The Liberal Reality

From the Political Wisdom of Hollywood, Eva Longoria everyone…

“I don’t think it’s a hard choice if you’re a woman,” said Longoria during an Obama campaign event in Colorado over the weekend, according to The Denver Post.  “We have to get out there and tell (others) ‘If you’re a woman, there is no way you can vote Republican.’”

Now that’s hard hitting political analysis and logic for you folks!

Are you suspicious of federal authority? How about really into individual liberty? Well according to a new study funded by the US Department of Homeland Security, you very well might be a terrorist.

A new study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

A report published earlier this year by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) at the University of Maryland has surfaced, and in their DHS-funded findings, Americans “reverent of individual liberty” and others adamant about protecting their personal freedoms are categorized as extreme right-wing terrorists.

In the paper, Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008, researchers used definitions from another START study, 2011’s Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism, to characterize what traits should be considered when describing right-wing terrorists. Both papers were funded with grants from the US Department of Homeland Security provided to START.

In explaining how START’s earlier study categorized terrorists in groups such as religious, ethno-nationalist and extreme left-wing, researchers recall that the organization considers right-wing extremists terrorists as “groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent (for some the threat is from a specific ethnic, racial, or religious group) and believe in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism.”

“Groups may also be fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation), anti-global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty and believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty,” the report adds.

SO YOU MIGHT BE A TERRORIST!

But don’t worry, they aren’t “profiling” you!!  Liberals are against “profiling”:)

THE DOWNSIDE TO OBAMACARE  liberal Style

Someone in the audience asked NPR health policy correspondent Julie Rovner this question: “Today’s decision is a positive decision for the estimated 50 million uninsured Americans. Who are the losers today?”

After thinking through her answer, she later added that another group of losers might be the citizens of states whose governors opt to not participate in the law’s expansion of Medicaid.

So, Obamacare creates no losers except where it fails to tax people sufficiently and where GOP governors fail to accept the wisdom of the law. In short, the only thing wrong with Obamacare is that it isn’t even more punitive, more mandatory and more intrusive. (townhall)

NOW THAT’S LIBERALISM FOR YOU!

The only downside is that you don’t believe and do everything we say and want 100% of the time without question. After all, we are the smartest and best humans that have ever lived!!

IF YOU AREN’T ON FOOD STAMPS YOU ARE HARMING YOUR COMMUNITY

One in seven Americans are on food stamps, but the government is pushing to enroll more — in many instances working to overcome Americans’ “pride,” self-reliance or failure to see a need.

“Our common goal is to increase participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” the United States Department of Agriculture explains on its “Outreach Toolkits” page. “Our purpose is to ensure that those going through difficult times can feed their families healthy, nutritious food. By working as a team, we can accomplish these goals.”

The USDA has adopted a range of strategies and programs designed to bring more people to SNAP, including taking on “pride.” A 2011 Hunger Champions Award document reveals that local assistance offices have been rewarded for “counteracting” pride and pushing more people to sign up for benefits.

The Ashe County Department of Social Services in Jefferson, N.C., for example, received a “Gold” award for confronting “mountain pride” and increasing food stamp participation by 10 percent.

“Hearing from the outreach worker that benefits could be used to purchase seeds and plants for their gardens turned out to be a very important strategy in counteracting what they described as ‘mountain pride’ and appealed to those who wished not to rely on others,” the document explains. “Eventually, many accepted assistance from the Low Income Energy Assistance Program, the Qualified Medicare Beneficiary program, and others, in some cases doubling a household’s net income. In 1 year, SNAP participation increased over 10 percent.”

Overcoming “beliefs” is a stated method from the USDA to bring more people to the program.
USDA claims that eligible people who do not participate are actually harming their communities by preventing additional funds from entering their respective economies.

“SNAP is an investment in our future. It offers nutrition benefits to participating clients, supports work, and provides economic benefits to communities,” USDA explains on one of its outreach pages. “However, too many low-income people who are eligible for the program do not participate and thus forgo nutrition assistance that could stretch their food dollars at the grocery store. Their communities lose out on the benefits provided by new SNAP dollars flowing into local economies.”

FOOD STAMPS ARE AN ECONOMIC STIMULUS!!!

Just like Unemployment! 🙂

USDA explains. “SNAP helps families become financially stable and make the transition to self-sufficiency, getting them through the tough times.”

Orwell Lives! If your brain doesn’t hurt after that you might be a liberal…

Wow! Liberal reality really is mentally deranged!

WE ARE FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU!! 🙂

IT’S A TAX!

The Supreme Court affirmed on Thursday what the White House never wanted to hear: Obamacare constitutes the largest and most regressive tax in American history.

From the start of the health care debate in 2009, the order was given for Democrats to deny that President Obama’s signature piece of legislation would be funded by new taxes. This was a purely political calculation since they knew they would pay a price if the multitrillion-dollar behemoth was called a tax bill. Mr. Obama swore he wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class, and he wanted to at least appear to be making good on the pledge. He maintained his health care law was “absolutely not a tax increase,” even though millions of Americans would be compelled to pay it and the IRS had to hire 16,000 agents to enforce it.

This left liberal lawmakers the awkward problem of trying to explain the constitutional basis of their power to enforce Obamacare if it wasn’t a tax. Rep. John Conyers, Michigan Democrat, attributed it to a nonexistent “Good and Welfare” clause in the Constitution. Sen. Patrick Leahy, Vermont Democrat, erroneously claimed it came from the same source as the federal power to regulate speed limits on interstate highways. The “mandate” rationale, which liberals attempted to justify under the Article I Commerce Clause, represented an unprecedented and dangerous expansion of government power.

When challenges to the law arose in the summer of 2010, the Justice Department said it would defend Obamacare as a “valid exercise” of Congress‘ power to “lay and collect taxes.” This contradictory position was painfully reflected in oral arguments before the court when U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli struggled to explain that Mr. Obama “said it wasn’t a tax increase because it ought to be understood as an incentive to get people to have insurance. I don’t think it’s fair to infer from that anything about whether that is an exercise of the tax power or not.” When Chief Justice John Roberts asked about this blatant twisting of words and logic for purely political purposes, Mr. Verrilli stammered, “Well, I – you know, I don’t – there is nothing that I know of that – that illuminates that, but certainly …” before Justice Sonia Sotomayor rescued him with another question. That was the moment when the case was decided.

After the decision, Mr. Obama doggedly stuck to his implausible line that Obamacare wasn’t a tax bill. His unpopular law was upheld in the worst way possible politically. The decision handed the issue to Republican challenger Mitt Romney and fired up the conservative base in a way that wouldn’t have happened had the law been partially or wholly overturned. Obamacare now stands as a highly regressive tax on middle- and lower-income families, a tax on jobs, a tax on youth, a tax on health, a tax on freedom of choice. In his decision, Justice Roberts wrote, “It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” This includes Mr. Obama and the congressional Democrats who voted for the Obamacare tax increase. (WT)

Because no Republican did. And Olympia Snowe of Maine is retiring.

So, to all my Fellow “terrorists”….

NOVEMBER IS COMING!

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

An Ugly Truth Revealed

Like the START Treaty this blog has a preamble, Provided by Former Arizona Governor and now Big Sis, the “Man Caused Disaster” enforcer (better known to normal people as Terrorism):  Janet Napolitano is keeping a tight ship on the security front. She even apparently throws in a day off for “thousands of people [who] are working 24/7, 364 days a year to keep the American people safe.” Or maybe she just forgot how many days are in a year. (ABC News with Diane Sawyer)

We can admire Janet for her lack of knowledge and silly little liberal gaffe because instead of worrying about nuking us or poisoning our food or blowing up our planes the terrorists will now be obsessed with what is that 1 day a year she is not being vigilant so they can all pile on at once. 🙂

Nice distraction Janet!

2 days ago was the 22nd anniversary of the bombing of Pam Am 103.

You know, a terrorist act not connected to any wars against Islam or Muslims.

Back when it wasn’t politically incorrect to say that 95% of all terrorist attacks in the last 20 years have been committed by Muslims.

The very idea that you even investigate that has CAIR and other muslim “advocacy” groups yowling racism and “profiling” and liberals running for politically correct cover.

The only guy ever convicted of this crime was “released” by the Scottish Government last year on “compassionate grounds” because he his death was imminent.

Abdelbaset al-Megrahi is still alive and living it up as a nation hero in Libya.

There was an agreement with US that if he was in a Scottish jail he’d stay there. And now it comes out that the Brits were working for nearly 2 years to weasle out of that.

And they managed to come up with a good Liberal (or Labor) excuse, “Compassion”.

When a Liberal talks about “compassion” look out, you’re about to get something rammed down your throat or up your ass!

Why did they do it? MONEY!

Pure a simple.

OIL MONEY.

BP even.

Intense political pressures and “commercial warfare” waged by the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi led to last year’s release of the “unrepentant terrorist” who blew up Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, according to a new report prepared by four U.S. senators.

The report was released Tuesday, 22 years to the day after a terrorist bomb exploded aboard  the Pan Am airliner,  killing 270 people — including 189 Americans — in one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism prior to 9/11.

An advance copy of the report – titled “Justice Undone: The Release of the Lockerbie Bomber” — was provided to NBC News.

The report finds that senior officials under former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown quietly and repeatedly pressured Scottish authorities to release Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the former Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the bombing.

They did so in order to protect British business interests in Libya, including a $900 million BP oil deal that the Libyans had threatened to cut off, as well as a $165 million arms sale with a British defense firm that was signed the same month al-Megrahi was freed from prison, the report states.

“This was a case in which commercial and economic considerations trumped the message of our global fight against terrorism,” said Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., one of the four senators who commissioned the report by a Senate investigator.

“God forbid there should be another terrorist attack. We have to make it impossible that anything like this injustice takes place again,” he added.

‘False’ and ‘flawed’ prognosis
The report also concludes that, in releasing Megrahi last year on the grounds that he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer and had only three months to live, Scottish authorities relied on a “false” and “flawed” medical prognosis that was possibly influenced by a doctor hired by the Libyan government. (Although there were recent reports that Megrahi was in a coma, that account has been disputed. As the Senate report notes, he remains alive, reportedly living in a luxury villa in Tripoli.)

The Senate report calls for a renewed investigation into Megrahi’s release by the State Department and a public apology by both the British and Scottish governments.

That request was rejected this week by both British and Scottish officials. “We totally reject their false interpretation,” a Scottish government spokesperson said in an emailed response to NBC News. The decision to release Megrahi “was not based on political, economic or diplomatic considerations, but on the precepts of Scots law and nothing else.”

Martin Longden, a spokesman for the British Embassy in Washington, told NBC that, since the Scottish government ultimately released Megrahi that “it is difficult to see how one can apologize for something that one wasn’t responsible for.”

However, Longden noted that the government of the current British Prime Minister David Cameron “has been very clear that Megrahi’s release was a mistake.”

Cameron has directed an internal British Cabinet review of all documents relating to Megrahi and its report, including some previously unreleased material, may be finished early next year, according to a British government official who requested anonymity.

The Senate report was signed by Menendez along with his Democratic colleague from New Jersey, Frank Lautenberg, and the two Democratic senators from New York, Charles Schumer and Kristen Gillibrand.

The four, who represent many of the American victims of the bombing, met with Cameron last summer when he visited Washington and demanded that he take further steps to uncover the trail of events that led to Megrahi’s release.

Megrahi’s release has stoked tensions between Washington and London since August 2009, when the former Libyan spy was released from a Scottish prison and received a hero’s welcome when he flew back to Libya.

U.S. officials outraged
The release triggered outrage from top U.S. law enforcement officials, such as FBI director Robert Mueller, and strong criticism from the Obama administration.

Scottish officials, however, said they freed him under a provision of their laws that allow for “compassionate release” in light of a medical prognosis that concluded he had only three months to live.

But the Senate report pokes hole in that conclusion, citing top cancer experts who say the three month prognosis was “inaccurate and unsupported by medical science,” and was made primarily by two Scottish prison doctors who had no background in prostate cancer. (One, the top doctor in the prison where Megrahi was housed, was a general practitioner and the other, Dr. Andrew Fraser, the director of health for the Scottish Prison Service, was a public health specialist.)

The Senate report states that Megrahi at the time “was not bed-ridden nor so physically frail that he could not undergo chemotherapy or other treatments. … (His) physical symptoms did not support a prognosis of three months and no doctor familiar with prostate cancer could have reasonably made such a prognosis.”

Among those who may have influenced the prognosis, the report suggests, were three doctors hired by the Libyan government to support the release of Megrahi on compassionate grounds, one of whom was quoted in British press accounts last summer as saying “we were asked to give an outcome and we did.”

That doctor’s report was sent directly to the Scottish prison doctor who worked on the medical prognosis 10 days before the final Scottish medical report on Megrahi, the Senate report says.

The Senate report also cites other factors that influenced the Scottish and British government’s actions on Megrahi.

Britain’s ambassador to Libya, Sir Vincent Fean, “directly participated” in an October 2008 meeting with Scottish government and senior Libyan officials to discuss a “way out” for Megrahi, it states.

Other British officials repeatedly warned the Scots that “British interests, including those of U.K. nationals, British businesses and possibly security cooperation would be damaged — perhaps badly — if Megrahi were to die in a Scottish prison,” according to a statement British Foreign Minister William Hague provided the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

‘A major problem’
The Libyan Government successfully freed al-Megrahi by using “commercial warfare,” states the report. “Libyan officials made it abundantly clear to Scottish and U.K. government officials that al-Megrahi’s death would be a ‘a major problem’ and ‘bad for relations,’ a message that was also delivered through BP officials,” Hague said.

While the British government has repeatedly insisted it was the Scots who made the final decision to release Megrahi, the Senate report notes that the British government had the power to block his transfer back to Libya — including denying the Libyans airspace to fly Megrahi home — because the decision affected matters of national security and terrorism.

The report also notes that Scottish officials were being lobbied to release Megrahi by senior officials of the government of Qatar, whose emir was the president of the Arab League.

“We should be most grateful if your office would exercise its discretion and on compassionate and humanitarian grounds take the necessary measures to remove Mr. Al-Megrahi from prison, Qatar’s trade mission wrote to Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill on July 17, 2009, just weeks before the Lockerbie bomber’s release.

At the time, the Senate report notes, Scottish officials were seeking to expand commercial ties with Qatar and Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond had been discussing a potential multi-billion dollar loan from the Persian Gulf country. The loan was never consummated, however.

Officials at the Libyan and Qatari embassies in Washington did not return phone calls seeking comment. (Newsvine)

And so today, the Liberals and their dupes in the Republican Party, will pass a International Arms Control agreement in a Lame Duck session of Congress with the Russians when the real threats are Radical Muslims, Iran and North Korea.

Why?

Because they are still on their checklist of THINGS TO DO WHEN WE HAVE THE POWER TO DO SO and since they won’t have it like this again, it’s now or never.

60’s hippie anti-military peaceniks who have wanted to do this all there lifes are posed to give themselves a party as they have managed during the Lame Duck session (after they were repudiated in the biggest lost in 90 years) to pass a Stimulus Bill, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and hobbling the US Military.

Man they are going to Party like it’s 1979!

Political Cartoon

Oh that’s right, in 1979 Iran took people hostage in our Embassy and we sat around doing not much of anything about.

My how times have changed. 🙂
ImageImage Political Cartoon

START DADT DREAM & Big Sis Too!

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Any time you kill a bloated, $1.27 trillion spending bill that includes more than 6,000 earmarks worth $8 billion, it’s a good day’s work. But as far as this lame-duck Congress is concerned, the work isn’t done.

And a bloated trillion dollar monster escaped.

As this is written, Reid and his congressional allies are trying to force votes on the Dream Act; the New START treaty; “don’t ask, don’t tell”; and a massive environmental bill — all in the final days of the year if not this very weekend before Christmas.

Got to get in that last Lame Duck Poison. Gotta push on and get as much of it injected as possible.

Screw the people. This is THE AGENDA we are talking about.

And nothing on earth is more important than THE AGENDA!

As a final insult to American voters, and virtually unnoticed by the media, Reid & Co. have rolled some 100 separate environmental bills into one — creating a giant land and private-property grab that again will have consequences well beyond the here and now.

Reid hasn’t even allowed this omnibus measure to be debated. And yet, as Landon Zida reported on the Heritage Foundation’s blog, the bill would “designate hundreds of thousands of acres of land under the control of federal government.” And all of it, as columnist Michelle Malkin has noted, with virtually no input. (IBD)

CRAM IT DOWN! CRAM IT DOWN! CRAM IT DOWN!

THE AGENDA UBER ALLES!!

The Democrats Christmas (politically incorrect)…Holiday Gift to all is to disarm our country against it’s enemies, give amnesty to illegals and to cram gays down your throat (even if you think the whole thing is silly) because these are the most important things in the universe to Liberals– THE AGENDA!

And they must get them in before Mommy & Daddy come home on Jan 5th and force them to clean up the mess they’ve made, kicking and screaming that it was someone else’s fault!

Meanwhile, Big Sis who’s I-can-see-you-naked Scanner have scientifically been proven to be incapable of detecting things like GUNS and a Border Patrol agent is killed by Mexican drug dealers on our own soil she’s gone all Al Gore!

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that her department is creating a new task force to battle the effects of climate change on domestic security operations.

Speaking at the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice on Thursday, Napolitano discussed the initial findings of the department’s recently created “Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force.”

Napolitano explained that the task force was charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.” (CNS)

The all day White House Forum on Environmental Justice also included talks by White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.

But don’t worry, they don’t have an AGENDA! 🙂

The two scientists most responsible for the development magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines used in hospitals have reached the conclusion that these currently deployed contraptions are not effective at preventing terrorists from carrying explosives aboard aircraft.

Basically, Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson, described as the “scientific genius” behind the MRIs, claim that TSA and the manufactureres, in order to show effectiveness, have biased the studies and left out known limitations of the machines.

Mr. Kaufman and Mr. Carlson showed less restraint in a peer-reviewed article posted online Nov. 26 by The Journal of Transportation Security. They created a computer model to simulate scanner operation and conclude an Islamic terrorist could easily sneak a large quantity of explosives past the device. “It is very likely that a large (15-20 cm in diameter), irregularly-shaped, cm-thick pancake with beveled edges, taped to the abdomen, would be invisible to this technology, ironically, because of its large volume, since it is easily confused with normal anatomy,” the study explains.

The researchers pointed out that the manufacturers of airport scanners positioned contraband like guns, knives and drugs in unnatural ways to conceal the limitations of their device. For example, the simulated drugs are always packed into tight rectangles that show up distinctly on the machine. TSA employees would have a far more difficult time spotting less tidy terrorists. “The eye is a good signal averager at certain spatial frequencies, but it is doubtful that an operator can be trained to detect these differences unless the material is hard-edged, not too large and regular shaped,” Mr. Kaufman and Mr. Carlson wrote.

Theirs is not the only such study. Last March the government’s own GAO reported that it was “unclear” whether airport scanners would have detected Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s botched Christmas Day underwear bombing attempt.

As TSA begins to touch more and more Americans in ways that they feel “ain’t right,” and more whole body scanners are deployed, the concerns of the public will increase. Even TSA officials admit that less that 10 percent of the flying public have faced a whole body scanner or an enhanced pat-down and there is already an uproar.

Add to that, radiation questions that are sure to emerge from these latest investigations and scientific evidence that the whole body scanner billion-dollar contraptions can’t spot a reasonably well-hidden bomb and TSA is going to have a growing problem.

But at least they can see yours! 🙂

And the Border will be made safe from Global Warming Threats!

And those nasty old Russians, Chinese and North Koreans won’t have to worry about our big stick because we’ll emasculate ourselves for them! Isn’t that nice of us.

But at at least we’ll have openly gay people in the military.

After all, that’s what’s MORE IMPORTANT.

All Hail THE AGENDA!!

Woo Hoo! Doughnuts…

Political Cartoon

Woo-Hoo! The Democrats blinked. This time.

Half darn.

We get the pork laden Stimulus II, known as the “Tax Deal”. But we don’t get the 6,488 earmark pork laden Omnibus Bill.

So we get $1 trillion in spending instead of 2. Yipeee….

But I guess it’s a start.

But what is fun is the President went to mat for TAX “CUTS” for “The Rich”. How Bush of him. 🙂

And watching the Democrats rail against Deficit spending is a cynics wet dream of hilarity. Nothing on earth is this funny for a cynic like me.

And their sanctimony about the earmarks was just hilarious.

Obama is telling members of Congress that failure to pass the tax-cut legislation could result in the end of his presidency, Rep. Peter DeFazio (Ore.) said. (remember that from the health care cram down)

“The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls, the president is making phone calls saying this is the end of his presidency if he doesn’t get this bad deal,” he told CNN’s Eliot Spitzer.

But the White House shot back late on Wednesday.

“The president hasn’t said anything remotely like that and has never spoken with Mr. DeFazio about the issue,” said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Obama’s push shows that the president is going to the mat in order to push through Congress the compromise brokered with Republicans. (The Hill)

And the 111th Congress has the lowest approval rating since most of them were 60’s hippie radicals. Gallup reports it at 13%.

Even the super liberals over at CBS and The New York Times has it at 17%.

But it’s not like this Congress actually gave a crap about what anyone thought because the Agenda was The Agenda.

Political Cartoon

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, DREAM Act, and START are much more important to Liberals. They are on The Agenda!

They just didn’t have the votes for the Omnibus Pork bill. Otherwise, Harry Reid was threatening to keep everyone through Christmas hostage until they passed their agenda (and still is because this was only 1 of the items).

“We have a constitutional duty to do congressionally directed spending and I don’t want to give up that responsibility,” Reid told reporters. “I can’t understand why some of our more conservative members here want to give up their power. I don’t understand that.”
So Harry believes that he has a Constitutional duty to pass Pork after Pork after Pork.
To bring home the Bacon.
It’s the Drug Dealer and Drug Addict in him rationalizing his Drug Use.
“But it was only a small amount”… “It’s no big deal”…
These guys needs a 1-step program: Just Say No!
They’ll have delirium tremens that will shake the earth out of orbit. But it would be worth it if we could pull it off.
But We the People who have been hooked on thi money by the Pusher Addicts in Washington also have to stop.
DT Symptoms may get worse rapidly, and can include:

* Body tremors
* Mental status changes
o Agitation, irritability
o Confusion, disorientation
o Decreased attention span
o Decreased mental status
+ Deep sleep that persists for a day or longer
+ Stupor, sleepiness, lethargy
+ Usually occurs after acute symptoms
o Delirium (severe, acute loss of mental functions)
o Excitement
o Fear
o Hallucinations (such as seeing or feeling things that are not present are most common)
o Highly sensitive to light, sound, touch
o Increased activity
o Mood changes rapidly
o Restlessness, excitement

Sounds like the Democrats. Anyone for  rehab? 🙂

Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, agreed, though with a far less triumphant tone.

“Today’s maneuvers demonstrate that the House and Senate Republican leadership from here on out should be considered a wholly owned subsidiary of the Tea Party,” Manley said.

What’s wrong with that? The People are the Tea Party.

It’s better than the Democrats who are a wholly owned subsidiary of The Marxist Left.

Michelle Malkin: No matter how soothing the White House overtures to business leaders sounded this week, an inconvenient fact remains: Washington is gripped by crab-in-the-bucket syndrome. And there’s no cure in sight.

Put a single crab in an uncovered bucket, and it will find a way to climb up and out on its own. Put a dozen crabs in a bucket, and 11 will fight with all their might to pull down the striver who attempts escape. President Obama sought to reassure 20 CEOs that he wasn’t the king crab holding them down: “I want to dispel any notion we want to inhibit your success,” he cooed. “We want to be boosters because when you do well, America does well.”

Take it all with a huge grain of sea salt.

This is, after all, the same “booster” who in April mused openly about limits on profits, government determinations for what constitutes a “good” product or service, and the expectation that private businesses serve a collective need to goose Washington’s jobs numbers. “I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money,” the president said. “But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you’re providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy.”

Our Founding Fathers had quite a different view of “the American way,” of course. In 1816, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”

But like a success inhibitor injected into the body politic, Obama’s policies have only served to suppress growth, punish ambition and discourage profit-maximizers. He has railed against “fat cats” on Wall Street while protecting his favored financial industry benefactors. He threatened to “kick” the “a**es” of oil industry executives while refusing to punish the scientific lies and distortions of his own job-killing environmental czars and bureaucrats. He inveighed against the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for collecting dues from international affiliates while ignoring the same practices among deep-pocketed unions. And he bemoaned tax relief for “millionaires and billionaires” that would actually benefit wealth-producing couples who annually earn more than $250,000 and individuals who earn $200,000 or more.

Most small-business owners will tell you they don’t want Obama “boosting” them. They just want him to get out of the way. But none of them was represented at his CEO shindig. Instead, among the business “leaders” the White House invited was billionaire Penny Pritzker — a Chicago crony, Democratic fundraiser/bundler and heiress whose family co-owned a failed subprime specialty bank.

While Obama, the olive-branch poseur, has called for a restoration of “civility” in Washington and liberal elites whine and whinny about the need for “no labels,” class-warfare demagoguery has metastasized unchecked.

Socialist Bernie Sanders took to the Senate floor to filibuster tax relief for all Americans last week in a ponderous, eight-and-a-half-hour harangue against “greed,” the “rich,” “richer” and “richest,” and “millionaires and billionaires” he had the audacity to liken to “bandits.” On the House side, N.Y. Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley attacked the GOP as the party of the wealthy and compared all people who earn more than $250,000 a year to the late convicted tax evader Leona Helmsley and her Maltese doggie heir.

The left wastes no opportunity to blame tea party and talk radio rhetoric for violent acts by lone nuts. But when a suspected serial arsonist (still on the loose) burns down expensive homes in an upscale Cape Cod neighborhood and spray-paints “f**k the rich” graffiti at the crime scenes, the “words-have-consequences” crowd is nowhere to be found. Such is the silence of the crabs.

The Silence of The Crabs… 🙂

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

 

Sign of the Times

Uber Progressive Leftist Alan Colmes on Megyn Kelly’s America Live yesterday discussing the 1/1/11 Tax Increases and Congress in general in getting things done implicitly said that 1-party rule (meaning Democrats) is the only way Washington can function anymore.

“But you don’t have 60 votes in The Senate to override a Republican filibuster”-Colmes

So unless you have an absolute supermajority  1- party rule where everyone is in lock step the minority is going to muck everything up.

Mind you, before Scott Brown’s election in January 2010 the Democrats did have a supermajority and STILL couldn’t pass their agenda. It took legislative trickery and dishonesty to pass ObamaCare after 15 months of wrangling, horse-trading,back room deals and manipulation by DEMOCRATS to pass it.

But even then, it was still the Republican’s fault!

So “Bi-partisan” is a myth.

The Democrats want total control or everything is going to go to hell. After all, they are the vastly superior economic and moral beings- if only those damn Republicans and those damn Tea Partiers would just get out of their way!

1- party rule (THEM) or bust!

I wonder if it will shift on the minority view when the Democrats are in the minority in the House starting in January? 🙂

It will still be the Republican’s fault, after all. Everything in life is, you know. 🙂

The “party of no” indeed…

But what do the Democrats want to do?

Here, for instance, is The Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberley Strassel:

“According to (Nevadan Harry Reid), Senate Democrats are going to confirm judges, rewrite immigration law, extend unemployment insurance, fix the issue of gays in the military, reorganize the FDA, forestall tax hikes, re-fund the government, and ratify a nuclear arms treaty (and the DREAM act) — all in two, maybe three, weeks. This is the same institution that needs a month to rename a post office.”

Or 15 months to pass Socialized medicine even with a Super-Majority! 🙂

Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can afford to have all the tax rates go up in January because they couldn’t get together and pass a bill to prevent that from happening (but the Democrats will do it just to preserve their class warfare ideology). But the nature of that bill matters, not just for politicians but — far more important — for the economy.

Speaking of the economy, another sign of the times:

The Soon-to-be Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi just this week: “But it’s also the right thing to do to grow our economy.  Economists tell us that unemployment insurance — the non-partisan Urban Institute estimated that unemployment insurance returns $2 to the economy for every $1 spent. This is money that is needed by families to buy necessities, to heat their homes… and immediately injects demand into the economy — creating jobs.”

Yes, folks, you heard it here- Unemployment creates Jobs and stimulates growth!

So more unemployment must therefore be a good thing.

Let’s all lose our jobs, sit home and watch Oprah and collect our Unemployment $$$ . It should be  a Utopia by Pelosi’s reasoning. 🙂

And Speaking of Pelosi:

In one of her first acts as speaker in 2007, Pelosi, a California Democrat, created the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming to draw attention to climate-change science and showcase how a cap on carbon dioxide needn’t be a threat to economic growth.

Republicans, who won control of the House in the Nov. 2 election, have opposed legislative efforts to regulate carbon emissions as a tax on energy. When the panel convened today, Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, said that the hearing “will be the last of the select committee.”

Too Bad Nancy, I guess you’ll have to peddle your Global Warming fraud another way…How about The EPA….

Republicans are assuming that cap-and-trade (aka cap-and-tax) is dead because Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid lacks the votes to bring up the House-passed bill and because this issue proved a loser in the 2010 House races. Like the famous Mark Twain saying, its death may be exaggerated.

The Senate’s environmentalism expert, Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., warns us that the Obama administration is trying to implement cap-and-trade anyway by bureaucratic regulations. Directives issued by the Environmental Protection Agency are coming down the pike to increase energy costs and kill jobs.

Last May, the EPA issued what it called a tailoring rule to govern new power plants, oil refineries and factories that yearly emit 100,000 tons or more of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride. Inhofe reports that this tailoring rule will further reduce our manufacturing base and especially hurt the poor and elderly.

Inhofe predicts that the EPA standards planned for commercial and industrial boilers will cost 798,000 jobs. He also warns about the harmful effects on jobs caused by new rules on ozone emissions.

Since Barack Obama moved into the White House, the EPA has proposed or finalized 29 major regulations and 172 major policy rules. The EPA is, for the first time, simultaneously toughening the regulations on all six major traditional pollutants such as ozone and sulfur dioxide.

Before Climate-gate exposed the politics behind the “science” of global warming, a 5-to-4 Supreme Court ordered the EPA to consider regulating emissions based on that unsubstantiated and now largely discredited theory.

Despite a long record of supporting Obama stimulus and spending legislation, the expected chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., says, “We are not going to allow this administration to regulate what they have been unable to legislate.”

Opposition to EPA’s new rules is remarkably bipartisan. Seventeen Democrats signed a letter to EPA Director Lisa Jackson opposing them.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., was elected after running a TV ad showing himself firing a rifle to put a bullet through a copy of the cap-and-trade bill, and he promised to fight EPA attempts to curb greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants. He may have a difficult task because Jackson is plotting to force mass retirements of the coal plants that provide half of U.S. electricity.

EPA’s aggressive overregulation is forcing the electric industry to choose between continuing to operate while taking on major capital costs of complying with heavy new burdens or closing down and building new plants that use more expensive sources such as natural gas. The public will surely end up paying higher electric rates (aka a big tax increase).

The ObamaCare law was deviously designed to take decision-making away from our elected representatives and give it to 15 “expert” members of the Obama-appointed Independent Payment Advisory Board. Many provisions of this law prohibit Congress from repealing or changing decisions of the “experts.”

The Obama administration is using administrative regulations to implement what is known as card check, which even the Democratic Congress refuses to legislate. Obama’s recess appointee to the National Labor Relations Board, Craig Becker, has lined up a 3-to-2 board majority to repeal the rule that requires secret ballots in unionization elections.

Currently, a secret ballot of workers is mandated to unionize a company. Becker’s new regulation will eliminate workers’ right and make them subject to coercion and bullying to induce them to vote yes on a card visible to union bosses.

The Obama administration is also toying with a plan to substitute administrative regulations for treaties. Several years ago, the Council on Foreign Relations fingered the treaty provision of the U.S. Constitution as its most objectionable section, and now an ex-Clinton administration State Department bureaucrat, James P. Rubin, has floated a New York Times op-ed suggesting that treaties are not “worth the trouble anymore,” and we should substitute domestic regulations.

The globalists find it inconvenient that our Constitution requires a two-thirds Senate vote for treaty ratification. Horrors! That, they say, causes “international frustration” with America.

This frustration broke into print because there are not enough Senate votes to ratify the New START Treaty that Obama signed with Russia. Rubin’s solution is to ditch the ratification process and substitute executive agreements and pronouncements.

Rubin reminds us that after it became clear the Senate was not going to ratify a climate-change treaty, Obama just used EPA regulations, and so we can do likewise with arms-control treaties. Let’s just ignore the Constitution and let Obama bureaucrats make all important decisions. (IBD)

Or Food, let’s get them where they eat.

A questionable food safety bill in search of a crisis passed the Senate, but may hit a snag in the House. This power grab of the nation’s food supply may end up benefiting a certain Hungarian billionaire. (aka George Soros, puppetmaster of the extreme Left).

Why would the Senate take up precious time in the lame duck session considering a food safety bill?

Just as ObamaCare wasn’t really about health care reform but about government power, S510 is not really about food safety but about government control of agriculture and the nation’s food producers. The Food Safety Modernization Act would give the Food and Drug Administration unprecedented power to govern how farmers produce their crops. The FDA would be able to control soil, water, hygiene, and even temperature, on farms. Through the law, the agency could regulate animal activity in the fields.

“This legislation means that parents who tell their kids to eat their spinach can be assured it won’t make them sick,” said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who wrote the bill, referring to a recent e-coli outbreak traced to spinach.

A crisis is a terrible thing to waste, even if you have to manufacture one. As the Heritage Foundation reports, the nation’s food supply is the world’s safest and getting safer all the time. Incidences of food-borne illnesses, despite headlines about massive egg recalls, have been declining for more than a decade.

In 1996, there were 51.2 cases of confirmed food-borne bacterial contamination per 100,000 people.

By 2009, this fell by a third to 34.8 cases per 100,000 people. So it would seem it’s getting safer for kids to eat their spinach. But then again, this bill isn’t about spinach.

S510 transfers authority over food regulation enforcement from the FDA to the Homeland Security Department, which brought us the TSA, naked body scanners and the groping of our junk. The bill requires the EPA to “participate” in regulating the food chain.

The bill expands government authority and control over America’s 2.2 million farms, 28,000 food manufacturing facilities, 149,000 food and beverage stores, and 505,000 residents and similar facilities. It increases inspections of all food “facilities.”

Because it taxes them for the privilege, the House must pass a new version of the bill to be sent back to the Senate. The Constitution requires all tax bills to originate in the House, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who opened the session with a five-minute soliloquy on football, should have known that.

One interesting feature of the bill is a bunch of new regulations regarding seeds and seed cleaning that requires expensive equipment. Smaller concerns might not be able to handle the added burden, concentrating the handling of seed production in the hands of corporate giants like Monsanto.

Curiously, George Soros’ hedge fund has just bought 897,813 shares (valued at $312.6 million) of Monsanto. His hand seems to be in anything that weakens individual freedom and destabilizes currencies and free governments, and makes him money in the process.

Governments at all levels have been busy telling us what we should eat and how our restaurants should prepare our food. Trans fats are bad and must be banned, as must vending machines that dispense candy bars and soda. There’s talk of putting federally funded salad bars in our public schools.

So much for the pursuit of happiness — we’re from the government and we have ways to make you healthy. Thomas Jefferson once said: “If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”

Well, ObamaCare has taken care of the medicine part, and now government is after our spinach, too.

You can have our turnips when you pry them from our cold, dead hands. Bon appetit, America. (IBD)

And there’s still the FCC with Net Neutrality and The Fairness Doctrine. The FTC with new regulations on businesses.

This Alphabet soup of liberal regulations is bad for anyone’s health.

“If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”– Thomas Jefferson

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

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”-Thomas Jefferson

Political Cartoon by Nate Beeler

WE Know Better

Some Liberals are feeling the heat of their spending binge. They have a banned a commercial because they don’t like it.

A new television ad about the U.S. national debt produced by Citizens Against Government Waste has been deemed “too controversial” by major networks including ABC, A&E and The History Channel and will not be shown on those channels. The commercial is a homage to a 1986 ad that was entitled “The Deficit Trials” that was also banned by the major networks. Apparently telling the truth about the national debt is a little too “hot” for the major networks to handle. But perhaps it is time to tell the American people the truth. In 1986, the U.S. national debt was around 2 trillion dollars. Today, it is rapidly approaching 14 trillion dollars. The American Dream is being ripped apart right in front of our eyes, but apparently some of the major networks don’t want the American people to really understand what is going on.

The truth is that the ad does not even have anything in it that should be offensive. The commercial is set in the year 2030, and the main character is a Chinese professor that is seen lecturing his students on the fall of great empires. As images of the United States are shown on a screen behind him, the Chinese professor tells his students the following about the behavior of great empires: “They all make the same mistakes. Turning their backs on the principles that made them great. America tried to spend and tax itself out of a great recession. Enormous so-called “stimulus” spending, massive changes to health care, government takeover of private industries, and crushing debt.”

Perhaps it is what the Chinese Professor says next that is alarming the big television networks: “Of course, we owned most of their debt, so now they work for us”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOpyggmTmeE&feature=player_embedded#!

I think it’s one of the best, most accurate commercials ever. That must be why it threatens liberals.

The Truth always threatens liberals.

 

Super-genius political science professor Charles H. Franklin of the University of Wisconsin, Madison recently gave loud voice to a widely held liberal belief: Ordinary Americans, especially conservative ones, are stupid.

At a conference by the Society of Professional Journalists, alternative newspaper editor Bill Lueders asked Franklin why “the public seemed to vote against its own interests and stated desires, for instance by electing candidates who’ll drive up the deficit with fiscally reckless giveaways to the rich.”

Franklin responded: “I’m not endorsing the American voter. They’re pretty damn stupid.” (Excuse my impertinence, but is there a grammatical glitch in the genius’s formulation?)

First, we should note that Franklin implicitly accepted Lueders’ premise as fact: The voters who claim to be motivated by a passion to end reckless Washington spending had just elected candidates who will be fiscally irresponsible because they support “reckless giveaways to the rich.”

But how smart is it to mischaracterize a policy, misrepresent its likely consequences and ignore other relevant data to arrive at an ideologically preordained conclusion?
Extending Bush tax cuts for those making $250,000 or more would not be a giveaway. We’re not talking about the government’s money, but money earned by individuals. Only leftists believe that all income is the property of the state and that the amount remaining after income taxes is a gift from the government to the individual.

Moreover, the tax rates we’re discussing have been in place since 2003. To extend those rates would not be a cut. To fail to extend them would constitute a tax increase. I suppose “intelligence” doesn’t require the honest use of terminology.

In addition, the premise is overly simplistic because it suggests that extending the Bush rates for the highest income bracket would cost the government revenues dollar for dollar, as if we have a completely static economy. The mentally gifted simply refuse to acknowledge the empirical evidence showing that reductions in marginal income tax rates during the Kennedy years, the Reagan years and the George W. Bush years resulted in increases in revenue. They also fail to factor in the economic truism that tax increases during bad economic times retard growth and thus constitute a drag on tax revenues.

Finally, the premise ignores that voters were rejecting Obama’s big spending across the board and that the extension of the Bush rates would be only one small part of the equation. Those voting out the Democrats were overwhelmingly repudiating Obama’s reckless spending in virtually every other category — save defense. That is, they voted not against their interests, Mr. Lueders and Professor Franklin, but consistent with them.

You might be interested in some other pronouncements by Professor Erudition. One example: In an article in Politico about a year ago, Franklin wrote, “The issue that has dominated the summer and fall, health care reform, will most likely not remain high on voters’ list of the most important problems in 12 months regardless of the outcome of legislation.” Well, exit polls showed that 20 percent of voters believed health care was not only important but the most important issue. Doubtless, a full majority of voters believed it was among the most important problems, even if not the most important.

The liberal intelligentsia’s contempt for the American people is well-established. Franklin’s snarky outburst is little different from then-ABC anchorman Peter Jennings’ statement that American voters had a temper tantrum when they delivered a congressional majority to Republicans in 1994, Obama’s assessment that voters are irrational because they are scared, or the Bush haters bitterly decrying the 2000 and 2004 elections with their observation that red-state voters were “reality-challenged.” And it’s no different from liberals’ perpetual characterization of Republican political figures as stupid, from Reagan to George W. Bush to Sarah Palin.

I’ll tell you what is rather silly; I don’t want to say “stupid.” It’s this repeated assertion that one’s political viewpoint is based on intelligence, when it is far more related to one’s worldview and disposition. For every brilliant, average or unintelligent liberal, I’ll show you a brilliant, average or unintelligent conservative. Ideology is not a function of IQ, and political allegiances and policy preferences are often unrelated to facts.

If you want an example of “stupid” — or at least intellectual negligence — consider the childish willingness on the part of so many intellectuals, on the left and the right, to deify candidate Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign.

Then again, hasn’t it always been axiomatic that “intellectuals” lack common sense? In their minds, Jimmy Carter was going to make the ideal president.

What’s worse, many of them think he did.

Please save us from the intellectuals. (David Limbaugh)

AMEN!

Political Cartoon by Chuck Asay
Political Cartoon by Michael Ramirez
Happy Black Friday ( until Al Sharpton calls it racist that is). Enjoy the stampede of the greedy. I wonder if any of them are liberals… 🙂