Court of AGW

At the upcoming United Nations Climate Summit in Paris, participating nations have prepared a treaty that would create an “International Tribunal of Climate Justice” giving Third World countries the power to haul the U.S. into a global court with enforcement powers.

Congress would be bypassed – left out in the cold – by this climate deal, critics say.

Policies once left to sovereign nations could be turned over to a U.N. body if the U.S. and its allies approve the proposed deal in Paris during the summit scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 11.

According to the proposed draft text of the climate treaty, the tribunal would take up issues such as “climate justice,” “climate finance,” “technology transfers,” and “climate debt.”

Buried on page 19 of the 34-page document is the critical text – still heavily bracketed with text that hasn’t been completely resolved and agreed upon – reads:

[An International Tribunal of Climate Justice as][A] [compliance mechanism] is hereby established to address cases of non-compliance of the commitments of developed country Parties on mitigation, adaptation, [provision of] finance, technology development and transfer [and][,] capacity-building[,] and transparency of action and support, including through the development of an indicative list of consequences, taking into account the cause, type, degree and frequency of non-compliance.

The U.N. held a preparatory conference in September in Bonn, Germany, that drafted language to be approved at the upcoming Paris climate summit. At the Bonn meeting the U.N. brought together more than 2,000 participants from governments, observer organizations and the media.

But none of those media chose to report on the proposed new global tribunal.

The Paris Conference is mandated to adopt “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all parties,” which is to come into force in 2020, according to IISD Reporting Services, which tracks the global sustainable development movement.

Like many initiatives that come out of the U.N., there has been a media blackout on coverage of the potential for a new world tribunal that would make binding decisions on a host of issues critical to the U.S. economy. The draft text has been available on the Internet since Oct. 20 for all to see.

“The only mentions one is likely to find with search engines are alarms being sounded by critics, the climate realists who reject the apocalyptic predictions (and discredited pseudo-science – see: here, here, and here) of the multi-billion dollar global warming lobby,” writes William F. Jasper for the New American magazine.

One such critic is the Craig Rucker, executive director and co-founder of CFACT.

Rucker points out that more than 130 developing nations – “led by South Africa and instigated by China and India” – are insisting they will not sign a climate deal in Paris unless it contains massive redistribution of wealth from developed to poor nations.

“Now they want the power to haul the U.S. and its allies before a U.N. Star Chamber to enforce compliance,” Rucker writes.

He also notes that this is not the first time the U.N. has tried to insert language creating a global climate court into a U.N. climate document. It happened in 2011 at a summit in Durban but was stripped at the last minute when CFACT blew the whistle and some media outlets picked up the story.

But this time around, the globalists writing the text have substituted the world “tribunal” for “court” and insist the body will be “non-judicial.”

“The slight edit to the terminology offers little comfort,” Rucker said, cautioning that the word “tribunal” could get watered down further if it attracts too much attention.

“If the climate tribunal becomes the focus of public scrutiny, watch for the negotiators to pull a switch behind closed doors and try and accomplish the same thing by re-branding it an enforcement ‘mechanism,’” he said.

“Whatever they call it, countries who sign onto this agreement will be voting to expand the reach of the U.N. climate bureaucracy, cede national sovereignty, and create a one-way street along which billions will be redistributed from developed to poor nations,” Rucker says. “Developed nations would be expected to slash their emissions while the ‘poor’ countries expand theirs. China, which holds a trillion dollars in U.S. debt, would be counted among the poor.”

He said China and India are “delighted,” with the prospect.

“They would like nothing better than a world where the West cedes the competitive advantages their free market economies created,” Rucker writes. “They hope for a future where Asia does the manufacturing and the U.S. and Europe do the importing – until their wealth runs out, anyway.”

Obama, Kerry ‘desperate’ to claim treaty as success

Rucker said President Obama and John Kerry are desperate to claim the climate treaty as a foreign policy “success.”

“President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry are mired in foreign policy failures,” Rucker notes. “They desperately want to get this agreement signed so they can claim a victory for their legacies.

“How far are they willing to sell out American interests to get this ill-begotten agreement signed?” (WND)

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA

NO MATTER WHAT!

That’s how far…

The 1%

The Sith Lords of The Left (except when they are Democrats or Socialists like George Soros then they are ok). 🙂

Debunking the Myth of the “1%.” Who’s Really “The Rich?”

Rich bastards! It’s time to spread the wealth around! If you’re part of the 1%, you’re part of the problem!

Or… is it?

Perhaps the greatest economic misconception of the 21st Century is the idea that 1% of the world’s population are greedy jerks who keep the other 99% of the earth living in poor houses made of mud and tears.

Think the top 1% are billionaires? Nope. Millionaires? Nada. Well, they’re at least cracking $750K, right? Wrong again. In fact, YOU are probably far more affulent than you realize. And you disgust me for it. Let’s look at the numbers, American style:

If you make more than $100,000, you’re in the top 20%.

If you make more than $149,000, you’re in the top 10%.

If you make more than $522,000, BINGO, you’re a 1%’er. You’re probably a greedy jerk too, so screw you.

This is just a guess, but even if you don’t fall into one of these categories, chances are, you at least know somebody who does fall into any of the above categories. Which makes you a second-hand 1 percenter. That’s like a second-hand smoker only more vile. You probably don’t even think of those friends as being rich, but they are compared to the rest of the world. And these are the people leftists tell us are causing all the world’s problems, including the diminishing bee population (not really, but maybe one day), who need to do more for the country by paying their “fair share.” Except, that top 1% of earners already pays more in taxes than the bottom 90% (that’d be EVERYONE making less than $149K) COMBINED. Behold, graphs:

who are the wealthy

Oh, and by the way? If you’re under 31 and make over $300,000 – you’re in the top 0.1%. For realzies. Check out this chart from The Atlantic:

wealthy

But let’s take things a step further. If we expand the comparison globally, you become waaaaay wealthier than imagined. Like Scrooge McDuck from Ducktales, swimming in a vault of coin.

The average yearly income on a global scale? $1,225.

Yeah. You’re rich. Bastard. How does it feel to cause global warming? Even if “your” money is sent to you on a bi-weekly basis from the US treasury… you’re rich. And kind of a succubus, but that’s for another article.

If you make more than a whopping $34,000 a year? You are in the top 1% of the world’s wealthy.

Over half of the world’s 1%’ers (those making $34K+), live in the United States.

the wealthy

Maybe you’re not so bad off after all, Mr. college hipster making $15 serving coffee, huh? Maybe life isn’t so bad climbing the corporate ladder for “just” $75K a year, is it? Also, a nutless monkey could do your job. You mad? Please leave room for cream.

Saying the wealthy need to pay more (paging Bernie Sanders), is really saying we all need to pay more.  Because really, you’re rich. If you’re an American, you’re rich. Like, super, ridiculously rich. Period. Also, you have running water, a flushing toilet, probably a phone of some kind, a flat screen, and maybe a Netflix subscription. So please, stop the whining. It’s getting old.

SO, how rich are YOU?

Here’s a fun tool created by Giving What we Can: you punch in your income and household size, they tell you how rich you are compared to the rest of the world. You’ll probably be shocked. And that’s a good thing. Seriously. Go try it. Like, right now, money-bags.

Go ahead, I Dare you! 🙂

Lesson? If you’re living in the USA, you’re a greedy one-percenter and a bastard for it. Screw you with your flushing toilet and your five figure annual income. All this comes down to dollars, common sense, and perspective. The United States is a bastion of wealth, even for the “poor” Americans binge watching Orange is the New Black. Our top income earners aren’t paying their “fair share,” they’re paying YOUR share too. So get the numbers, memorize them, and every time you hear a gender-studies hipster talk to you about the one percent and shares and fairness and the latest iPhone, tell them about the real facts. If they’ll listen. (Steve Crowder)

But we all know that Liberals do not respond maturely to facts. 🙂

And if Democrats didn’t have the Envy Card, The Hate Card they would be just a husk of nothing floating on the winds. 🙂

But I want us to be super careful when we use the language “hard worker,” because I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall, because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like. So, I feel you that he’s a hard worker. I do. But in the context of relative privilege…”- MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

And remember in  the FY 2015 the government took in more tax money than anytime in it’s history and still ran a deficit!

elect me d5c6f-democrats6

Political Cartoons by Dana Summers

The Inequity of it All

Today is my Birthday.

What I want for my birthday is for Liberals to stop thinking with their emotions and be rational, logical adults who aren’t narcissistic, greedy, power mad, 2 years old at heart.

Not going to Happen.

Neither is getting Establishment Republicans and RINOs to stop being narcissists and thinking only of their own agenda and thinking about The American People for a change.

I might as well wish for World Peace at the same time, it’s just as likely.

Strike up a conversation with any taxi cab driver or any fry cook at a roadside diner and the word “inequality” is unlikely to ever come up. That’s not on the list of top concerns for middle class America. It’s also not on the list of concerns for the world’s poor. Millions of people are willing to risk life and limb just to come here and start out at the bottom of the income ladder.

(Don’t the immigrants realize how unequal things are? Yes, they want to live in a country where a poor immigrant can become a billionaire.)

So why is anyone claiming that inequality is our most important problem? Because the chattering class has decided that stoking envy is the only way to energize the Democratic Party. Think about the problems we really do have: runaway entitlement spending, poor public schools, welfare dependency, an overly burdensome tax system and anemic economic growth. In every case the solutions we are debating come from the right: Privatization, school vouchers, tough love, a flat tax and lower taxes on capital.

The left has no solutions, or at least none that anyone takes seriously. So, over the years of the Obama presidency the topic of inequality has emerged front and center. Democratic candidates could rail against the super rich and imply that their high incomes are the cause of everyone else’s stagnating income, without ever saying what exactly they would do about it.

Until Bernie Sanders came along. Sanders actually has a few concrete proposals – including the idea that we should become like Denmark, a high tax welfare state. Once the discussion turns from pure demagoguery to serious conversation, inevitably we are forced to look at what economists have to say. (Warning: it’s not good for Democrats.)

In other words, you can’t solve the problem by taxing the rich. If taxation is your only tool, you have to break again one of Barack Obama’s frequently broken promises and raise taxes on the middle class.

In a Brookings Institution study, Peter Orszag (former chief economist for President Obama) and his colleagues discovered that if you raised the top tax rate from 40 percent to 50 percent and redistributed that money to people at the bottom, the top 1 percent’s share of income would only decline from 16.4 to 15.6 percent. The Gini coefficient (the numerical measure of inequality) would change so little you would have to squint to see it.

Then there is the question of why we have increasing inequality in the first place. Another study by Orszag and current Obama chief economist Jason Furman found that a primary source of inequality among people is inequality among firms. Take a look at the chart below. If you happened to be working for one of the top 10 percent of most successful companies over the past two decades your salary, bonuses and other compensation probably soared. If you have been working for the median firm, your income has probably risen modestly. If your employer is in the bottom half of the distribution, your income has probably been stagnant.

So what can be done about that? The idea of arresting the growth of highly successful companies is silly. But that isn’t necessarily a deal breaker for the left. The problem for Democrats is that Silicon Valley is heavily Democratic. It’s one of the places Democrats go to get mega gifts. My bet is that you won’t hear a peep about inequality among firms in the coming election.

orszag chart

 

SOURCE: KOLLER ET AL. (2015); MCKINSEY & COMPANY

That leaves Denmark. People on the left are fond of citing the Nordic states — Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Iceland — as examples of countries with higher taxes and less inequality. It’s easy to see why. As Matt Yglesias writes

Danish mothers enjoy 18 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave at 100 percent of their ordinary pay. Danish students leave college free of debt. Everyone is covered by a national health insurance system and can take advantage of subsidized child care; plus, thanks to a generous welfare system, Denmark’s child poverty rate is about a quarter of America’s.

So how do the Danes afford all that? With high taxes. As Yglesias makes clear, it’s not just taxes on the rich. The top tax rate in Denmark is 57 percent, about the same as it is in California. If California wanted to become like Denmark, it would basically leave the rich alone. But it would have to sock it to the middle class with effective tax rates averaging from 35 to 48 percent. Then the state would need to pile on with 25 percent value added tax — which is basically a form of sales tax and every bit as regressive. Car addicted Californians would also experience a huge spike in the price of gasoline and a 180 percent tax on the price of a new car!

So how does Denmark keep from looking like Greece? Answer: They believe in privatization, deregulation and free enterprise. Denmark is rated as one of the best places in the world to do business. It scores higher on the Heritage Economic Freedom ranking than the United States does. Unlike the US, public sector unions in Denmark don’t control public services and push up costs with job protecting regulations. For example, a private, for-profit company is currently in charge of 65 percent of municipal fire departments and 85 percent of ambulance services in the country. According to Yglesias:

In Copenhagen … the metro is driverless, the suburban rail network features one-man train crews, and many urban bus lines are run by private companies. These are all kinds of measures that US labor unions would normally oppose….

Øresund Bridge from Copenhagen to Malmö was constructed at a drastically lower price than the United States is prepared to spend to replace the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York even though the Nordic bridge is substantially longer and includes a major train component along with the roadway.

The Danish model is awfully hard to emulate if public sector unions are the backbone of your party.

Finally, there is Yale law professor Stephen Carter’s observation that the word “inequality” was used eight times by the candidates and once by the moderator in the Democratic debate the other night. In every instance the focus was on taxing the rich, not on helping the poor. In fact, the word “poverty” was used hardly at all. Apparently, envy sells better than charity when communicating with Democratic voters.

Yet Carter, himself a bona fide liberal, notes that we don’t really have an inequality problem. We have a poverty problem.

That Democrats ignore it is hardly surprising. When is the last time you heard a Democratic candidate for president talk about the poor in any respect? The last one I can remember was John Edwards and that was eons ago. (Townhall)

And look what happened to him… 🙂

Oh, the inequity of it all.

 

DIY

A recent New York Times headline read, “Raising Taxes on the Wealthiest Would Pay for Bold Plans.” The story says that by soaking the rich “the government could raise large amounts of revenue … while still allowing them to take home a majority of their income.”

Nowhere in the story, nor in the endless promises of Democratic presidential candidates, is there a single word about whether more government spending will produce the promised outcomes. We are to take this on faith, despite past performance being a good indicator of future results. Also absent is any expectation that individuals have more power than government to direct and improve their lives.

The Government in 2015 has taken in more tax money than any time in American History…but they still run a massive deficit…things have gotten worse not better.

That’s because to the left, government is much like a deity to be worshipped rather than a servant of the people. If you don’t worship at the leftist shrine, you’re labeled unsympathetic toward the poor. Republicans should respond: “We care about the poor, but unlike you, who have spent over a trillion dollars fighting poverty with little to show for it, we want the poor to become independent of government.”

What keeps most of the poor locked in poverty is propaganda from the left, which tells them they cannot succeed without government assistance, which, in turn, leads them to a series of bad choices and a state of perpetual victimhood. Look at America’s big cities, dominated by Democrats, to see how that’s working. Once we talked about people who overcame difficult circumstances; now we just sing about overcoming … someday.

 

Charles Koch and his brother David are reviled by the left because they contribute large amounts of money to Republicans. Never mind that George Soros does the same for Democrats. The normally reclusive Charles is doing interviews to promote his new book “Good Profit: How Creating Value for Others Built One of the World’s Most Successful Companies.”

Speaking with Megyn Kelly on the Fox News Channel, Charles read a letter his father sent him about his inheritance: “If you choose to let this money destroy your initiative and independence, then it will be a curse to you and my action in giving it to you will have been a mistake. I shall regret very much to have you miss the glorious feeling of accomplishment. Remember that often adversity is a blessing in disguise and is certainly the greatest character-builder.”

Where are you hearing anything like that in contemporary political discourse, especially among Democrats? It’s all about free college tuition, free health care, free everything. The United States will become a giant ATM and those evil, miserly, insensitive “millionaires and billionaires” will pay for it all because it isn’t fair that they have more money than you have.

They (the anti-Democrat) are racists,bigots, homophobes, haters,misogynists, who hate children, poor people, want to destroy the environment and above all are “greedy” and “selfish” (the last two are in quotes because they are so laughable I can’t type it straight).

Even if government confiscated all of their wealth there wouldn’t be enough to pay off the $18 trillion national debt. What happens when the money runs out; when all of the wealth of the successful is exhausted and the incentive to make money disappears with it?

The Democrats will demand more.

Where will the left turn then? Who is asking these questions? Not debate moderators, who seem more interested in getting the candidates to attack each other, as though the debates were just the latest reality shows. This is the future of the United States at stake. Could we please hear some adults conversing like adults?

The Liberal Media only wants to attack the right and throw Nerf balls at the Left.

The Agenda is The Agenda and they are the superior form of life, at least according to them.

Need a plan for success, or at least independent living?

The Democrat completely endorse not having one. That’s what government is there for, for you to be coddled and manipulated like zombies.

It isn’t new. Stop turning to government as a first resource. Get married before you have children, stay married and if things get tough seek counseling. Stay in school. Don’t take drugs. Develop good character and a sound work ethic. If a good job with a future isn’t available where you live, move to a city that offers more opportunity, or start a small business.

Why be an adult when Democrats want to be your Mommy. 🙂

In the bidding war for votes, the left is preaching a message of envy, greed and entitlement. Human history proves that message doesn’t improve a life.

But as long as itn wins elections they don’t care.

The old values worked. If you’re a millennial, ask your grandparents about them, why they worked and how we lost sight of them along the way. Since these values succeeded for previous generations, why don’t we reclaim them?

Because then you’re a “greedy”, “selfish” “uncaring” bastard!

Yeah, Bastards! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
 

ObamaCare Busted Again

Last week, the total number of failed ObamaCare-created insurance co-ops reached eight, as co-ops in Colorado and Oregon announced that they were closing doors at the end of the year.

These co-ops got a total of about $900 million in low-interest loans, most of which are unlikely to be repaid.

The administration handed out more than $2 billion in guaranteed loans to 23 co-ops, as well as additional “solvency funds” when many started suffering financial problems last year.

Now we learn that 11 of the remaining 15 co-ops could be at death’s door too, but the administration is hiding information about their health.

The Daily Caller reports that the administration has “a secret list of 11 ObamaCare health insurance co-ops they fear are on the verge of failure, but they refuse to disclose them to the public or to Congress.”

These co-ops, the Daily Caller reports, are now on “advanced oversight” by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs ObamaCare.

Earlier this year, an inspector-general audit noted that all but one of the co-ops had lost significant amounts of money in 2014, due either to lower-than-expected enrollment or because they underpriced their insurance policies.

Democrats exempted the co-ops from disclosure rules that apply to publicly traded corporations.

Oh, and the penalty for not having insurance is going to skyrocket next year too. 🙂

The math is harsh: The maximum federal penalty for having no health insurance is set to jump to $695 or 2.5 percent of taxable income , and the Obama administration is being urged to highlight that cold fact to help drive its new pitch for health law sign-ups.

That means the 2016 sign-up season starting Nov. 1 could see penalties become a bigger focus to motivate millions of people who have remained eligible for coverage, but uninsured.

You Vill Comply with Herr Fuhrer!!

So what if the program you’re complying with is dying and is already a massive failure, that doesn’t even remotely matter!

Remember this is the Tax that is a Penalty that isn’t tax! 🙂  The government said so. 🙂

Just when it looked like Obamacare couldn’t get worse, new statistical evidence shows that it can, and has. Health care insurance is getting more expensive for most workers because of an increase in deductions.

Employer-provided health plans defy earlier predictions that the number of such plans would fall in the face of new Obamacare regulations. While the overall number of plans did not decrease appreciably, subscribers were hit this year with big jumps in deductions, the part of medical bills insurers won’t pay. Nearly 1 in 10 of such deductions range upward from a thousand dollars. The average worker will pay more for medical expenses than ever. The clear message is, “you’re insured, but don’t get sick.”

Gee, I thought it was “They just want you to die” at least that was what the Democrats said about The Republicans… 🙂

The increases continue a growing trend. The average deductible has more than tripled, from $303 in 2006 to $1,077 this year. This is part of the explanation of why wages have flattened. Workers have chosen medical insurance benefits instead of higher wages. These deductibles have increased more than seven times the increase in wages. Increases in medical insurance premiums have actually fallen by 1 percent over 2014, falling for the first time in a decade, though the cost of family plans are up 3 per cent.

The Affordable Care Act, the polite  (DEMOCRAT) name for Obamacare, was intended to supply subsidies to offset increases in premiums. But apart from difficulties in getting these subsidies in place — state-administered funds versus federal funds — the growing difficulty for the average worker is an increase in deductibles (and co-pays) rather than more expensive premiums.

A Kaiser Family Foundation study reports the average deductible for a generous plan this year is $2,500 or more. Predictions that this would undermine company plans is now being borne out. This trend is further reinforced by the so-called employer mandate in Obamacare, which requires employers of a hundred or more employees to provide health benefits; this becomes 50 or more employees in 2016. Businessmen argue that this requirement costs jobs, and accounts in part for the growing structural unemployment even as the economy slowly sputters to life. Managers are reluctant to add workers and try to stay under those ceilings.

Another piece of bad news in the Kaiser study is that the Obamacare’s 13 percent tax on so-called “Cadillac” plans has led many companies to withdraw them. Opposition to the tax is coming as much from the Obama administration’s usually loyal unions as from business companies.

It’s tempting to say to the president and his incompetent fixers that we told you so. But we won’t. The slapdash, do-it-before-anyone-looks Obama administration’s attempt to solve the infinitely complicated shortcomings of the medical care system, comprising a sixth of the economy, with one magic pill was inevitably doomed. No one should minimize the difficulty of matching technology, expensive in its initial development, to the demands of an aging population. Critics of Obamacare who are tempted to search for another magic pill should be careful. Miracle cures are always fraught with peril. (WT and IBD)

Ideologically Driven Ones, doubly so.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Problem in a Nutshell

With YET ANOTHER debt Crisis loomin in a couple of weeks, here’s the real pr5oblem in a nutshell.

Federal Taxes Set Record in FY 2015; $21,833 Per Worker; Feds Still Run $438.9B Deficit

The Federal Government fot the year has has record tax collection, the likes of which have NEVER been seen in US history BUT yet they are STILL RUNNING A DEFICIT!!

They are still spending more than they take in, though they have never taken more money EVER!

That is the problem in a nutshell.

But don’t talk to the politicians, especially not Democrats about cuts because they will go nuclear about throwing grandma off a cliff, kids starving, rich people are greedy, etc etc ad nauseum.

And the RINOs have no balls. So This will continue.

That’s the problem.

(CNSNews.com) – The federal government took in a record of approximately $3,248,723,000,000 in taxes in fiscal 2015 (which ended on Sept. 30), according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released today.

That equaled approximately $21,833 for every person in the country who had either a full-time or part-time job in September.

It is also up about $212,927,100,000 in constant 2015 dollars from the $3,035,795,900,000 in revenue (in 2015 dollars) that the Treasury raked in during fiscal 2014.

federal_tax_receipts-chart
1985-2015

 

Even as the Treasury was hauling in a record $3,248,723,000,000 in tax revenues in fiscal 2015, the federal government was spending $3,687,622,000,000. So, the federal government ran a deficit of $438,899,000,000 for the fiscal year.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total seasonally adjusted employment in the United States in September (including both full and part-time workers) was 148,800,000. That means that the federal tax haul for fiscal 2015 equaled about $21,832.82 for every person in the United States with a job.

In 2012, President Barack Obama struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes. That included increasing the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, increasing the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent, and phasing out personal exemptions and deductions starting at an annual income level of $250,000.

An additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends, interest, capital gains and royalties–that was embedded in the Obamacare law–also took effect in 2013.

The largest share of fiscal 2015’s record-setting tax haul came from the individual income tax. That yielded the Treasury $1,540,802,000,000. Payroll taxes for “social insurance and retirement receipts” took in another $1,065,277,000,000. The corporate income tax brought in $343,797,000,000. (By Terence P. Jeffrey )

But yet, the drug addicts in Washington not only want more, they want to blame you for being greedy if you demand they cut back.

That’s the problem in a nutshell.

And the nuts are in charge of the squirrels…

The Future of America: Debate-able

Matt Walsh: It’s comforting to project all our anger onto politicians. Lord knows, they deserve a fair amount of it. However, the difficult reality is this: America’s biggest problem is its citizens, not its politicians. Indeed, its politicians are a symptom, a reflection, of its people. They may manipulate and coerce and propagandize, but when it comes down to it, in a democratic system, if a bunch of lunatics and scoundrels are in power it’s because the people chose to put them there. The sickness originates, then, with the people. And the people’s sickness is rooted in the soul.

Depressing how ignorant and narcissistic they are, many willfully so.

My mind kept going back to this fact last night as I watched the Democrat debate on CNN. To be honest, I’m not totally sure why I watched it. Clearly, a person must have some serious psychological issues if they elect to spend an evening with Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It’s like choosing to be mentally water boarded for two and a half hours. Only a troubled man would willingly subject himself to such torment. I’ll be making an appointment with a therapist later today.

That’s why I wasn’t watching. I already have high blood pressure and heart problems I didn’t their help to my grave. Plus, it would just soul-crushingly depressing watch the Liberal Media coddle these nutters and the audience applauding them for it.

But whatever my masochistic motivations, I watched, and although I wasn’t terribly surprised by anything that occurred, I was nonetheless deeply disturbed and grieved. This is what’s become of my country, I kept thinking to myself. This is America. These are mainstream, popular, beloved Democrat politicians participating in a presidential election on national TV, yet from what they’re saying, you’d be excused for assuming they were just a handful of fringe crazies campaigning to be the next leader of some hippy commune in upstate Oregon.

corrupt

There wasn’t a single good or feasible or coherent idea offered at any point from anyone not named Jim Webb. Just hard-left hokum and naked socialism, because that’s precisely what millions of American voters demand.

The want the visceral, gutteral, hatred that they’d been raised on. They didn’t want ideas, they wanted EMOTIONS.

I’m old enough to remember when Democrat politicians in national elections had to pretend to be capitalist and at least vaguely Christian and constitutionalist to get elected. Now, it’s a race to see who can play the most convincing godless commie demagogue.

I started out my voting life as a Democrat. I even voted for Jimmy Carter, to my ultimate shame.

But they don’t make Democrats like, say JFK anymore. They were exterminated.

The Far Left is “centrist” to these loons.

With the frazzled Muppet from Vermont leading the way, all of the candidates (except Jim Webb, who apparently stumbled into the wrong debate) spent the first several minutes complaining about “income inequality.”

Because that is the emotional buzzword of The Party. Forget the facts, especially about the income gap GROWING under Obama…Liberals and Democrats don’t do facts.

This was a theme they’d all return to incessantly throughout the evening, because there’s nothing more exhilarating than listening to old rich white people complain about old rich white people.

The “diversity” of it is hilarious. But it would be a thoughtcrime for that to occur to them so their brains just skip that detail none the wiser.

Bernie Sanders lamented again and again that the “middle class is collapsing,” but never expressed any interest in seeing us poor middle class folk move up and out of the middle class.

Socialism doesn’t have a middle class, by the way. Just Very rich and everyone else whose poor. Talk about “inequality”… But again, that’s facts, and facts don’t matter.

For Sanders and the rest of them, the “middle class” should be all we peons aspire to. Success and wealth ought to be solely possessed by the left wing ruling class. Wealth is evil, you see, so that’s why we should let our great and generous protectors carry the burden.

After all, they are so vastly superior!

Middle Class! Inequality! Greed! Middle Class! Inequality! Greed! I can’t really blame them for shouting socialist catchwords all night. This is what their voters desire. They don’t desire capitalism, because capitalism means opportunity and freedom, and opportunity and freedom mean hard work. Economic freedom is so unpopular among liberals that Bernie Sanders openly disavowed it to the sound of roaring applause. Clinton was hesitant (for now) to fully label herself a socialist, so instead she said she’s a sorta-capitalist who thinks “capitalism has to be saved from itself.” This is another way of calling American people children who need to be rescued by benevolent bureaucrats, but that’s OK because Democrat voters fervently wish to be treated like children. They want their own failures and struggles in life to be the fault of “the rich” and they want a president who will magically make it better.

They want their Mommy Government to make the hurt of life go away.

It’s a bit awkward, of course, because they already voted for a guy who promised to do just that, yet the “income inequality” has only gotten worse. This, as Hillary asserted several times, is still the fault of the Republicans. Even when we had a Democrat president and a Democrat Congress, all of our economic woes could be laid at the feet of Republicans and “the rich.” But not every “the rich.” Just “the rich” who aren’t Democrat politicians, or Democrat donors like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase, or union leaders, or Planned Parenthood executives, or Hollywood liberals, or university administrators, or any other group comprised mainly of wealthy left wingers.

Leftist “rich” = Good. Right-wing “rich”= Evil!

Isn’t Doublethink wonderful… 🙂

Anyway, the fact that the most prominent critics of “the rich” are themselves rich is of no concern to the Democrat voter. Consistency, logic, and sincerity are not priorities to this crew. They just want to be coddled and cuddled and soothed.

Don’t actually make them think. Thinking is too hard. Just let them have their primitive base emotions and leave it at that.

That’s why the candidates pivoted back to “inequality” and mythological, phantom issues like the gender wage gap over and over again, but never once, so far as I can remember, even mentioned the word “liberty” or “freedom.” This is where we are, culturally speaking. Five presidential contenders can spend 150 minutes blabbering on about their supposed principles and plans for America, but never once pretend to be even moderately concerned about protecting and preserving liberty.

And the Democrats watching are obliviously happy.

Why? Because Democrat voters don’t want liberty. It’s really that simple. They want easy answers and free stuff. On the free stuff end of the spectrum, all of the candidates received massive applause when they, often entirely out of nowhere and in response to completely unrelated questions, endorsed making college education free or much cheaper for citizens and non-citizens alike. And not only free college, but free health care, and more paid leave, and a doubled minimum wage.

The Narcissism of a 2 year old spoiled brat in adults. That’s a Democrat.

I felt like I was in fifth grade again watching our class president promise us bi-weekly pizza parties. Even then I knew that kind of pledge was unrealistic and disingenuous. Even then I knew the school couldn’t possible pay for 70 pizza parties if we were going on field trips to the freaking post office because they couldn’t afford to take us to the zoo or the aquarium. Even then I knew you need money for things. I was 10. Democrat voters are adults.

But they absolutely don’t know better and more importantly, DON’T WANT TO know better and will actively fight you to NOT know any better.

They want to feel protected, like a child, by their parent Government, for all the evil people of the world. The Not-We.  (Doctor Who reference).

Naturally, nobody ever explained how a country with $18 trillion of debt and over $127 trillion of unfunded liability might manage to suddenly become Santa Claus for 320 million Americans and illegals.

And they don’t care, either.

Indeed, along with “liberty,” the phrase “national debt” was never uttered. And if they weren’t going to explain how the government would start handing out full ride scholarships, paid vacations, “living wages,” and free medical care to every human being who happens to exist within our borders, they certainly wouldn’t attempt to explain why.

And the sheep don’t care. “The Rich” (the evil one version) will pay for it, naturally.

The idea that college in particular should be free is not only absurd and unworkable but incredibly offensive to any self-sufficient adult (a small minority, I admit). I’ve got news for you, my fellow young people, college isn’t a human right. It’s also not a necessity. I pay a mortgage and support a family of four by myself, with no government handouts, and I do it without a college degree. It is possible. If you can’t afford college — and God knows it’s obscenely expensive and not worth the investment for most people — don’t go. Forge your own path. Think for yourself. Do something different with your life.

But that involves potential for failure and the Liberals never prepared them for that. Hard work, is well, HARD.

It’s much easier to sit back with your iPhone, your Starbucks, and let Mama Government just give you presents all day long.

You really want to drive down college costs? That’s how you do it. You can eliminate your own college expenses by simply choosing not to take on any college expenses. Crazy how that works, isn’t it? But that’s not what liberals want to hear. They want to hear about the crusty old socialist genie who will make free stuff appear out of thin air.

Poof! Free Stuff for everyone!

The gun control portion of the debate was the most instructive. All of the candidates (except Webb, it goes without saying) fiercely and passionately competed over who most opposes the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment. Bernie Sanders was accused — accused! — of being not completely against our Constitutional rights to keep and bare arms, and had to take great pains to assure liberal voters that these were unfounded rumors. It was a scene that would have made Thomas Jefferson weep had he been around to witness it: presidential candidates rushing to distance themselves from the Constitution.

That’s Democrats for ya…

Later, the topic turned to foreign policy, and Hillary was only tentatively and briefly asked about her role in the Benghazi fiasco. While attempting to dodge the question, the moderator interrupted and reminded her that “Americans lost their lives.” Clinton curtly shot back, “I’ll get to that,” and proceeded to explain how her policies in Libya worked out splendidly because the Libyan people were able to hold an election.

And no one missed her non-answer I bet. And no “journalist” did either.

The problem, of course, is threefold: 1) She again callously dismissed the deaths of four Americans, because, put simply, she doesn’t care about any human life that isn’t her own.

Human Life must be part of THE AGENDA in order to matter. This is the “compassionate” and “sensitive” Left at its finest.

2) She forgot to mention the “democratic Libyan government” is now in exile, hiding away on a boat in Tobruck while militias run the country.

The consequences of a Liberal’s actions never matter. The intent was good, and that’s all that natters.

3) The real issue is that Clinton and Obama were running guns through Benghazi to Syrian terrorists. This is what got our ambassador killed, and it’s why both Clinton and Obama lied about it. Obviously, this incredible scandal should be enough to disqualify someone from the presidency and land them in prison for the rest of their lives, but here in America they aren’t even asked about it during a presidential debate, much less prosecuted for it.

wanted

Instead, the candidates were told to name the biggest national security threat we face, and two of the candidates said climate change. These, I remind you, are adults running for president of the United States who believe our greatest enemy is the weather. Islamic State is overseas torturing and decapitating women and children but, according to Bernie Sanders, the real problem is that temperatures get a little balmy in the summertime. God help us.

This moment of sheer dementia was eclipsed only by a question posed later on in the debate. The candidates were asked whether “black lives matter or all lives matter,” and those who answered agreed that only black lives matter. The question alone shows you how far the Democrat Party and the culture as a whole has fallen in just the last few years. During Obama’s first run, you would have been flabbergasted by such an inquiry. Do black lives or all lives matter? What? Huh? Really? Talk about a false dichotomy.

But White People are evil. 🙂 (except the white people on the Democrat President Ticket that is). 🙂

Now you barely bat an eye at the full frontal stupidity of the question or the insanity of the answer. You aren’t in the least bit surprised that Democrat politicians cannot simply affirm the value of all human life without upsetting a significant portion of their base. When “do all lives matters?” becomes a difficult gotcha question in politics, you know things have gone severely off the rails.

Perhaps the most unsettling moment came when Clinton was asked about her decision to commit a serious federal crime by conducting classified business on her private email servers. It should be no surprise that a pathological crook who spent decades intimidating and silencing her husband’s rape victims would think this, in comparison, is rather small potatoes. That’s to be expected. It’s the Democrat voter’s cooperation that’s the real outrage here.

Clinton said the whole thing was a right wing conspiracy and then started babbling about free college tuition. Sanders got on his knees and kissed the feet of Her Highness, insisting that Clinton’s rampant criminality is a distraction. The audience of trained seals burst into applause at the sight of two powerful people agreeing that powerful people shouldn’t be required to obey the law. Then the auditorium nearly exploded in a fit of joy and exuberance at this exchange between Lincoln Chafee, who is a person who apparently exists, and Her Highness:

CHAFEE: … There’s an issue of American credibility out there. So any time someone is running to be our leader, and a world leader, which the American president is, credibility is an issue out there with the world. And we have repair work to be done. I think we need someone that has the best in ethical standards as our next president. That’s how I feel.

COOPER: Secretary Clinton, do you want to respond?

CLINTON: No.

Her Highness refusing to address her illegal activities was, by far, the most popular response, or non-response, of the night. I felt like I was watching some sort of strange reimagining of a George Orwell book. It was creepy, really.

The Democrat Playbook, and instruction manual is “1984”.

Of course, there were a few other big applause lines, like when Hillary defended the baby killers at Planned Parenthood and when Bernie promised to raise taxes (a promise he repeated 16 times or so). Hillary scored points on several occasions by noting that she has a vagina. When asked how her administration won’t be a third Obama term, the only difference she could highlight is her genitalia. Hillary has made it clear that she’ll bust out the “I’m a woman” card anytime her back is against the wall, and it will always work with her supporters because her supporters are profoundly immature.

I did say that was going to be the ploy, did I not? 🙂 Vote for Obama or you’re a racist. Vote for Hillary or you’re a sexist!

There was one genuinely good line, courtesy of the sore thumb Jim Webb. All of the candidates were asked who they’d consider their number one enemy. Chafee said he was proud to make an enemy of poor coal miners. Clinton said her greatest enemies are not Islamic State or the Iranians, but Republicans. Sanders said something about corporatebankersWallStreetyaddayadda. Webb, the Marine veteran, said his number one enemy would be the Viet Cong soldier who threw a grenade at him, but “he’s not around anymore.”

It was a fantastic moment, particularly in contrast to the fools before him who bragged about fighting with coal miners and Republicans. Webb actually fought with his life on the line and defeated his enemy on the battle field. In a Republican debate, his answer would have brought the house down, as well it should. But in a Democrat debate, it was met with awkward silence, just like the silence that followed Webb’s earlier declaration that all human lives matter.

He was NOT WE. Who let him in?

This is the Democrat Party, ladies and gentlemen. Behold it and weep. Just remember to reserve most of your disgust for the people in the audience or at home who cheered as politicians promised us death, tyranny, and free crap. To give you an idea of how enthusiastic some of these people are, consider this: I offered criticisms of the candidates on Twitter last night and one liberal responded by saying she hopes my children kill themselves (she’s since deleted her account). I got an email from a Hillary fan this morning telling me she’ll “pray” I get leukemia. You’d like to think these reactions are isolated, but they aren’t. It’s pretty common.

All too common. And this, of course, is the vaunted and much bally-hooed “Tolerance” that Liberals go on about incessantly. 🙂

The Democrat Party exists in its current state because this country is infested by evil, fear, stupidity, and hatred. Clinton and Sanders are but manifestations of it. And never forget that they are just that: manifestations. Expressions of the spiritual malady that’s eating this nation alive, not the source or cause of it.

The voter and the politician are, in the end, one and the same, both equally to blame.

Speaking of Orwell, I’m reminded of the last line in “Animal Farm”:

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

TRUE.

And then there’s the RINO’s running the “opposition”  <snicker>… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

The Post-Boehner War Begins NOW!

Conservatives 1 RINOs 0.

But it’s only the end of the first inning of a very long game.

“John’s not going to leave for another 30 days, so hopefully he feels like getting as much stuff done as he possibly can,” Mr. Obama said during a news conference with the Chinese president on Friday.

Cram it in now while we have the chance. Sounds familiar somehow?

After all, Conservatives are “extremists” and unwilling to compromise.  🙂 Hmmm, sound like Obama and the Democrats.

The unmovable object meets the irresistible force.

So we better pass everything before that happens, potentially, Obama is thinking.

It’s not like if another RINO gets in as Speaker the same voices will just go away.

But remember, we, the Conservatives, are the “extremists”.

Celebrate the retirement of John Boehner, and it is worth celebrating. But it doesn’t mark a victory for conservatism or the end of any battle. At best, it’s the beginning.

Well, he’s gone. More correctly, he’s going.

Speaker of the House John Boehner announced Friday that he’s resigning effective Oct. 30. My reaction, similar to that of most conservatives, was a resounding “good!”

And it is good, even though we’re unlikely to get the truly new blood we need in this position.

Barring some miracle, the next speaker of the House will be someone who has spent a lot of time in Washington, D.C. And you don’t spend a lot of time in Washington and possibly be elected speaker without having ingratiating yourself to a lot of people. And the only currency for ingratiation in politics is money.

Not always our money. Sometimes it’s campaign money. But for members of Congress to be a draw at fundraisers, they have to have some sway over how our tax money is dispensed. No one is going to give $2,000 to get a grip-n-grin picture with a backbench congressman with no power or influence. Juice gets the green.

So who will be the next speaker of the House? I don’t know. But there’s a saying about the devil you don’t know, and I fear we may end up with a person like that.

Boehner was awful at times, unwilling to fight the fights that mattered when they mattered and not having a strategy to at least put Democrats, particularly the president, in awkward positions. But his problems may not end up being unique to him. Considering he still has support from many Republicans – perhaps even a majority of the caucus – finding an acceptable person to replace him could be harder than people think.

The establishment appears to be coalescing around current Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California. He has some appeal to conservatives too, especially when measured against Boehner. But he will not be a savior.

He’s in leadership, which means he’s had every opportunity to strategize with the speaker to take the House in the right direction. It hasn’t happened. There’s little reason to believe much will change should he be the man in charge. It could, but nothing that happened in his current position would lead anyone to be convinced of that.

So who else is there? Lots of qualified conservatives could do the job. Whether they want it is a different story.

There’s no point in listing names – the list of people you’d like to see consider a run is as unique to you as your fingerprints. And I understand the belief that “there’s nowhere to go but up” when it comes to leadership in the House. But just because it seems like that doesn’t make it so.

If conservatives fracture, if they fail to unite behind one candidate and show a united front, we could end up with the devil we don’t know.

And ithink   that likely since the Establishment will want a RINO and the Conservative will want, well, a Conservative and the two are hard to meld together in these very partisan days.

There are egos amongst conservatives. There are friendships. There is loyalty between members. In short, just like the rest of Washington, it’s high school with paychecks.

The Nerds just dethroned the Class President. All his clique minions are buzzing with annoyance.

To elect a conservative speaker, or even a more conservative speaker, it’s going to require unity. That’s the one thing conservatives aren’t good at.

They don’t do groupthink like The Democrats do.

Several conservatives are flirting with a run. If they can’t coalesce around one, we’ll have another Speaker Squish.

And I still think that’s where we are headed.

Celebrate the retirement of John Boehner, and it is worth celebrating. But it doesn’t mark a victory for conservatism or the end of any battle. At best, it’s the beginning.

Conservatives have determination. They have the fight in them. But whether they have the ability to manage their way to success remains to be seen. A victory is great, but it’s just a victory. The fight isn’t over; it will never end.

The WAR begins now.

Eat, drink and be merry. Just remember that Boehner’s resignation, while significant, is a starting line, not a finish line. Without a united march forward, conservatives may win the first inning but lose the game. (Derek Hunter)

 AMEN!

The Law of Demand

Many people argue that liberals, socialists and progressives do not understand basic economics. I am not totally convinced about that.

Me too. And the fact that they don’t WANT to understand it. Since it’s evil and they wantn to destroy it they don’t want to understand their enemy.

Take the law of demand, for example, one of the fundamental principles of economics. It holds that the lower the cost of something the more people will take or do of it. Conversely, the higher the cost the less people will take or do something. By their actions, liberals fully understand the law of demand. Let’s look at some proof.

The Seattle City Council voted unanimously to establish a tax on gun and ammunition sales. Hillary Clinton has called for a 25 percent tax on gun sales. In Chicago, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle proposed “violence taxes” on bullets to discourage criminals from buying guns. Let’s ignore the merit of these measures. They do show that gun grabbers acknowledge the law of demand. They want fewer gun sales and thus propose raising the cost of guns.

And it makes them “feel good” to “do something” and taxing something always makes a liberal happy.

NBCBLK contributor Danielle Moodie-Mills said, “We need to stop misgendering people in the media, and there needs to be some type of fine that’s put into place for … media outlets … that decide that they’re just not going to call people by their name.” What Moodie-Mills wants is for us to be obliged, if a man says he’s a woman, to address him as her and, if a woman says she’s a man, to address her as him. The basic point here is that Moodie-Mills acknowledges the fundamental law of demand when she calls for FCC fines for media people who “misgender” folks. By the way, if I claimed to be the king of Siam, I wonder whether she would support my demand that I be addressed as “your majesty.”

That’s reserved for Obama. 🙂

In the Ohio Legislature, Rep. Bill Patmon, a Democrat from Cleveland, introduced a bill to make it illegal to manufacture, sell or display toy guns. The ban would apply to any toy gun that a “reasonable person” could confuse with a real one. A $1,000 fine and up to 180 days in jail would be imposed for failure to obey the law. That’s more evidence that liberals understand the law of demand. You want less of something? Just raise its cost.

Even San Francisco liberals and environmentalists understand the law of demand. They’ve proposed a ban that over the next four years would phase out the sale of plastic water bottles that hold 21 ounces or less in public places. Violators could face fines of up to $1,000.

Former U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu once said, “We have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” in order to make Americans give up their “love affair with the automobile.” If gas prices rise high enough, Chu knows that Americans will drive less.

And for a while there when it was over $4 a gallon it was working. Then those damn oil companies found Oil in Bakken region in the Dakotas and the supply got to big overall…curses! foiled again!

Then there’s the EPA and “making energy prices skyrocket” as Obama once said.

There you have it — abundant evidence that liberals, socialists and progressives understand the law of demand. But wait a minute. What about raising the cost of hiring workers through increases in the minimum wage?

Aaron Pacitti, Siena College professor of economics, wrote that raising the minimum wage “would reduce income inequality and poverty while boosting growth, without increasing unemployment.” The leftist Center for Economic and Policy Research has written a paper whose title tells it all: “Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?” The U.S. Department of Labor has a page on its website titled “Minimum Wage Mythbusters” (http://tinyurl.com/lt47co9), which relays a message from liberal economists: “Increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers.”

Just like Global Warming, science in the slavish service of Liberal Ideology.

What the liberals believe — and want us to believe — is that though an increase in the cost of anything will cause people to use less of it, labor is exempt from the law of demand. That’s like accepting the idea that the law of gravity influences the falling behavior of everything except nice people. One would have to be a lunatic to believe either proposition. (Walter E Williams)

Or Global Warming “consensus”. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

We are From THE Government

Government wants you to think it helps you at every turn. Every time you make a decision, a purchase, government wants to be there, looking essential.

But it’s a trick. Most government “help” creates new problems.

Students once went to private banks to get college loans. Banks, since they had their own money on the line, tried to lend only to students who were likely to succeed and then pay them back. Politicians then said, “Banks don’t lend enough, so we’ll guarantee loans or make loans ourselves! After all, college is essential for success.”

Colleges responded by raising tuition at seven times the rate of inflation. It’s a spiral in which taxpayers are forced to give money to colleges — which then charge high tuition, so students graduate deep in debt, and then politicians demand that taxpayers forgive that debt.

And since the loans are guaranteed by the government no matter what the colleges’ charge they go nuts. And the Left thinks it’s the Colleges fault. They are just taking full advantage of the government’s guarantees. They don’t have to be “careful” because the government will pay THEM back.

You, well, you’re screwed!

President Obama said, sure, just pay back 10 percent or, after 20 years, nothing! Taxpayers will pay the rest, which goes to schools that employ professors who demand more government programs. It’s a spiral that makes government bigger.

The same thing happened with housing. People once borrowed from private banks, which applied market discipline. If they thought you wanted to borrow more than you would likely repay, banks wouldn’t lend you the money.

But now government — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration — guarantee nearly every loan. That helped create the last housing bubble. After it burst, and taxpayers were charged nearly $2 billion to bail out the FHA, the politicians assured the public they would fix this to make sure it never happened again.

But they didn’t. Today, once again, more than 90 percent of home loans are backed by taxpayers, and after briefly raising down-payment requirements, the FHA will again make loans to people who make down payments of as little as 3 percent.

And another housing bubble will likely burst. But Government, especially Liberals who’s God is Government won’t see it coming or even understand why.

Their ideology says they are “doing good” so it can’t be bad, now can it? 🙂

A sensible solution would be to get government out of the home loan business, but even Republicans claim government support for homebuilding is needed. It isn’t. Canada has no Fannie, Freddie or FHA, and no housing bubble. In Canada, lenders and homeowners risk their own money, yet just as many people are able to buy homes.

Finally, Obamacare makes the same arrogant assumption about healthcare: Without government, people can’t afford health care and won’t make good decisions. But healthcare is bureaucratic and costly because of government.

But the sanctimonious Left will never see it that way. Government is the great equalizer to them. What it equalizes is the misery and pain. Which the Leftist then turn misery and blame other people for that too.

Government meddling is not at fault. It’s “Corporate America” that is at fault for everything.

For decades, government encouraged us to pay for health care — even routine procedures — with insurance. But insurance is designed for large, rare expenditures, like your house catching fire or a heart attack.

See Adverse Selection. Understand it, and you’ll understand why ObamaCare can NEVER make rates go down as promised.

When everything from head colds to backaches is paid for through insurance, neither the customer nor service provider pays much attention to what anything costs. I’m on Medicare now. I’m amazed that when I go to a doctor, no one even mentions price.

And if no one knows how much anything costs, no one cares. So it’s hypnotizing.

If we paid for everything that way — clothing, groceries, computers — everything would cost much more. No one would know when to shop around, when they were getting a great deal, or when to say: enough.

The more we enshrine the idea that “everyone must have health insurance,” the more big insurance companies can raise prices without worrying about customers fleeing. Forced government insurance steers everyone into a few big plans instead of letting individuals make decisions that foster competition. Hospitals and insurance companies are the ones really being helped.

President Eisenhower addressed a similar problem when he complained about a “military-industrial complex.” Today we have a broader “government-industrial complex.”

It shouldn’t surprise us when big companies start out opposing regulation but then announce that they wholeheartedly support government’s latest “reform.”

By the time legislation is passed, the major players in the industry have had a role in writing the laws, ensuring that they are guaranteed a profit.

They get there’s, and you get yours- up the ass. But you’re supposed to feel good that Government is there to protect you from the big bad Corporates who have bought off the politicians in the first place. 🙂

I don’t think government makes my life easier by being around me all the time. Instead, it makes it harder and harder to imagine life without government. Perhaps that was their goal. (John Stossel)

Yes, it was.

Government is GOD.

All hail, the Almighty.

Worship it.

The Angry Left

Bernie Sanders is angry. Who is he angry at? Rich people. Why rich people? That’s not clear.

But has been the mantra of The Left for a generation at least. A generation brought up on this garbage. Garbage in, garbage out.

At Liberty University, Sanders complained about a small number of people who have “huge yachts, and jet planes and tens of billions” while others “are struggling to feed their families.” In Madison Wisconsin, Sanders called for a “political revolution against greed.”

So what’s the connection between people who have “tens of billions” and people who are “struggling to feed their families”? For the most part it’s a positive one. In a capitalist system, people get rich by meeting other people’s needs. Because some people are rich, other people find it easier to feed their families.

Take the world’s richest man, Bill Gates. When I was a student at Columbia in the 1970s, I remember a friend showing me a fantastic hand held device. It could add, subtract, divide and multiply. And it only cost $400. Today, I can sit in bed with my lap top, which in 1970 dollars cost less than $400. I can buy and sell goods on eBay, conduct personal banking, purchase airline tickets, book hotel rooms and even work the New York Times crossword puzzle – in large part because of Bill Gates.

Take the world’s richest woman, JK Rowling. When she wrote the last Harry Potter book or helped on the last Harry Potter movie was she making anyone worse off? Was she taking food out of the mouths of babes? Or was she bringing entertainment and pleasure to millions of people?

Is Bill Gates greedy? There’s no evidence of that. He is giving all his money away in ways that are curing diseases that kill children all over the world. More generally, I have never met a truly creative person who was motivated by greed. But even if greed were the motivation, we need more of it – as long as it’s meeting our needs.

So what’s Sander’s complaint? Here are his own words:

“99 percent of all new income today (is) going to the top 1 percent.”

In 2007, “the top 1 percent of all income earners in the United States made 23.5 percent of all income,” which is “more than the entire bottom 50 percent.”

“Today the Walton family of Walmart own more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America.”

When Sam Walton was alive, he was one of the world’s richest men. Yet he wore blue jeans and drove a pickup truck. No one in Bentonville, Arkansas even knew he was rich until they read about it in Forbes. Is Walmart making it harder or easier for people to feed their families? You be the judge.

As has been said many times, The Left is only interested in the Narrative, not the truth.

Muslim kid brings homemade electronic device to school and the School system freaked out because of all the school violence.

The Left doesn’t give a crap about that. It’s all about the fact that he’s a Muslim.

Then it came out that it was all a setup by a Muslim “activist” father who set up the whole thing.

The Left doesn’t care. It’s all about “racism” to them because that fits their Narrative and what THEY want to be true.

bomb

Behind the rhetoric on the left, there is one persistent theme, always implicit, never explicit. Leftist rhetoric is designed to encourage people to believe that the reason they are poor are because other people are rich. And this kind of rhetoric is not confined to politicians who know nothing of basic economics. Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz, Jeffrey Sachs and other well-known economists are just as guilty. They invariably imply that “all property is theft,” a staple of barn yard Marxism. Yet, on rigorous examination, this idea is silly. Most of the people on the Forbes 400 list are self-made or next generation of self-made billionaires.

But the truth doesn’t matter, to The Left.

Writing in the Dallas Morning News, Cullen Godfrey asks: why do we demonize billionaires?

And usually, not Democrat Million and Billionaires. Nor, say, NFL player millionaires, just the owners.

They didn’t steal our money. They earned our money by providing us with the things that we want and that make our lives better. The Forbes 400 list includes names such as Oprah Winfrey, filmmakers Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Phil Knight (Nike), Elon Musk (Tesla), Charles Schwab, Ralph Lauren and Michael Ilitch (Domino’s Pizza). Of course, there are those with inherited wealth, but the vast majority on the list are first-generation, self-made billionaires, and those with inherited wealth have, as a rule, been excellent stewards of their good fortune.

Like Jeremy Corbyn, the new Labour Party leader in Britain, Bernie Sanders is appealing to our worst instincts. His is not the message of compassion and love. His is the message of resentment, jealousy and hate.

The hallmarks of the Left.

What would he do? Tax capital. He hasn’t given us a figure, but if he goes along with the 90 percent income tax rate favored by Paul Krugman or the 80 percent rate proposed by Thomas Piketty, Bill Gates may never have been able to start Microsoft. Sam Walton may never have given us Sam’s Club.

I’m not sure The Left would care about that.

As I wrote at Forbes earlier this week, the left is intellectually bankrupt. While appealing to our basest emotions, they have no real solutions to any real problems. In fact, their “solutions” would almost certainly make the poor more poor.

But they make them “feel” empowered. Perception is not reality, but it works for them.

There is, however, a proposal from the right of the political spectrum: tax consumption rather than saving, investment and capital accumulation. As I wrote previously:

[W]hen Warren Buffett is consuming, he’s benefiting himself. When he’s saving and investing, he’s benefiting you and me. Every time Buffett forgoes personal consumption (a pricey dinner, a larger house, a huge yacht) and puts his money in the capital market instead, he’s doing an enormous favor for everyone else. A larger capital stock means higher productivity and that means everyone can have more income for the same amount of work. So it’s in our self-interest to have very low taxes on Buffett’s capital. In fact, capital taxes should be zero. That means no capital gains tax, no tax on dividends and profits — so long as the income is recycled back into the capital market. We should instead tax Buffett’s consumption. Tax him on what he takes out of the system, not what he puts into it. Tax him when he is benefiting himself, not when he is benefiting you and me.

But the Left Politicians are only interested in Taxes that benefit THEM.

The Land of Hypocrites

California is the land of hypocrites.

And elsewhere, considering the rising star of The Democrats is a full on, no apologies, SOCIALIST!

As I pulled into the parking lot adjacent to my radio station in Los Angeles, I noticed a Mercedes R500 sitting next to me. Between the Mercedes symbol and the R500 label sat a big, fat bumper sticker: “BERNIE SANDERS 2016.”

Ah, bumper sticker liberalism…

No wonder the old joke is: California- The Granola State. What’s not fruits and nuts is flakes!  (yes, that would be politically incorrect). 🙂

The Mercedes R500 retailed at $71,000 back in 2006, when the well-off young gentledriver’s parents presumably purchased it. Now, their kid pulls up to the pricey Equinox gym (sticker price: $160 per month) with a bumper sticker touting the virtues of redistribution of wealth.

Redistribution of OTHER people’s wealth, no doubt.

This is the privileged generation of Americans. They’ve been able to benefit from the free markets of their parents; they can afford to purchase Fine water to sip while running on the world’s highest-end ellipticals, then clean off beneath the rain shower head before heading out to brunch at Gracias Madre. Then, that night, they head off to the LA Memorial Sports Arena to listen to a 73-year-old socialist babble on about the evils of the system that granted them their wealth.

Because the education system is overrun by, guess what, Politically Correct Socialist-leaning Liberals.

That’s why banning the American Flag is a good idea (amongst others).

Saving the Delta Smelt and waste the water entirely.

80% of the water usage in California is for agriculture. So lets limit and fine people watering their lawns to save water that’ll fix the problem!

Don’t think outside the Agenda box.

America has become so wealthy that its citizens now ignore the source of that wealth. “It’s not all about the money” is an easy thing for rich people to say. But ask the billions around the globe living in abject poverty whether trashing a system that guarantees tremendous baseline economic opportunity seems like a great idea.

The Roman Empire, anyone?

But this is what happens when no one teaches young Americans the morality behind the system that guarantees economic opportunity: young Americans decide that “higher morality” dictates the death of that system. Young Americans don’t desire an Xbox and a car — they desperately want a feeling of meaning and belonging, none of which capitalism naturally provides.

Socialism, however, does.

It gives you a buzz, it’s a buzzkill, but at least it gives you a “feel good” moment in between all the guilt, fear,anxiety it’s economics actually create.

A momentary drug high. After it, you need another fix.

The outcome: California. It isn’t just the incoherence of bumper stickers and car brands that makes California the center of American hypocrisy. It’s the fact that Californians routinely embrace more regulation and higher taxes in order to feel that quick boost of self-esteem, and then spend effort and time attempting to avoid those rules. Nannies expect to be paid in cash, because all the same people who voted for higher employer taxes refuse to pay those taxes. Young Californians only use free market Uber after endorsing higher minimum wage and more restrictions on transportation. Californians take massive tax deductions, but only after voting to raise their own income taxes.

As I have said about liberals many times, a lot of what they do is on a “For thee, not me” attitude. So YOU need to do it, to make THEM feel good, but like hell THEY are going to do for you. Hell no!

None of this makes California more livable. Instead, Californians live in a fantasy world of their own making: a socialist utopia with a thriving black market, in which the popularly backed economy fails while individuals strive to avoid it. All of which runs fine, until the day that Bernie Sanders actually closes the loopholes and cracks down on the cheating. Then the Mercedes turns into a Yugo, and the bumper sticker finally lands where it belongs: on a product of socialism rather than free markets. (Ben Shapiro)

Bush Lied! People Died!

Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!

It sorta sounds good. It’s certainly more Politically Correct.

Its certainly less of a buzzkill than $18.5 Trillion in Debt, 93 million unemployed, record poverty, and stagnant economy.

Reality is such a bitch. Choose Socialism.

🙂

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
difference

Tranforming America

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

These two policy achievements have many things in common.

nuclear_blast

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

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

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

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

The Agenda is The Agenda.

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

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

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

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

But are on THE AGENDA, so they must be.

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

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

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

Rigid Ideologues and weak spined Republicans will do that.

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

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

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

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

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

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

White Guilt has bit them in the asp!

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

those dame dirty nukes! Agree with me or else!

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The Real Questions

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

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

Here goes:

Jeb! Bush:

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

HILARIOUS! 🙂

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

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

Dr. Ben Carson:

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

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

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

Jim Gilmore:

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

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

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

Chris Christie:

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

🙂 I like these questions.

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

Hehehehehehehehehe…..

Carly Fiorina:

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

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

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

Lindsey Graham:

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

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

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

Doubt it.

John Kasich:

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

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

Nothing.

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

Good one.

George Pataki:

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

Star Wars or Doctor Who?

Marco Rubio:

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

I agree completely.

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

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

Ted Cruz:

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

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

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

Rand Paul:

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

Chemtrails. Are they a thing?

Just how stable are you?

Scott Walker:

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

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

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

Mike Huckabee:

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

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

Bill Clinton played Sax, look what that got us.

Bobby Jindal:

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

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

Be useful.

Rick Santorum:

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

It won’t be.

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

And are you the man to do it?

Donald Trump:

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

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

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

These are the questions no one will ask.

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

So what do think about that?

negotiate with terrorists

nukes

socialism