Your Safety is Our Primary Concern

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” — attributed to Benjamin Franklin.

Political Cartoon by Gary McCoy

You knew the Department of Homeland Security was broken under Janet Napolitano. She won’t secure the border. She can’t bring herself to name the religion that breeds an incessant flow of suicidal extremists. And now she may allow Muslim women wearing hijabs (full body coverings) to pass through security without the intrusive scanning process that the rest of the citizenry must endure.

CAIR, the islamic pressure group link to the terrorist group HAMAS says “jump” and she and most liberals say “how high?”.

When asked, Janet said “Look, we have, like I said before, we are doing what we need to do to protect the traveling public and adjustments will be made where they need to be made,” Napolitano responded. “With respect to that particular issue, I think there will be more to come…”

So no need to recruit westerners to be radicals anymore. Just get CAIR to cry foul and Janet and the Liberals will jump and do as they say. So the terrorist can just come as they are.

Meanwhile, grandma and  screaming 3 year olds will get felt up like they were at a strip club.

And heaven forbid a bomber hides something up their ass, we’ll all have mandatory enemas!

http://townhall.com/video/oreilly-ann-coulter-debate-tsa-security-measures

Yeah, that’s effective. 😦

It’s okay for the TSA to grope nuns, but Muslim women are exempt (nothing beyond the head and neck). We cannot profile potential terrorists, but it’s okay to molest three-year olds (except we won’t call it molest because it’s the government doing it). Muslim men won’t go through body imaging machines, but it’s okay to grope non-Muslims’ genitals.

And, just to be clear, when one guy expresses his displeasure about his “junk” being touched, the TSA wants to make an example out of him by retaliating and launching an investigation into the guy who resisted the TSA’s overtures.

The Transportation Security Administration has opened an investigation targeting John Tyner, the Oceanside man who left Lindbergh Field under duress on Saturday morning after refusing to undertake a full body scan.

[snip]

Michael J. Aguilar, chief of the TSA office in San Diego, called a news conference at the airport Monday afternoon to announce the probe. He said the investigation could lead to prosecution and civil penalties of up to $11,000.

TSA agents had told Tyner on Saturday that he could be fined up to $10,000.

“That’s the old fine,” Aguilar said. “It has been increased.”

So what we need is everyone dress in Muslim grab and pretend to be a Muslim. That will overload Janet’s brain to the point where we may actually cause her brain to crash and we can get someone competent in there (but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that though).

If Liberals jump at whatever Muslim pressure groups say, then obviously we need to all be Muslims.

Because the TSA assumes you are a terrorist right from the get-go, unless you’re a muslim that is.

So what if virtually every terrorist attack in the 45 years has been committed by Muslims. Who cares.

Certainly not the TSA.

We don’t want to PROFILE!

Everyone is guilty until proven innocent, except Muslims.

Sigh…And it doesn’t end there.

Just being normal Americans also who voted to crush the Democrats in the last election didn’t even phase the ideologically mind locked nutters.

The Democrats, and the predicted Lame Duck Poison has arrived.

Facing the largest Tax Increase (there are no “cuts”) in American History, something that is guaranteed to crush a bad economy the Democrats are all fired up about Illegal Immigration, Net Neutrality, and Treaties to hand over military superiority to the Russians.

They learned nothing on Nov 2. As predicted. They are far to full of their own hubris to understand. The Agenda is The Agenda!

And they still are. They are, after all, vastly superior to us mere mortals.

After the election, it seemed like the White House might have gotten the message. Obama said “the overwhelming message that I hear from the voters is that we…want you to work harder to arrive at consensus. We want you to focus completely on jobs and the economy…” White House officials were reported to be “deeply concerned about winning back political independents”. The FCC also seemed to get it. Chairman Genachowski said “At the FCC, our primary focus is simple: the economy and jobs.”

Message received, right?

Apparently not.

Now, in an astounding act of political and economic deafness, FCC Chairman Genachowski has apparently “touted net-neutrality regulations as one of the most important policies the country can adopt to improve its broadband deployment efforts”, and The Politico reports that they are “putting together a net neutrality proposal” which would apply net neutrality rules to wireless. And they may may try to jam it through in December.

Why now? “Lawmakers will already be gone for the Thanksgiving holiday, giving the FCC a small window to release a controversial order without immediate harsh reactions from Capitol Hill Republicans.”

I’m not sure why the administration thinks Congressional Republicans will let this happen. There may not be an Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman yet, but there isn’t much daylight between the candidates on this issue. If the FCC goes too far on this issue, they can expect a Congressional examination that would make the TSA blush.

Regulations that decrease investment and will lead to a loss of investment are no laughing matter in this bad economy. Americans will look to Congress to ask some tough questions on why the FCC and White House didn’t get the message after the midterms.

The question now is whether it was the FCC or the White House itself that didn’t get the message in the midterms. If they want to jam through these regulations, there is plenty more where the mid-terms came from. (Redstate.com)

The Senate has voted to take up consideration of S.510, the so-called Food Safety Modernization Act, which would grant the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) more control over our diets. The supposed intention behind the legislation is to protect consumers from food-borne illnesses. But will it really?

If passed, the misnamed Food Safety and Modernization Act would authorize the FDA to tell farmers how to grow their crops. Federal bureaucrats who likely know little to nothing about farming will set the guidelines on appropriate temperatures, what soil to use, how much water to use and what animals are allowed to be on certain fields.

A study by Senator Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) office states “on the whole this bill represents a weighty new regulatory structure on the food industry that will be particularly difficult for small producers and farms to comply with (with little evidence it will make food safer)”

President John Tate states: “Don’t fall for their rhetoric about a few provisions that supposedly address concerns of small-scale farmers; the FDA still has all the power it needs to shut down family farms on a whim. In other words, it will be up to bureaucrats to decide whether or not local food production is decimated by federal regulations or shut down.”

The Congressional Budget Office has calculated that this overreaching bill would cost $1.4 billion between 2011 and 2015. To carry out these new rules, the federal government will hire over 17,000 new bureaucrats. Food producers will likely spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually complying with these unnecessary government regulations. This cost will be passed onto consumers in the form of higher food prices. Big agriculture is one of the largest proponents of the bill since it will likely destroy their competitors who cannot afford the high cost of these regulations.(red state.com)

But you’ll be “safer”. 🙂

Now doesn’t that make you feel better…

And the Democrats have listened to the the people cry on the economy, by not doing anything so far about the tax increases, but they do want give amnesty to illegals and crush the internet and farmers under their boots.

Message received loud and clear.

But did you listen?

Political Cartoon by Lisa Benson

 

Your Role

From the man who made “never let a crisis go to waste”, Rahm Emanuel former White House Chief of Staff comes what we all knew in our hearts.

The Democrats claim, even now, that the Republicans obstructed them and that they sought “bi-Partisanship” on Health Care Reform and the President even said he’d listen to ideas from Republicans.

We all knew that was bullhockey (and when he repeated the same lines in his speech right after the election…)

Well, in a book, Rahm has admitted as much.

In a new book, Rahm claims he privately argued to Obama that he shouldn’t pursue bipartisan support for health reform, because it would take too much time, instead insisting that the lesson of Clinton’s failure to pass reform was that it was imperative to put a premium on getting it done quickly. That cuts strongly against the image of Rahm as the chief internal advocate of the White House’s strategy of deal-making and accommodation with Republicans.

Rahm makes the claim in interviews with journalist Richard Wolffe, in his new book, “Revival: The Struggle for Survival Inside the Obama White House,” which was released today. From page 102:

Unlike his boss, Emanuel wasn’t interested in looking reasonable with Republicans; he wanted to look victorious. He didn’t care much for uniting red and blue America; he wanted blue America to beat its red rival…

Obama was prepared to sacrifice time and political capital to make his policy bipartisan and more ambitious; Emanuel believed Obama did not have that luxury. “Time is your commodity. That answers everything,” Emanuel said. “But a lot of us thought we didn’t have the amount of time that was being dedicated. If you abandon the bipartisan talks you get blamed. He still wanted to try to achieve it that way. But that’s one of a series of things you can look back on and be a genius about.

“My job as chief of staff is to give him 180-degree advice. He hired me, as he asked, to learn from the past, or to use my knowledge from my time in Congress and in the Clinton administration. Watching ’94, watching ’97 when we did kids’ health care, and then studying Medicare, what were the lessons? The lesson about time as a commodity is not mine, it’s Lyndon Johnson’s. You got X amount of time; you gotta use it.”

The decision to waste time chasing bipartisan support for health reform was clearly one of the mistakes that led to health care being such a big political liability for Dems. It extended the whole mess by months and months, which gave opponents more time to demagogue the bill and scare voters and helped turn the public against the process. Rahm seems to be suggesting here that he foresaw something like this happening, and argued against the futile quest for bipartisan support, which is certainly not the view of his legacy in the White House that has endured.(WP)

Gee, I’m shocked….And he was always portrayed as “the Moderate Voice” in the White House.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid!

Then Big Sis Janet Napalitano when asked about the government gropes at airports,“It’s all about security,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said. “It’s all about everybody recognizing their role.” (Reuters)

Your role as always is to sit down and shut up because the government is better, stronger, more powerful and just plain better than you.

They want to take care of their serfs. And don’t want you little people to be bothered by thinking how you’re being exploited.

Your Lord and Masters have spoken. Shut up, sit down, and know your place.

Oh, and there will be “death panels” despite how the left mocked people for suggesting it and got all frothy and pit bullish crazy ever time someone mentioned it.

Ever notice that when Leftists get really made about a characterization of them it usually ends up being true? 🙂

The left’s favorite economist, who condemned others for saying ObamaCare would require death panels, now admits they are real and necessary. The way to control costs, he says, is death and taxes.

Paul Krugman has long extolled the virtues of Britain’s National Health Service and its National Institute for Clinical Excellence with the Orwellian acronym of NICE. Krugman has been anything but nice to NHS critics and those who’ve said that what have been called its “death panels” would be brought to America via ObamaCare.

In a roundtable discussion on ABC’s “This Week,” the New York Times columnist said of what recently came out of the president’s deficit commission: “Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.

“Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for,” Krugman said. “And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, (the deficit commission) should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.”

Krugman went right to his blog Sunday afternoon to “clarify” his comments. He explained, and we are willing to accept, that he was being derisive of the term and sarcastic. “I said something deliberately provocative on This Week,” Krugman wrote, “so I think I’d better clarify what I meant,” which is something he regularly denies to others.

He explained that “health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care.”

Whatever his intended use of the phrase “death panels,” what he describes are in fact “death panels.” A group of people will sit on a, er, panel, deciding what treatments are cost-effective and should be available and who should get them. That is called rationing and in cases of the “extreme care” he mentions, a life-and-death decision.

That’s a death panel.

We recall how Krugman savaged Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for warning what Krugman now says should happen might happen. Palin said: “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

Sharing Krugman’s belief that such a system is just fine is Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama’s choice to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services. Berwick has said: “NICE is extremely effective and a conscientious, valuable and — importantly — knowledge-building system.” No, NICE is a system of rationing through a bureaucratic formula defining “cost-effectiveness” that has rushed untold numbers of Britons to an early grave.

“The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open,” is what Dr. Berwick told a National Institutes of Health publication when he was just president and CEO of the Institute for Health Care Improvement.

The Obama administration’s health care reform is all about cost and little about care. Dr. Berwick has opined: “We can make a sensible social decision and say, ‘Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit (new drug or medical intervention) is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds.’ ” In other words, the government will decide whether treating you and extending your life is worth it.

By any other name, that’s still a death panel. (IBD)

Welcome to Orwell’s…I mean Obama’s America.

Your role: Serf. Their Role: Master

If they want Death panels, they get death panels, you just can’t call them that and you can’t object. That’s not your role.

If you don’t want to be groped at airports like your a side of beef at local Strip Club, too bad! They have to play being serious about security (While ignoring 18-40 year old male Muslims).

That’s their role.

Now do you want some Hope and Change? 🙂

Political Cartoon by Chuck Asay
Political Cartoon by Steve Kelley