Why it is…

This guy Christopher Cook from Western Free Press nails it. It’s a great summation of what I have said over and over again in this blog for the last 5 years.

“Conservatives see liberals as misguided; liberals see conservatives as evil.”
—Original source unknown

Are you a conservative, a libertarian, or a Republican? Have you ever been verbally assaulted by someone on the political left with a ferocity you didn’t quite understand? Have you seen it happen to friends and colleagues, or watched in horror as the media establishment does it to a public figure?

Of course you have. At some point or other, nearly everyone on the political right has witnessed or been the victim of an attack designed not to elucidate facts, but rather to paint him or her as a villain.

My attention was recently drawn to a typical such calumny from a Facebook exchange:

Republicans hate anything that isn’t white, wealthy, and christian at least in appearance. They hate the poor, women, and minorities. They hate science and don’t believe that the global warming we clearly are experiencing is man made. They hate any government programs that help the poor and minorities, and the particularly despise immigrants, particularly the illegal kind. They love programs that line the pockets of oil companies, mining companies, and are willing to export jobs with wild abandon.

They hate public education, and they despise public schools and the public school teachers and public university professors. And since the do not respect the market place of ideas, they hate tenure (that gives teachers academic freedom) because it prevents them from firing teachers who are Democrats and who might infect some student with their liberal ideas. They want insurance companies to make a maximum of profit, and are perfectly willing for the health insurance companies to kill people by refusing service to anyone that might cost them a buck more than the median expense. They don’t care about clean food because it might cost the food corporation a little money, and they don’t care about clean water because cleaning up the waste will cost their precious corporate persons a little money.

This is not a recitation of facts; it is a series of smears. It is the construction of a giant cartoonish super-villain, made of straw and woven together with calumny. The giant straw villain is then publicly burned, in a narcissistic orgy of self-adulation. Of course, the torches of the “best” people burn the brightest.

Or one of my favourites: “you should stop watching Faux News” end of discussion.

Another way of looking at it is this: It is the modern-day version of a witch trial. The charges are utterly farcical and cartoonish. “I saw her dancing with demons in the pale moonlight.” “She looked at me and I sneezed, and the next day, I had a terrible cold.” “She turned me into a newt.” But they are stated with great conviction and repeated incessantly, and they establish the unassailable collective will of which the accused has run afoul. The witch is made into the auslander, and the good people of the community show how “good” they are by shouting their accusations the loudest.

Either way, whether the wicker man or the witch, the effigy goes up in flames and the community is purged—for the moment—of its evil. Moral annulment now achieved, the villagers walk away feeling good about themselves. Feeling superior.

Facts are also unimportant in this perverse passion play. Like the slavering, semi-psychotic Facebook rant above, most such assaults aren’t a series of accusations backed up by facts, they are a series of character assassinations, most of which are contradicted by the facts.

The most salient example today is the charge that people of the right (conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, tea partiers) oppose Obama out of pure racism—simply because he is black. Though this charge is easily refuted—by common sense, widespread evidence, and actual studies—it is repeated incessantly by the media, the left’s foot-soldiers . . . even the president himself.

Anything short of full Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants is therefore, racist. Anything less than full compliance with Global Warming fearmongering is “denial” and also Racist (according to the EPA Director).

Face it, disagree with a Leftist on basically anything, eventually you’ll be  a racist. Period. End of Discussion. 🙂

When actual studies are done (as opposed to just restating what the leftist imagines to be so as if it were actual fact), we learn that real racism is distributed fairly evenly among the population without regard to political affiliation.  In 2008, a survey was done that showed similar numbers of Republicans (5.7) and Democrats (6.8) would not vote for a black presidential candidate. Such a question gives us one of the clearest possible tests of raw racism. A loaded question like, “Do you feel blacks receive too much welfare?” might confuse attitudes about race with attitudes about government welfare programs. But this gives us apples to apples: All things being equal, would you refuse to vote for someone solely because of race?

In the 2008 survey, Democrats were slightly (1.1%) more likely to show racist thinking than Republicans, though this is well within the margin of error. A similar study on senatorial candidates was far more damning to Democrats. Bottom line: there is little evidence that Republicans oppose Obama or any candidate on the basis of race to any greater degree than Democrats.

But this should be obvious based on other facts and indicators as well. Take Mia Love. If you are on the political left, you may not have heard of her, but she is a rising star on the right. She quotes Bastiat, she believes in core principles such as subsidiarity—she is dynamic, successful, and hits all the right notes. She is a black woman, and I have not met or heard of a single conservative, Republican, or tea partier who wouldn’t be delighted to support her. (Deep down, many of the left know this, which is why they have been so vicious to her.) I have worked alongside or come in contact with hundreds of activists and partisans on the political right over the last 15 years, and I cannot think of a single one who would not exult at a Mia Love victory. If she were elected president, I myself would do the happy dance on top of the tallest mountain in my area every November!

The reason is obvious: we agree ideologically. Race is unimportant. Barack Obama is, it can be fairly argued, further to the political left than any previous president. And people on the right oppose him so virulently for that very reason—not because of his race, but because of the huge ideological gulf that lies between. Imagine that.

The other painfully incessant canard is the notion that people on the right “hate the poor.” In fact, the evidence shows the opposite. Conservatives are more charitable than liberals by fairly significant margins, even when you adjust for a variety of factors. Rich, middle-class, and poor conservatives are all more charitable than their liberal counterparts.  It’s not that conservatives are wealthier overall, either—liberal households are 6% wealthier on average. (I bet you never heard that little fact on MSNBC.) It is also not that conservatives are more religious: new data indicate that secular conservatives give more than secular liberals. These conservatives are voluntarily helping the poor with their own money, in greater numbers than their liberal counterparts in every cohort. Conservatism is a greater predictor of charity.

Leftists (they hardly deserve the term “liberal”), by contrast, are more “charitable” with other people’s money. Leftist A votes for Politician B to take money (by force) from Taxpayer C to give it to Recipient D. A and D give more support and power to B, who continues to take more and more from C, in a perverse and ever-increasing form of economic bondage. Then, A, B, and D get together and say that C hates the poor. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But we are getting dragged into the weeds here. We could go on and on refuting fact after fact, but the facts are unimportant. The leftist is creating a narrative. As a marketing guru will tell you, Facts tell, but stories sell. It’s a lesson the leftist has learned well.

Even more disturbing, in recent years, this method of “argumentation” has increasingly become the first tool pulled out of the toolbox. No longer does the leftist feel as compelled to make real arguments. All he needs to do now is shout “Racist!” or “War on Women!” and his job is done. He walks away feeling smugly satisfied of his own politically correct superiority, and the untrained observer is left addled at best, and possibly even swayed by the narrative.

So why they are so vicious?  Why do people who self-describe as “compassionate” direct such vitriolic hate and assaults at their ideological opponents? How they can justify painting you as such a monster?

Simple: To them, you are a monster. You must be.

Reason #1: Utopianism
You’re in their way

Strip everything away, and the fundamental trait of all leftists is this: The believe that through the state, they can build paradise on earth. They believe that with enough tinkering, coercion, and rule by “experts,” they can eliminate all hard choices and competing goods, perfect human nature, and bring all good things to all people.

To someone of the political right—defined by our belief in human freedom, private solutions, and individual sovereignty—this is just the modern re-telling of the age-old story: that some men should rule over other men. Ancient despotism, monarchy, fascism, totalitarianism, modern progressivism—they’re all just different flavors, and different degrees of application, of the same basic philosophy. But the person on the left does not see it that way. He wants perfection. He believes it is possible. And by gum, he’s going to get it.

This utopian thinking quickly leads to an unavoidable conclusion, echoed from the French Revolution to Lenin and Stalin to Mao to the Progressives of the modern era: “On ne fait pas d’omelet sans casser des oeufs.” (You can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs.) To the utopian statist, “process costs” are entirely acceptable. They are building paradise, after all.

That’s why you see so much more toleration by the left’s rank and file of corruption and bad behavior by their leaders. What’s a little lying here, a little corruption there? They are building paradise. What’s a little cheating in the face of all they intend to accomplish?

That is also why you see such a prevalence of cult-of-personality adulation for strong leaders. Strong leaders resolve contradictions and sweep away the opposition. Strong leaders have the will to get the job done. Strong leaders get the trains running on time. Next stop, paradise.

But most importantly . . . these utopians—both the leaders and the rank and file—are so convinced of the nobility of their intentions that they believe that anyone who stands in their way must, by definition, have evil intentions. After all, who but a monster would stand in the way of paradise? And what consideration do monsters deserve? Why none at all, of course—they’re monsters.

That is why they do not simply disagree with you. That is why they calumniate you and attribute the worst motives to you. That is why they hate you.

Reason #2: Utopianism
The WORLD is in their way

The world refuses to conform to their utopian vision. The world isn’t the neat and tidy place they want it to be. They still hold onto the childlike belief that there can be goods with no tradeoffs, and this world of endless tradeoffs proves them wrong every day, mocking their childishness in the process. That makes them very angry.

Someone once said, “Conservatives believe what they see; liberals see what they believe.” Leftists hate you for the fact that you see the world as it is, rather than as it should be. You accept the facts of reality as they truly are, and you try to make the best of it. They believe that they can make reality conform to their vision of it. (That this effort always requires massive application of force against other human beings doesn’t bother them. It’s just another process cost.)

Your acceptance of reality as it is is pedestrian and troglodytic. Their vision of how reality should be makes them noble and romantic. They hate you for not living in the same fantasy land that they do. They hate you for recognizing that life is filled with tradeoffs. They don’t see the tradeoffs, so when you point them out, it’s as if you are the one that is making the tradeoff exist. La-La-La . . . I can’t hear you! Stop making bad things happen.

Your acceptance of reality makes them so angry, in fact, that they have convinced themselves that you must be suffering from some sort of psychological malady. Over the last century, dozens of self-reinforcing  junk-science books and studies have been published labeling “conservatism” (once called “classical liberalism”) as a mental disorder. Like the mental patient permanently lost in a psychotic world of his own creation . . . he’s normal, it’s the rest of you who are nuts.

Reason #3: Preening Narcissism
They are beautiful, so you must be ugly

The ideas of the political left produce failure at best and misery, oppression, and democide at worst. In spite of this, I had long clung to the belief that at least people on the political left “mean well.”

But do they? Or do they simply want to feel as though they mean well?

Author Robert Bidinotto asks (and answers) the same question:

Have decades upon decades of liberal policy failures deterred liberals from being liberals? Have the trillions of dollars blown on welfare-state programs since the “New Deal” and the “War on Poverty” made a damned bit of difference in curing poverty? And has that failure convinced “progressives” that there is something fundamentally wrong in their worldview and approach? Have the horrendous historical consequences of appeasement policies stopped today’s politicians from appeasing international thugs and terrorists? No?

Then why does anyone assume that liberals gauge the value of their worldview by the standard of its PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES?

Practical consequences are ALWAYS trumped by the advancement and protection of one’s core Narrative: the fairy tale that gives one’s life meaning, coherence, and moral justification. [ . . . ]

Doing that makes them feel good about themselves. And they would far rather feel good about themselves than actually achieve any of their stated practical objectives. It’s not about the objectives at all. It’s about THEM.

John Hawkins is just as unequivocal:

3) Liberals emphasize feeling superior, not superior results. Liberalism is all about appearances, not outcomes. What matters to liberals is how a program makes them FEEL about themselves, not whether it works or not. Thus a program like Headstart, which sounds good because it’s designed to help children read, makes liberals feel good about themselves, even though the program doesn’t work and wastes billions. A ban on DDT makes liberals feel good about themselves because they’re “protecting the environment” even though millions of people have died as a result. For liberals, it’s not what a program does in the real world; it’s about whether they feel better about themselves for supporting it.

If this is true, then for many, utopianism isn’t about what they think they can achieve, it’s about their own self-image.

So is it true?

The persistence of this vision in the face of centuries of evidence would seem to indicate that it may be. We know that maximizing human freedom is more moral and produces better results—the last two centuries have made that clear. And on the flip side, we know that maximizing government at the expense of the individual produces a parade of horribles. And yet, again and again, we are told that it simply wasn’t done correctly before, or by the right people.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?
Why you are, my dear—you are so compassionate and fair and noble in every way.

The leftist looks at herself in the mirror and sees that she is one of those “right people,” because that is how she wants to see herself.

And if she is so beautiful and noble and fair . . . then how ugly you must be for standing in her way.

 

The leftist—the utopian, the statist—sees himself as on noble quest. He is the embodiment of everything good, simply because that is how he sees himself. How he wants to see himself. In order to maintain this self-image, he must make you the embodiment of everything horrible. He must make you ugly.

To statists, you are just another process cost. Their willingness to accept process costs on the road to their utopia is limited only by national context. In the United States, an exceptional nation where we still have some rule of law, they will certainly calumniate you, and they may decide to harm your finances, career, or reputation. In less exceptional countries where there is less rule of law, the harm is often to people’s freedom or even their very lives, as more than 100 million poor souls discovered in the 20th century.

The typical leftist in America, ignorant of his own philosophical pedigree, will protest this characterization. Do not let their protestations sway you. The degree to which they will treat you—the monster standing in the way of their utopia—as a disposable process cost is limited only by the degree of power they have. For your own safety, do not let them get more.

You are in the way of the utopia they are trying to create. You are in the way of the power they need to do it.

You. Are. In. Their. Way.

utopia

“The conservative “thinks of political policies as intended to preserve order, justice, and freedom. The ideologue, on the contrary, thinks of politics as a revolutionary instrument for transforming society and even transforming human nature. In his march toward Utopia, the liberal ideologue is merciless.”― Russell Kirk

the Ministry of Truth It is an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete rising 300 metres into the air, containing over 3000 rooms above ground. On the outside wall are the three slogans of the Party: “WAR IS PEACE,” “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY,” “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” There is also a large part underground, probably containing huge incinerators where documents are destroyed after they are put down memory holes. (Hard Drives crashing anyone?)

The Ministry of Truth is involved with news media, entertainment, the fine arts and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history to change the facts to fit Party doctrine for propaganda effect. For example, if Big Brother makes a prediction that turns out to be wrong, the employees of the Ministry of Truth go back and rewrite the prediction so that any prediction Big Brother previously made is accurate. This is the “how” of the Ministry of Truth’s existence. Within the novel, Orwell elaborates that the deeper reason for its existence is to maintain the illusion that the Party is absolute. It cannot ever seem to change its mind (if, for instance, they perform one of their constant changes regarding enemies during war) or make a mistake (firing an official or making a grossly misjudged supply prediction), for that would imply weakness and to maintain power the Party must seem eternally right and strong.

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” – George Washington

154418 600 Obamas Piece Prize   Reposted cartoons

The Vain Hope of Change

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-George Orwell

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AMEN.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Brian Farrington

Your Lord and Master

Click to visit the original post

One of the things that gauls me the most about Liberals is their sanctimony.
There absolute conviction that they are the superior moral being and your just a dumb greedy mindless chimp.
A guy on the radio was spewing his sanctimony about “equality” and “fairness” where rich people needed to have their money taken from them because he was more concerned about  the poor and starving and giving them a “fair shot” and an “opportunity”.

Because after all, they have no shot now. And they are incompetent to begin with so government must step in and save the day!
When asked if he was concerned about giving the government the ability to just take a persons money just because they have millions of dollars the sanctimonious liberal just comes back repeated about rich people have different morals and he was concerned with the poor and the starving and refused to answer the question and just want to pontificate about how superior his “morality” was compared to evil non-liberals.
That’s what makes him “feel” good.
All emotion no logic.
All sanctimony.
Paraphrase: “when two babies are born I see one that will work at McDonalds and the other has a trust fund”
The sanctimonious liberal wants to piously pontificate about opportunity for the poor.

The way to do that is take from the rich and give it to the poor but that’s not “redistribution of wealth” because the Liberal puffed himself up and said with due pride “I’m not a socialist I’m just concerned about the poor”.

Yikes! Orwell would be proud of you my son.
That way they have an equal opportunity to work hard and be successful.
Notice anything wrong with that logic??
And then there’s the problem of when does the person who was poor and worked their ass off to make themselves rich cross the line into Evil, rich greed, immoral bastard worthy of having their success stripped from them in the name of the Liberal holy sanctimony??
And what incentive does that give to the person to become rich anyhow?
None.
Hey, if the Liberals are always going to give you everyone’s fish because it’s “fair” and they will “feel” good doing it then why do you need to learn to fish for yourself.

If Master Liberal is always going to promise you that they will deliver the booty why then do you need to “struggle”??

The only struggle you need is to elect Democrats so they can take the money from someone else and give it to you.

From Media Matters- The Propaganda Arm of The Obama Administration (as proven by Fast & Furious): In a report released April 9, researchers at the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimated that food stamps “reduced the poverty rate by nearly 8 percent in 2009.” That year, USDA researchers concluded, food stamps reduced the depth of child poverty by 20.9 percent.

As MSNBC’s Al Sharpton explained, “facts matter” in the debate over anti-poverty programs.

Valerie Jarrett: according to her, unemployment checks — in some round about way — are actually “good for” and “stimulate” the economy. “People Who Receive That Unemployment Check Go Out And Spend It And Help Stimulate The Economy.”

Nancy Pelosi: “It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck,” she said.

Dean Baker: Unemployment Insurance “Stimulates The Economy” By “Put[ting] Money In … [The] Pockets” Of People Who Are “Very Likely To Spend” It. In an August 30, 2011, email to Media Matters, Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research

Moody’s Economist Sophia Koropeckyj: They’ve likely depleted their savings, and this is really all the income that they have. And they have kids to feed, they have rent to pay, and there’s a very, very high probability they’re going to spend that entire amount that they get.

<LYNN> NEARY (NPR Host): And where do they spend it? In stores.

KOROPECKYJ: That initial infusion into the economy of the unemployment insurance benefits then reverberates through the economy, flows through the economy in a variety of ways, and so that, you know, $1 of benefits is magnified. [NPR, All Things Considered, 7/11/10]

Then Media Matters goes on to cites the CBO.

But when the CBO came out with ObamaCare was going to cost twice as much and would cause lots of people to lose their own insurance they ignored it.

Funny how that worked out.

The fact that they only give you the scraps and make you “feel” good about and gin up Class Warfare to cover up it’s deficiencies and fakery and keep most of it for THEIR cronies is immaterial because you are told you are entitled to it so when the government hands out its meager portions to you the peasants you are so grateful to your Lord and Master for their protection, wisdom, guidance and love.

If this is starting to sound like a Medieval King-Lord-Royalty-Peasant relationship you are catching my drift.

The Elites and The “grateful” peasants.

Also sounds a bit like Communism.

Funny how that worked out. 🙂

OBAMACARE

Call it President Obama’s Committee for the Re-Election of the President — a political slush fund at the Health and Human Services Department.

Only this isn’t some little fund from shadowy private sources; this is taxpayer money, redirected to help Obama win another term. A massive amount of it, too — $8.3 billion. Yes, that’s billion, with a B.

Here is how it works.

The most oppressive aspects of the ObamaCare law don’t kick in until after the 2012 election, when the president will no longer be answerable to voters. More “flexibility,” he recently explained to the Russians.

But certain voters would surely notice one highly painful part of the law before then — namely, the way it guts the popular Medicare Advantage program.

For years, 12 million seniors have relied on these policies, a more market-oriented alternative to traditional Medicare, without the aggravating gaps in coverage.

But as part of its hundreds of billions in Medicare cuts, the Obama one-size-fits-all plan slashes reimbursement rates for Medicare Advantage starting next year — herding many seniors back into the government-run program.

The cuts were 1/2 of what was supposed to be the offest of the cost of the original price of ObamaCare. Which is now a 1/4 because the costs of ObamaCare have gone up even before this happens.

But funny how it was all set for after the election… 🙂

Under federal “open-enrollment” guidelines, seniors must pick their Medicare coverage program for next year by the end of this year — which means they should be finding out before Election Day.

Nothing is more politically volatile than monkeying with the health insurance of seniors, who aren’t too keen on confusing upheavals in their health care and are the most diligent voters in the land. This could make the Tea Party look like a tea party.

Making matters even more politically dangerous for Obama is that open enrollment begins Oct. 15, less than three weeks before voters go to the polls.

It’s hard to imagine a bigger electoral disaster for a president than seniors in crucial states like Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio discovering that he’s taken away their beloved Medicare Advantage just weeks before an election.

This political ticking time bomb could become the biggest “October Surprise” in US political history.

But the administration’s devised a way to postpone the pain one more year, getting Obama past his last election; it plans to spend $8 billion to temporarily restore Medicare Advantage funds so that seniors in key markets don’t lose their trusted insurance program in the middle of Obama’s re-election bid.

The money is to come from funds that Health and Human Services is allowed to use for “demonstration projects.” But to make it legal, HHS has to pretend that it’s doing an “experiment” to study the effect of this money on the insurance market.

That is, to “study” what happens when the government doesn’t change anything but merely continues a program that’s been going on for years.

Obama can temporarily prop up Medicare Advantage long enough to get re-elected by exploiting an obscure bit of federal law. Under a 1967 statute, the HHS secretary can spend money without specific approval by Congress on “experiments” directly aimed at “increasing the efficiency and economy of health services.”

Past demonstration projects have studied new medical techniques or strategies aimed at improving care or reducing costs. The point is to find ways to lower the costs of Medicare by allowing medical technocrats to make efficient decisions without interference from vested interests.

Now Obama means to turn it on its head — diverting the money to a blatantly nonexperimental purpose to serve his political needs.

A Government Accounting Office report released this morning shows, quite starkly, that there simply is no experiment being conducted, just money being spent. Understandably, the GAO recommends that HHS cancel the project.

Congress should immediately launch an investigation into this unprecedented misuse of taxpayer money and violation of the public trust, which certainly presses the boundaries of legality and very well may breach them.

If he’s not stopped, Obama will spend $8 billion in taxpayer funds for a scheme to mask the debilitating effects on seniors of his signature piece of legislation just long enough to get himself re-elected.

Now that is some serious audacity. (NY Post)

And AARP’s stake in MediGap, the “alternative” to Medicare Advantage (which was a program that has worked better than most) has nothing to do with their support of ObamaCare.

If you opted for a Medicare Advantage health plan (aka Part C), you cannot also buy a Medigap policy. (from AARP’s Website).

So if you have the government gut your competition silently as part of the cost cutting of “waste,fraud and abuse” so much the better for you.

Which is why AARP is not a seniors advocacy group, it’s an insurance company! and it’s looking out for it’s bottom line, the greedy capitalist bastards! 🙂

And so, if you have a slush fund for “Medicare” costs that technically  don’t exist yet, and it just happens to find it’s way into your pockets because, after all, this election is all about YOU and YOU are so superior to everyone else and you can’t allow the peasant to revolt against their Lord and Masters now can you!- That’s ok.

Liberals are so superior to you peasants in their minds that how “stupid” and “racist” are you to want to get rid of them.

So, for your own good they must lie,cheat and steal the election to preserve the proper and “fair” relationship of the government and it’s people–The Lords and Masters to the peasants.

“The Peasants are Revolting!”

“Yeah, they stink on ice.” — Mel Brooks History of the World Part 1

Monty Python & The Holy Grail

King Arthur: I am your king.
Peasant Woman: Well, I didn’t vote for you.
King Arthur: You don’t vote for kings.
Peasant Woman: Well, how’d you become king, then?
[Angelic music plays… ]
King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.
Dennis the Peasant: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Arthur: Be quiet!
Dennis the Peasant: You can’t expect to wield supreme power just ’cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Arthur: [grabs Dennis] Shut up! Will you shut up?!
Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Arthur: [shakes Dennis] Shut up!
Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I’m being repressed!
Arthur: Bloody Peasant!
Dennis: Ooh, what a giveaway!
#2: WARNING- Foul Language

God Has Spoken…

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Sorry, time-limited, scope-limited military action.Kinetically even! 🙂

“To brush aside America’s responsibility as a leader and — more profoundly — our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are,” Obama said. “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

…At this point, the United States and the world faced a choice.  Qaddafi declared he would show “no mercy” to his own people.  He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment.  In the past, we have seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day.  Now we saw regime forces on the outskirts of the city.  We knew that if we wanted — if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”–President Obama Last night.

Gee, in 2009 when the student revolution against Ahmadinejad came and went when it was crushed BRUTALLY he did nothing. No outrage.

Darfur, in the Sudan must be next. That’s a genocide.

Then there’s North Korea.

China, people are sent to gulags and imprisoned or just “disappear” all the time.

How about Cuba, Venezuela, Ethopia, Zimbabwe…

Oh that’s right, Liberals hate having their shortcomings pointed out to them. They were righteous and we just let them be righteous and bask in their superiority.

And “feel good” liberalism.

They are all puffed up with a sense of greatness right now. The fact that they are ridiculously hypocritical, yet again, is not the be mentioned.

Especially, the “Gadhafi must go” and now he has he ruled out targeting Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, warning that trying to oust him militarily would be a costly mistake.

So what is the end game here then?

And the rebels are now being supported by Al-Qaeda, and who’s supporting the Rebels, we are!

So that’s why I secretly think he wants the “rebels” to do it for him. Because if Gadhafi stays in power he will slaughter his enemies. That’s a given and Obama knows this. But his “superior morality” won’t extend to doing in war what you are supposed to do in war.

Win.

That’s dirty George Bush “unilateral” “cowboy” stuff.

Of course, since this is a tribal war, the rebels will undoubtedly slaughter the pro-Gadhafi forces if they win.

And if indeed, Al-Qaeda is supplying the rebels and the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the coming elections in Egypt, Obama may have just created the biggest, nastiest mess for the US in generations that could last generations.

But his heart was in the right place.

He had the best of intentions.

So cut him a break.

Sorry, NO!

The road to hell is pave with liberalism’s “good intentions”.

All thanks to our Dear Leader. 🙂

Victor David Hanson: President Obama just gave a weird speech. Part George W. Bush, part trademark Obama — filled with his characteristic split-the-difference, straw-man (“some say, others say”), false-choice tropes…

His dithering and confusing Orwellian  need to be a COMMUNITY ORIGINIZER, perhaps.

“Um, I think we’re all beginning to lose sight of the real issue here, which is “What are we going to call ourselves?” um, and I think it comes down to a choice between `The League Against Salivating Monsters’ or my own personal preference, which is `The Committee for the Liberation and Integration of Terrifying Organisms and their Rehabilitation Into Society’. Um, one drawback with that… the abbreviation is `CLITORIS’.- Red Dwarf episode “Polymorph”.

So that’s why he waited a month and up to the point where the resurgent Gadhafi was about to crush the rebels with superior firepower.

I think somewhere a flock of ducks just went lame.

So it’s up to his superior morality to decide who is being slaughtered and whose not.

He’s God. The decision of who lives and who dies is in his hands.

Gee, that sounds like ObamaCare. 🙂

And as for the liberal harp count on how much Iraq and Afghanistan cost (in just 6 days):

One week after an international military coalition intervened in Libya, the cost to U.S. taxpayers has reached at least $600 million, according figures provided by the Pentagon.

U.S. ships and submarines in the Mediterranean have unleashed at least 191 Tomahawk cruise missiles from their arsenals to the tune of $268.8 million, the Pentagon said.

U.S. warplanes have dropped 455 precision guided bombs, costing tens of thousands of dollars each.

downed Air Force F-15E fighter jet will cost more than $60 million to replace.

And operation of the war craft, guzzling ever-expensive fuel to maintain their positions off the Libyan coast and in the skies above, could reach millions of dollars a week, experts say.

In 6 days, God made $600 million dollars that we don’t have disappear. So how long before we need a “stimulus” or a “quantitative easing” to borrow more money for the Chinese for this war that isn’t war because Liberals don’t even recognize the word exists when they start one.

In 6 Days God made a mountain of debt, again!

But damn if they don’t “feel good” about themselves and puffed up their superior moral selves!

And how dare you poke holes in their superiority!

How dare you question GOD himself!

Charles Krauthammer: President Obama is proud of how he put together the Libyan operation. A model of international cooperation. All the necessary paperwork. Arab League backing. A Security Council resolution. (Everything but a resolution from the Congress of the United States, a minor inconvenience for a citizen of the world.) It’s war as designed by an Ivy League professor.

True, it took three weeks to put this together, during which time Moammar Qaddafi went from besieged, delusional (remember those youthful protesters on “hallucinogenic pills”) thug losing support by the hour — to resurgent tyrant who marshaled his forces, marched them to the gates of Benghazi, and had the U.S. director of national intelligence predicting that “the regime will prevail.”

But what is military initiative and opportunity compared with paper?

Well, let’s see how that paper multilateralism is doing. The Arab League is already reversing itself, criticizing the use of force it just authorized. Amr Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, is shocked — shocked! — to find that people are being killed by allied airstrikes. This reaction was dubbed mystifying by one commentator, apparently born yesterday and thus unaware that the Arab League has forever been a collection of cynical, warring, unreliable dictatorships of ever-shifting loyalties. A British soccer mob has more unity and moral purpose. Yet Obama deemed it a great diplomatic success that the League deigned to permit others to fight and die to save fellow Arabs for whom 19 of 21 Arab states have yet to lift a finger.

And what about that brilliant U.N. resolution?

● Russia’s Vladimir Putin is already calling the Libya operation a medieval crusade.

● China is calling for a cease-fire to be put in place — which would completely undermine the allied effort by leaving Qaddafi in power, his people at his mercy, and the country partitioned and condemned to ongoing civil war.

● Brazil joined China in that call for a cease-fire. This just hours after Obama ended his fawning two-day Brazil visit. Another triumph of presidential personal diplomacy.

And how about NATO? Let’s see. As of this writing, Britain wanted the operation to be led by NATO. France adamantly disagreed, citing Arab sensibilities. Germany wanted no part of anything, going so far as to pull four of its ships from NATO command in the Mediterranean. France and Germany walked out of a NATO meeting on Monday, while Norway had planes in Crete ready to go but refused to let them fly until it had some idea who the hell is running the operation. And Turkey, whose prime minister four months ago proudly accepted the Qaddafi International Prize for Human Rights, has been particularly resistant to the Libya operation from the beginning.

And as for the United States, who knows what American policy is. Administration officials insist we are not trying to bring down Qaddafi, even as the president insists that he must go. Although on Tuesday Obama did add “unless he changes his approach.” Approach, mind you.

In any case, for Obama, military objectives take a back seat to diplomatic appearances. The president is obsessed with pretending that we are not running the operation — a dismaying expression of Obama’s view that his country is so tainted by its various sins that it lacks the moral legitimacy to . . . what? Save Third World people from massacre?

Obama seems equally obsessed with handing off the lead role. Hand off to whom? NATO? Quarreling amid Turkish resistance (see above), NATO still can’t agree on taking over command of the airstrike campaign, which is what has kept the Libyan rebels alive.

This confusion is purely the result of Obama’s decision to get America into the war and then immediately relinquish American command. Never modest about himself, Obama is supremely modest about his country. America should be merely “one of the partners among many,” he said Monday. No primus inter pares for him. Even the Clinton administration spoke of America as the indispensable nation. And it remains so. Yet at a time when the world is hungry for America to lead — no one has anything near our capabilities, experience, and resources — America is led by a man determined that it should not.

A man who dithers over parchment. Who starts a war from which he wants out right away. Good God. If you go to take Vienna, take Vienna. If you’re not prepared to do so, better then to stay home and do nothing.

And on the 7th day, God went and played another round of golf while dreaming of being a sports analyst on ESPN… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Train of The Left

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

The Liberals are getting desperate: “Never underestimate the will of someone when their back is against the wall,” he said. Democratic Rep. Terese Berceau took the threat a step further, “I think tonight we had a Gabrielle Giffords moment. I don’t know if you heard that outside, but it shook me up.” The Washington Post’s Chuck Lane started the Giffords’ name-dropping trend when he wrote, “If the brave Gabrielle Giffords could speak normally, what would she say about these events? I hope she would agree with me: This is a sad moment for liberalism, for the Democratic Party, and, really, for the whole country.” Keep it classy, folks! (DC)

And that’s your “civil” Liberals. Mind you when the Tea Party protests Liberals they are “violent”. 🙂

But a desperate Liberal will say and do anything to try and control you and win to prove they are the “superior intellect”.

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

CONCORD, N.H. — Lawmakers and residents engaged in heated debate Tuesday over a bill that would make random airport security pat-downs and body scans criminal in New Hampshire.The bill (HB628-FN) “makes the touching or viewing with a technological device of a person’s breasts or genitals by a government security agent without probable cause a sexual assault,” according to the introductory text of the bill.”Let’s put their name on the sex offender registry, and maybe that will tell them New Hampshire means business,” said bill co-sponsor Rep. Andrew Manuse, R-Derry.

“We have to understand that if things need to be changed, they have to be done at the federal level, not the state level,” said Rep. Laura Pantelakos, D-Portsmouth. (WMUR-TV)

Gee, that rationale sounds familiar…where have I heard it before from Liberals?

Oh yeah, THE BORDER and ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!

Fascinating. 🙂

Oh, and the TSA doesn’t leave it there, by the way.

Coming to a Street Corner near you…VIPR

According to a first-hand video account from a train station in Savannah, Georgia the Transportation Security Administration is now performing security pat downs and bag searches AFTER passengers disembark from their trips.

There were about 14 agents pulling people inside the building and corralling everyone in a roped area AFTER you got OFF THE TRAIN! (and the TSA will claim later that you weren’t required to enter their domain– but also the sweep was supposed to be over by this time-Oops!) This made no sense!!! Poor family in front of us! 9 year old getting patted down and wanded. They groped our people too and were very unprofessional. I am all about security, but when have you ever been harassed and felt up getting OFF a plane? Shouldn’t they be doing that getting ON??? And they wonder why so many people are mad at them.

“They sent us all into a roped-off holding area and said ‘Y’all are going to be searched,’” Brian Gamble (who was there) says. “We were getting off the train. This didn’t make sense.”

When the firefighter started to complain he was told by a TSA supervisor, “calm down. This is for your own security“.

Yeah you might want to commit a terrorist act on the train! Wait, you just got OFF the train. I know, you wanted to commit on in the station!! But it was the last train of the night! Ummm…I Know, you wanted to asassinate Paula Deen! Yeah that’s the ticket!!! 🙂

After Gamble’s video clip of the incident went viral on You Tube, the TSA was forced to resort to its usual tactic of wheeling out “Blogger Bob” on the TSA website in an effort to explain away the controversy.

From TSA blog: The screening shown in the video was done in conjunction with a VIPR operation. During VIPR operations, any person entering the impacted area has to be screened. In this case, the Amtrak station was the subject of the VIPR operation so people entering the station were being screened for items on the Amtrak prohibited items list (see below).

It should be noted that disembarking passengers did not need to enter the station to claim luggage or get to their car.
(Was some conceirge going to deliver it to them?? Or were you hoping they’d just say “screw it we don’t need them!” that way TSA agents don’t have to steal them!!)
Signs such as the one shown here are posted at the entrance to the impacted area. 

Gropping Zone Ahead! Prepare to be Assaulted!

However, after looking into it further, we learned that this particular VIPR operation should have ended by the time these folks were coming through the station since no more trains were leaving the station. We apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused for those passengers.
We’re sorry we groped you. 😦
Gee, don’t you feel so much better now!
A VIPR team is a bunch of goons who swarm an area looking for “terrorists”. Mind you, this the TSA were talking about….
In case you were wondering what those prohibited items are:

The following kinds of items are prohibited as both checked and carry-on baggage:

  • Any type of gun, firearm, ammunition, explosives, or weapon.
  • Incendiaries, including flammable gases, liquids and fuels.
  • Large, sharp objects such as axes, ice picks and swords.
  • Corrosive or dangerous chemicals or materials, such as liquid bleach, tear gas, mace, radioactive and harmful bacteriological materials.
  • Batteries with acid that can spill or leak (except those batteries used in motorized wheelchairs or similar devices for mobility-impaired passengers).
  • Club-like items, such as billy clubs and nightsticks.
  • Fragile and/or valuable items (including but not limited to electronic equipment).
  • Animals (except service animals).
  • Oversized and/or overweight items.
Anyone see the inherit flaws in this list? 🙂
And so that leads to the Left’s favourite control freak issue, ObamaCare:
The first step in allowing the state to pass judgment over thoughts (as opposed to actions) was arguably hate-crime laws, which more harshly penalize criminals who “hate” their victims’ skin color, ethnic background, or sexual orientation. The next step was laid out this week by U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler, who, in upholding Obamacare’s abuse of the Commerce Clause, argued that “making a choice is an affirmative action, whether one decides to do something or not do something. They are two sides of the same coin. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.” Writes the WSJ’s John Fund: “This sort of strained legal reasoning by activist judges has led to all manner of state intrusions on economic and personal activities. It’s no wonder so many members of Congress thought that passing ObamaCare was a routine act. Here’s hoping that the Supreme Court provides some adult supervision.” Indeed! (DC)

So whether you make a choice or make a choice not to make a choice you’ve made a choice and the Government will be right their to crush you for it.

Much like that bag from the Train …

Your Papers Please!

P.s. “George Soros is launching a new investment fund that plans to profit off of the ‘green energy’ boom, which is entirely dependent on government subsidies supported by the groups Soros funds,” writes the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney. And not only is Soros starting a business to profit off policies lobbied for and written by the Center for American Progress–which Soros himself bankrolls!–but he’s also hired Cathy Zoi, Barack Obama’s “Acting Under Secretary for Energy and Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy,” to run it.

But there’s no corruption in Obama’s “green” Ideology… 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

The Incredible Rightness of Being

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Dr. Charles Krauthammer folks: The November election sent a clear message to Washington: less government, less debt, less spending. President Obama certainly heard it, but judging from his State of the Union address, he doesn’t believe a word of it. The people say they want cuts? Sure they do – in the abstract. But any party that actually dares carry them out will be punished severely. On that, Obama stakes his reelection.

And the Liberal Media will be right there 24/7/365 to pound on you for it relentlessly.

Grandmas with her dentures she borrowed from her dead sister who get thrown out in the cold and is living on dog food and even that is being hurt by the mean,evil republicans!

Remember the new Orwellian Precept, “Spending is INVESTMENT

No other conclusion can be drawn from a speech that didn’t even address the debt issue until 35 minutes in. And then what did he offer? A freeze on domestic discretionary spending that he himself admitted would affect a mere one-eighth of the budget.

Freezing the budget heat at historically over the top levels is no decrease. It’s like saying, Today in Hell it will be 4998 degrees instead of 5000 enjoy the cool weather!

Obama seemed impressed, however, that it would produce $400 billion in savings over 10 years. That’s an average of $40 billion a year. The deficit for last year alone was more than 30 times as much. And total federal spending was more than 85 times that amount. A $40 billion annual savings for a government that just racked up $3 trillion in new debt over the past two years is deeply unserious. It’s spillage, a rounding error.

The debt raises $33,333.33 PER SECOND in 2010. PER SECOND!

As for entitlements, which are where the real money is, Obama said practically nothing. He is happy to discuss, but if Republicans dare take anything from granny, he shall be Horatius at the bridge.

He is happy to let the Republican propose so the Democrats and the Liberals can blow them up for it. After all, that politics. Let your enemy take all the slings and arrows and come in and claim the victory for the people!

So what if entitlements ARE the real problem. The Democrats figure they can win politically if they let the Republican step on all the land mines and then go after them for it gleefully and relentlessly.

And if the Republicans don’t step on every single land mine the Democrats will point it out and ask them if they were “chicken” or protecting someone politically. Then when the Republicans go there, the Democrats and the Media will flash 24/7 “Can you believe what they did?!!” That’s just cruel and heartless!!

Just watch.

This entire pantomime about debt reduction came after the first half of a speech devoted to, yes, new spending. One almost has to admire Obama’s defiance. His 2009 stimulus and budget-busting health-care reform are precisely what stirred the popular revolt that delivered his November shellacking. And yet he’s back for more.

Liberals, especially this President, are oblivious to reality. They just figure if they just keep going it has to work eventually because they are always right and they are so vastly superior to everyone.

There is not even a conception by The Left that they could be wrong on any level.

It’s as if Obama is daring the voters – and the Republicans – to prove they really want smaller government. He’s manning the barricades for Obamacare, and he’s here with yet another spending – excuse me, investment – spree. To face down those overachieving Asians, Obama wants to sink yet more monies into yet more road and bridge repair, more federally subsidized teachers – with a bit of high-speed rail tossed in for style. That will show the Chinese.

Man the battlements!, Castle de Liberal is under seige! The Ego Defense is inflated and ready to deflect all attacks.

And of course, once again, there is the magic lure of a green economy created by the brilliance of Washington experts and politicians. This is to be our “Sputnik moment,” when the fear of the foreigner spurs us to innovation and greatness of the kind that yielded NASA and the moon landing.

NASA? are they still in business??

Apart from the irony of this appeal being made by the very president who has just killed NASA’s manned space program, there is the fact that for three decades, since Jimmy Carter’s synfuel fantasy, Washington has poured billions of taxpayer dollars down a rat hole in vain pursuit of economically competitive renewable energy.

And the food shortages caused by Ethanol (made from corn) are just because of greedy capitalists!!

This is nothing but a retread of what used to be called industrial policy – government picking winners and losers. Except that in a field that is not nearly technologically ready to match fossil fuels, we pick one loser after another – from ethanol, a $6 billion boondoggle that even Al Gore admits was a mistake, to the $41,000 Chevy Volt that only the rich can afford (with their extended Bush tax cuts, of course).

And is a fake electric car (since it can only go 30 miles on electricity and 300 on GAS!) that also has proven that it can’t operate in extreme cold (like this winter) but at least the charging stations will be provided GE (chairman now the “Job Creation Czar”).

Perhaps this is all to be expected from Democrats – the party of government – and from a president who from his very first address to Congress has boldly displayed his zeal to fundamentally transform the American social contract and place it on a “New Foundation” (an Obama slogan that never took). He’s been chastened enough by the election of 2010 to make gestures toward the center. But the State of the Union address revealed a man ideologically unbowed and undeterred. He served up an insignificant spending cut, yet another (if more modest) stimulus, and a promise to fight any Republican attempt to significantly shrink the size of government.

Indeed, he went beyond this. He tried to cast this more-of-the-same into a call to national greatness, citing two Michigan brothers who produce solar shingles as a stirring example of rising to the Sputnik moment.

“We do big things,” Obama declared at the end of an address that was, on the contrary, the finest example of small-ball Clintonian minimalism since the days of school uniforms and midnight basketball.

From the moon landing to solar shingles. Is there a better example of American decline?

But it’s all evil, greedy “rich” Corporate America’s Fault!

Oh by the way, Brother can you spare a job! 🙂

Mind you, Michael Moore is suing people for profits on one of his movies and Arianna Huffington just sold The Huffington Post for $315 Million.

Evil Capitalists! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

The Real Star Wars

sith-lord-obama-64047_600

This is a tale of a young Senator who set out to change the world. To grab power. To reshape everything.

To fundamentally violate one of the truth of existence and to fight against it.

That truth, LIFE ISN’T FAIR.

I believe (to borrow another movie) it to be the Inception idea that started modern Liberalism.

If Life isn’t fair, then let’s make it equal. So that it is no more or less fair for anyone.

But that way leads to The Dark Side.

The Sith await you.

Think about it, you have a (in this case young) Senator who rises in a time of stress and War and Crisis. He promises hope & change. Though the hope and change he wants is to control everyone and everything. That way, Social Justice is “Fair”. And Life if “fair”.

In the time of crisis he is granted powers and takes steps no leader has ever dared take before. He takes over the Banks, insurance companies, the auto industry.

He consolidates more power to central authority that ever before. he is playing both sides against each other in the name of “fairness” to consolidate power. Because, after all, they only way life can be “fair” is if you control it from birth to death.

You have no freedom. But it’s Fair! 😦

“So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause”–Sen. Padme Amidala

But life is not fair.

And this frustrates him. He has such a grand vision. But he can’t get it done.

It’s not fair!

He’s so much smarter than everyone else. He’s so much better. More enlightened.

And all he wants is for everyone to be equal. Now that’s “fair”.

And before the November 2nd elections (9/10/10): “If it was just a referendum on whether we’ve made the kind of progress that we need to, then people around the country would say ‘We’re not there yet,'” Obama said.

“If the election is about the policies that are going to move us forward, versus the policies that will get us back into a mess, then I think Democrats will do very well.”

And on Nov 2, he and his minions were “shellacked”. But that didn’t stop them from have a very productive Lame Duck Session where they got 90% of what they wanted.

As a matter of fact, he’s now the “Comeback Kid”. The Emperor has New Clothes.

But still he fears that his life’s work will be undone, challenged or left unfulfilled. The dreams of 90 years of Progressive Liberalism rest upon his shoulders.

His vision.

So, like Palpatine, he will have to be craftier and take more control rather than letting his minions like Darth Vader do all the heavy lifting.

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”— Master Yoda

And who hates more liberals.

Only Radical Muslims and terrorists.

Class Warfare. Hate the rich (but not the Liberal Rich like George Soros or even Obama who made $5 million dollars last year).

Race Warfare. Pitting blacks and Hispanics against Whites because Whites are “not fair” and oppressive.

Despite the fact that liberal policies hurt blacks and hispanics.

It keeps them down.

The promise of “fairness” and “Justice” keep them in line. Even though in the 50 years they haven’t even come close to either.

Religious Warfare. The more Progressive (aka radical) they are the seemingly more anti-religious they are- especially Christianity.

How is that different from the Sith wanting to wipe out the Jedi??

The Jedi are spiritual. The Force is spiritual.

They must be crushed.

The State is your only salvation.

The Government is your protector. Your savior.

Not yourself.

But if Obama is Senator Palpatine, cum Emperor-wanna be, who is Darth Vader. The angry, power mad servant of the Dark Side?

Nancy Pelosi, who else. 🙂  (Not Dick Cheney as the Liberals tried to use in 2005 after Bush beat Kerry for re-election)

But it does point to the fact that when Liberals object to the dirty tricks way things are being done “unfairly” that usually means they have already done them and you’re not allowed to do what they are doing because they are so vastly superior and more “fair” than you.

But Darth Vader never got demoted to a Minority Position. This should just strengthen her backbone and her insanity.

She will hate even more at being thwarted and simultaneous be proud of her many accomplishments over the last 2 years.

Obstructing the rebel scum will be new mission. They cannot be allowed to retake what she has taken.

After all, it is my own opinion that Nancy Pelosi thought she was the Empress for the last 2 years and that Barack was the upstart who was getting in HER way.

Then there’s The Conspirator, aka Harry Reid. He who works behind the scenes to make it work through any means necessary.

You have the faceless “enemy”- The Rich. The Corporations. The Separatists.

You have the faceless, uniform soldiers of the cause, The Unions and the Bureaucracy. A hegemony of purpose and the foot soldiers of the cause.

And then you ad in an Orwellian touch, The Ministry of Truth. The Liberally-biased media that is a champion of the Empire’s needs and wants and will spread it’s message and lies far and wide across the land. Willingly so. And they all proclaims to be “fair” and “objective”.

Those who disagree with this view are the evil ones who are not fair and not objective: FOX,the Internet-Like Drudge,Daily Caller etc, and Talk Radio.

Which is why they must be controlled. So you send out the faceless bureaucratic clone minions of the FCC, the FTC, the FDA to stop them.

The SEIU are the people’s clone army. Foot soldiers for the cause.

Then there are the Liberal lawyers and judges who stop the resistance by ruling from ideology under the cover of law. To control the people ever further.

Then comes the Resistance, The Rebel Alliance.

A loose band of like-minded independent people who just want their freedoms back. To restore democracy and give all people a chance.

Meet THE TEA PARTY.

Hated, denigrated, and reviled by the Imperials.

But their allies in the Government haven’t proven they can be trusted yet. Not after the Lame Duck give aways they allowed.

So this chapter in the saga has yet to be written and it falls to all of us in the movement to keep the pressure on.

To quote yet another movie, “Never Give up! Never Surrender!”

Or as Master Yoda might say, ““Do or do not… there is no try.”

The Saga Continues.