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.

All I Want For Christmas is My 6,488 Earmarks!


The Democrats have decided what they want for Christmas. Your front teeth and everything else you and the next several generations own.

They have stuffed their own stockings full of joy (for them).

They want to go out on a drug induced high.

They don’t care if Santa thinks they’ve been naughty.

THE LAST FEAST: 6,488 EARMARKS

$575.13 million per page

Political Cartoon

Senate Democrats have filed a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill that would fund the government through fiscal year 2011, according to Senate GOP sources.

Then there’s the DREAM ACT, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, etc. They are vastly more important than the debt or deficit!

And if we don’t get them, we’ll stay here until January 5th and hold our breath and turn blue until you kiss our buts!

The package drew a swift rebuke from Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee.

“The attempt by Democrat leadership to rush through a nearly 2,000-page spending bill in the final days of the lame-duck session ignores the clear will expressed by the voters this past election,” Thune said in a statement. “This bill is loaded up with pork projects and should not get a vote. Congress should listen to the American people and stop this reckless spending.

The Senate bill, though, boosts spending by $16 billion.

“We’re not through. Congress ends on Jan. 4,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat.

So we’ll keep you HOSTAGE until the very last second to pass our Agenda or else!

We are going to squeeze you and everyone else to the last possible second to get our Ideological Obsessions done whether you like it or not.

Screw the Elections! F*ck the Voters! Sh*t on going quietly into the night! Up Yours! 🙂

We want what we want and when we want it and we don’t give a crap about anything else!

Up Yours!

We love earmarked-to-your-death 2,000 page bills!

“Mr. President, at 12:15 p.m. this afternoon, my office received a copy of the omnibus appropriations bill. It is 1,924 pages long and contains the funding for all 12 of the annual appropriations bills for a grand total of over $1.1 Trillion. It is important to note that the 1,924 pages is only the legislative language and does not include the thousands of pages of report language which contain the details of the billions of dollars in earmarks and, I’m sure, countless policy riders.

“While we continue to uncover which earmarks the appropriators decided to fund – thanks to a new online database – we at least know what earmarks were requested by Members and how much those projects would cost the American people if they were all funded. Taxpayers against Earmarks, http://www.washingtonwatch.com and Taxpayers for Common Sense joined forces to create this database. According to the data they compiled – for fiscal year 2011 Members requested over 39,000 earmarks totaling over $130 billion. Absolutely disgraceful. I encourage every American to go to the website http://www.endingspending.com study it, and make yourselves aware of how your elected officials seek to spend your money.

“In the short time I’ve had to review this massive piece of legislation – I’ve identified approximately 6,488 earmarks totaling nearly $8.3 billion. Here is a small sample:

$277,000 for potato pest management in Wisconsin
$246,000 for bovine tuberculosis in Michigan and Minnesota
$522,000 for cranberry and blueberry disease and breeding in New Jersey
$500,000 for oyster safety in Florida
$349,000 for swine waste management in North Carolina
$413,000 for peanut research in Alabama
$247,000 for virus free wine grapes in Washington
$208,000 beaver management in North Carolina
$94,000 for blackbird management in Louisiana
$165,000 for maple syrup research in Vermont
$235,000 for noxious weed management in Nevada
$100,000 for the Edgar Allen Poe Cottage Visitor’s Center in New York
$300,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society in Hawaii
$400,000 for solar parking canopies and plug-in electric stations in Kansas

“Additionally, the bill earmarks $727,000 to compensate ranchers in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan whenever endangered wolves eat their cattle. As my colleagues know, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Gray Wolf program is under intense scrutiny for wasting millions of taxpayer dollars every year to ‘recover’ endangered wolves that are now overpopulating the West and Midwest. My State of Arizona has a similar wolf program but ranchers in my state aren’t getting $727,000 in this bill.

“Mr. President, I will have much more to say about this bill later this week. I assure my colleagues – we will spend a great deal of time talking about this bill and the outrageous number of earmarks it contains. But for now let me just say this: it is December 14th – we are 22 days away from the beginning of a new Congress and nearly three full months into fiscal year 2011 – and yet we have not debated a single spending bill or considered any amendments to cut costs or get our debt under control. Furthermore, the majority decided that they just didn’t feel like doing a budget this year. How is that responsible leadership?

“This is the ninth omnibus appropriations bill we have considered in this body since 2000. That is shameful and we should be embarrassed by the fact that we care so little about doing the people’s business that we continuously put off fulfilling our constitutional responsibilities until the very last minute.

“One thing is abundantly clear to me – that the majority has not learned the lessons of last month’s election. The American people could not have been more clear. They are tired of wasteful spending. They are tired of big government. They are tired of sweetheart deals for special interests. They are tired of business as usual in Washington. And they are tired of massive bills – just like this one – put together behind closed doors, and rammed through the Congress at the last moment so that no one has the opportunity to read them and no one really knows what kind of waste is in them.

“Let me be clear about one thing – if the Majority Leader insists on proceeding to this monstrosity – the American people will know what’s in it. I will be joined by many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle to ensure that every single word of this bill is read aloud here on the Senate floor.

“I encourage my friends on the other side of the aisle to rethink their strategy and move forward with a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government into next year when a new Congress takes over – a Congress that was elected by the American people on November 2nd. “The majority may be able to strong arm enough members into voting for this omnibus – but they will not win in the end. The American people will remember – and I predict that we will see a repeat of November 2nd in the very near future.” (Sen. John McCain)

OBAMACARE UPDATE

The newest defense of the Health Care Mandate: Auto Insurance!

They are not even remotely the same thing.

I wrote a blog about this 15 months ago when they trotted this crap out the last time: https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/the-bad-analogy/

But let me just hit you with Point#1 that blows the whole argument to pieces in seconds:

If you don’t have a car, you don’t need or are required by law to have auto insurance!

Just try that under Obama’s Health Care. You’ll be hearing the jackboots of the IRS stomping on your face very soon…

Q.E.D. 🙂

And these are supposed to be bright people?

They are, but their Ideology is so far up their arse that it has throttled their brainpower.

And they don’t care, because they are vastly superior to you!

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

Judgment Day: Damnation or Salvation

No, it’s not July 29, 2019 and Skynet is not going to destroy the world.

But it still might. Only Skynet is the Democrat Party.

Today, you either vote for the salvation of this nation (against the Democrats) or it’s Damnation at the hands of Progressive Ideologues who will do even more damage than they have if they retain power.

For Liberals are so full of their own superiority that lying, cheating and being completely amoral and unethical in their pursuit of their Progressive Utopia is all for your own good because you’re obviously not intelligent enough or enlightened enough to understand just how magnificent they are. How beneficent they are. How vastly superior in every way that they are.

So they have to win at any cost, by any means necessary.

It’s for your own good.

Now faced with that, that is what must be repudiated today.

Not that the liberals will understand that. Oh no, narcissism on this level will not understand the slap down they should get today.

That’s your fault, for not being as enlightened and as wise and wonderful as they are. You neandertal!

You racist. You bigot. You Teabagger!

You “enemy” (In an interview Monday with radio host Michael Baisden, Obama said he should have used the word “opponents” instead of enemies.– well that’s some progress…:) ) Obama said. “What I’m saying is you’re an opponent of this particular provision, comprehensive immigration reform, which is something very different.”

He changed in the middle of the paragraph again! He does that.

“I think I see a path, as clear and as direct as a ray of light, which leads to the attainment of that object,” George Washington wrote. “Nothing but harmony, honesty, industry and frugality are necessary to make us a great and happy people.”

Have we ever in American history seen a group of politicians for whom frugality is of less value than the Democrats now running Congress and the White House?

The region where an illegal immigrant murdered an Arizona rancher six months ago remains plagued by Mexican drug-cartel violence yet the Obama Administration has chosen to spend $52 million on restoring habitat damaged by the border fence rather than secure the area. (Judical Watch)

Want more? Vote Democrat!

With unemployment still at a severe high, a majority of states have drained their jobless benefit funds, forcing them to borrow billions from the federal government to help out-of-work Americans.

A total of 33 states and the Virgin Islands have depleted their funds and borrowed more than $38.7 billion to provide a safety net, according to a report released Thursday by the National Employment Law Project. Four others are at the brink of insolvency.(CNN)

But don’t worry, it’s George Bush, the Republicans, “Secret Money” and Corporate America’s fault! Vote Democrat!

Bromley illustration

Pollster Scott Rasmussen said it best in the Wall Street Journal yesterday:

But none of this means that Republicans are winning. The reality is that voters in 2010 are doing the same thing they did in 2006 and 2008: They are voting against the party in power.

This is the continuation of a trend that began nearly 20 years ago. In 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president and his party had control of Congress. Before he left office, his party lost control. Then, in 2000, George W. Bush came to power, and his party controlled Congress. But like Mr. Clinton before him, Mr. Bush saw his party lose control.

That’s never happened before in back-to-back administrations. The Obama administration appears poised to make it three in a row. This reflects a fundamental rejection of both political parties.

More precisely, it is a rejection of a bipartisan political elite that’s lost touch with the people they are supposed to serve. Based on our polling, 51% now see Democrats as the party of big government and nearly as many see Republicans as the party of big business. That leaves no party left to represent the American people.

Voters today want hope and change every bit as much as in 2008. But most have come to recognize that if we have to rely on politicians for the change, there is no hope. At the same time, Americans instinctively understand that if we can unleash the collective wisdom and entrepreneurial spirit of the American people, there are no limits to what we can accomplish.

In this environment, it would be wise for all Republicans to remember that their team didn’t win, the other team lost. Heading into 2012, voters will remain ready to vote against the party in power unless they are given a reason not to do so.

Elected politicians also should leave their ideological baggage behind because voters don’t want to be governed from the left, the right, or even the center. They want someone in Washington who understands that the American people want to govern themselves.

And that’s the ideological opposite of the Narcissistic Progressive Liberal Democrat.

If you think that smart businesspeople will sit around and let our government tax them out of existence before they move their operations overseas — vote Democrat.
If you think it helps you if your boss gets hit with a huge tax bill — vote Democrat.
If you want the American government to be feared by the American people — but laughed at by Hugo Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — vote Democrat.
If you want to pay through the nose in taxes until you are 70 so union thugs in purple shirts can retire in security at age 50 — vote Democrat.
If you like the fact that people who actually know the Constitution get laughed at by people who are ignorant of it — vote Democrat.
If you want the entire country to be like Detroit, Philadelphia, New York, New Orleans, Chicago — vote Democrat.
If you think liberalism and socialism have done a good job of managing the incredibly beautiful and rich state of California, vote Democrat.
If you want a government bureaucrat, who can no doubt access your voter registration records, to determine whether or not you get a hip replacement or a cancer treatment — vote Democrat.
If you want electricity bills to “necessarily skyrocket” — vote Democrat.
If you think civil rights means that all white Americans are by definition guilty and all African-Americans are by definition innocent, vote Democrat.
If you want to vote the same way the dead are voting — vote Democrat.
If you want to vote the same way the felons are voting — vote Democrat.
If you want to vote the same way the Illegal Aliens are voting — vote Democrat.
If you like the fact that our military men and women are being disenfranchised — vote Democrat.
If you think Cuba is a success story — vote Democrat.
If you think insurance companies can lower rates, pay for every small medical item — and every preexisting condition — and every illegal alien — and stay in business — vote Democrat.
If you agree with the French union protesters upset about having to delay retirement for two years to age 62 — vote Democrat.
If you think a rally sponsored by Arianna Huffington, the SEIU, and the DNC is a non-political rally — vote Democrat. (American Thinker)

If you like George Soros, a foreign Billionaire socialist (giving money to a host of originizations including NPR,Huffington Post, Media Matters, ACORN, and many unions and other groups) running your media and your government by proxy– Vote Democrat.

I dare you!

But when you have no freedom and the government controls your every waking moment and your very existence from one second to the next because you voted for the Democrats in 2010 don’t whine to me.

Washington was convinced that Americans had devised the greatest political system ever. In discarded notes for his first Inaugural Address, Washington expressed certainty that senators and congressmen could never “exempt themselves from consequences of any unjust and tyrannical acts which they may impose upon others. For in a short time they will mingle with the mass of the people.”

And “besides,” Washington added, “their reelection must always depend upon the good reputation which they shall have maintained in the judgment of their fellow citizens.”

If through some crystal ball he could have seen today’s Congress, George Washington might have had second thoughts. But the father of our country would be proud to see what “the mass of the people” do today at the voting booth.

The Choice is yours. Choose Wisely. The Future itself hangs in the balance.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Scared Lizard Brains

Political Cartoon by Lisa Benson

President Obama seems to have learned nothing from the disaster of the “cling-to-guns-and-God” talk that almost derailed his campaign in 2008. He’s back at it—blaming voters for failing to “think clearly” because they’re “scared” about the economy:

WEST NEWTON, Mass. – President Barack Obama said Americans’ “fear and frustration” is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.

“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country’s scared.”

Scared of You, your Czars, and your Socialism,dear boy.

Obama views himself as the neocortical leader — the defender, not just of the stimulus package and health-care reform but also of cognitive reasoning. His critics rely on their lizard brains — the location of reptilian ritual and aggression. Some, presumably Democrats, rise above their evolutionary hard-wiring in times of social stress; others, sadly, do not.

Though there is plenty of competition, these are some of the most arrogant words ever uttered by an American president. (Washington Post)

This is an improvement over Obama’s 2008 “cling” speech because now Obama’s critics are scared rather than racist or stupid. There’s hope for us!

Obama told the several dozen donors that he was offering them his “view from the Oval Office.” He faulted the economic downturn for Americans’ inability to “think clearly” and said the burden is on Democrats “to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling.”

Big Brother Barack is hear to save you. Cuddle up and he’ll protect you from the evil capitalists and the mean old Republicans who want your children to starve and your grandma to be homeless and eating dog food!.

Now, don’t you feel better. 🙂

Insulting voters is rarely a good way to win them over. But usually the “blame the customer” approach, as Mark Shields calls it, takes hold in the wake of an election defeat. Obama has broken new ground by moving it up to two weeks in advance of the vote.

It’s another thing to say those poor people will change when they get their jobs back when you’ve had two years to get them their jobs back and have conspicuously failed. At that point, blaming “false consciousness” becomes a semi-delusional way of dancing around your own inability to remove the root of that false consciousness. A little humility is in order. If true humility is unavailable, false humility will do.

Maybe Obama was cynically making a pitch to his immediate audience—a small crowd of Massachusetts donors who might be expected to respond to the idea that they were defending “facts” and “science” against confused know-nothings. But Obama should know, especially after the 2008 San Francisco incident, that a candidate can’t keep his words confined to a fundraiser. And this apparently wasn’t a closed-to-press event like the one in S.F. We didn’t have to rely on a donor/blogger like Mayhill Fowler to spill the beans. Reporters reported on it. Obama couldn’t have been trying to cyncially play to the donors—he’s not that naive! This must be what he really thinks.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.

Obama seems more inclined to just tough it out until the economy recovers and the scared, confused voters become unscared and see the light. Meanwhile, he’ll spend his time in a protective cocoon.

He’ll be the child you will just sit and pout and turn blue 🙂 until he’s proven right and everyone loves him for it.

Ground your heels into the dirt and refuse to do anything until someone kisses my butt and tells me I’m the greatest thing since the evolution of man.

We thought he was a great salesman. He turned out to be a lousy salesman. We thought he was a great politician. Instead he makes elementary mistakes and doesn’t learn from them. He didn’t know “shovel-ready” from a hole in the ground, and then somehow thinks admitting this ignorance without apology will add to his appeal.

Did I happen to mention this editorial was from Newsweek? You know the Magazine famous for Cover Headlines like “We are all Socialists Now” and “Is America  Islamophobic?”

I found it fascinating. And in the end the writer said he still wanted Obama over a Republican. Even after trashing him.

Now that’s partisanship for you. 🙂

What could Obama possibly learn from voters who are embittered, confused and dominated by subconscious evolutionary fears? They have nothing to teach, nothing to offer to the superior mind. Instead of engaging in debate, Obama resorts to reductionism, explaining his opponents away.

In April 2008, Obama described small-town voters to wealthy donors in San Francisco: “It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” Now, to wealthy donors in Massachusetts, opponents are “hard-wired not to always think clearly.” Interpreting Obama does not require psychoanalysis or the reading of mystic Chicago runes. He is an intellectual snob.

But intellectual disdain among elites feeds this destructive populism rather than directing or defusing it. Obama is helping to cause what he criticizes.

Obama may think that many of his fellow citizens can’t reason. But they can still vote.

And voting him out in 2012 and his buddies out in two weeks is what us scared, racist, primitive gun-clingling,  scared morons have to do.

Period.

The First A-Bomb

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

“People are frustrated, they’re anxious, they’re scared about the future. And they have a right to be impatient about the pace of change. I’m impatient. It took time to free the slaves,”– President Obama speaking to young Democrats at a hip-hop concert in Washington.

After all, this struggle to retain their power is as important as freeing the slaves which the then Democrat party was against by the way just like they were the ones against the Civil Rights Acts more than Republicans. But those are actual facts and that’s the last thing you’ll hear from the Democrats for the next month at least.

In the 2008 campaign, Michelle Obama at one point said of her husband’s burden: “Barack is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign to enter this messy thing called politics.”

The president often clears his throat with “let me be perfectly clear” and “make no mistake about it” — as if we, his schoolchildren, have to be warned to pay attention to the all-knowing teacher at the front of the class. (VDH)

Hitler proclaimed that the Third Reich would last a thousand years.

It didn’t.

The Democrats are still hoping for the same thing.

And since they have shown the need to win at all costs and have a propensity for Ends Justify the Means they have begun their bombardment.

And the Ministry of truth will be right their with them, arm-in-armament.

It will not be about their actual “accomplishments”. It will be a war of words. Mostly lies, distortions and personal attacks.

FEAR IS HOPE, after all.

And the first of the “October Surprises” was dropped by ultra-liberal Lawyer Gloria Alred.

The maid who was hired through a legitimate company 9 years ago with all due diligence of the day. When it was discovered she was an illegal, she was fired. LAST YEAR.

But it didn’t matter until just now, a month before the election when she is neck and neck with Ultra liberal Former Governor Jerry Brown.

Only now it matters. If Brown was farther ahead you’d never have hear this one.

And now this maid who was making $23/hr should be in prison for felonies and fraud.Exposed by the liberals for their own gain. After all, she was fired in 2009 and is still here in the country, so what has she been doing since?

But do you think a Justice Dept. that has a policy and a practice of not prosecuting minorities is going to touch this with a 12-foot barge pool?

Especially, when this woman can be used a political pawn, and discarded like throwing out the trash after the election if Brown wins.

Cindy Sheehan, anyone? You do remember her right? 🙂

NO.

This is merely a cynical Political stunt by the Democrats.

As any employer can tell you, when an employee presents employment verification documents, they must be inspected and then accepted if they appear to be genuine. Meg and her husband took the appropriate steps as required by law. The documents appeared to be valid and they had to accept them as presented.

The Social Security Administration issued these “No-Match” letters for several years before stopping the practice altogether. They sent millions of letters every year, to employers and employees, before realizing the futility of the process. When Meg and her husband received the No-Match letter for the employee they took the same action that tens of thousands of employers have done; they asked the employee to correct the information.

As the No-Match letter states, “Any employer that uses the information in this letter to justify taking adverse action against any employee may violate state or federal law and be subject to legal consequences.” It is impossible to legally terminate an employee based on “clues” or suppositions about their immigration status. You must have concrete facts before you can take action, or else be subject to discrimination lawsuits. When the employee confessed that she was working illegally in the U.S., it was the proper action to then terminate her employment. (Fresno Business Journal)

But that doesn’t matter, because the whole point of this exercise was to set off a Democratic A-Bomb (Ad-hominem bomb) and smirk and act all superior. To puff themselves up.

The issues, and poor victim of this charade, the maid, reading a pre-prepared statement to camera might as well have been a captive of Al-Qaeda for all it matters.

Want to here Gloria Alred be destroyed by logic and reasoning: http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=1970739&spid=32364

When asked if her client was an “illegal alien” she said  “No”.

When pressed she repeatedly said she wasn’t an illegal alien, merely an “undocumented worker” (who has openly admitted to committing Social Security Fraud).

So the famed lawyer, Gloria Alred, deliberately dismisses the legal and lawful term because it doesn’t fit with her agenda.

And that’s liberalism for you and their view of the law.

And there are plenty more A-Bombs to come as the Democrats will stop at nothing to hold on to their power.

NOTHING.

Expect to see the next two weeks bring much more in way of personal attacks and allegations of scandal. And especially with so much money floating around in hard-to-track outside groups, those attacks are likely to be pretty vicious.
Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson recently psychoanalyzed the falling support for the president by claiming that “the American people are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats.” (VDH)
After all, they are vastly superior to you and you are the Barbarian hoards at THEIR gates trying to sack their Utopian Dream so they have to do everything they can to destroy you. 🙂
When America votes for a liberal candidate, it is redeemed by the left as intelligent — and derided as dense when it does not.

As is their new “Made in America” campaign which bitches and moans that the Republicans are solely responsible for outsourcing jobs and that’s why you need to keep the Democrats.

The fact that millions have lost their jobs SINCE the Democrats took over. That the Stimulus was a total failure (upwards of $300,000 per “saved or created” job-mostly in the public sector not private sector to begin with).

That their refusal to extend tax cuts sends a message to employers that not only will ObamaCare kick your ass but now we are going to raise your taxes also!

That always makes a good atmosphere for job creation.

The Democrats can hang themselves on their “only for those making $250,000 a year” crap around their necks and choke on it. They refused to even bring THAT up for a vote.

And they left town knowing they had never done it.

So where are their convictions. They have none.

They just want to hold onto to their power. That’s it.

They will say anything. Do anything to win.

The End Justifies the Means.

Moral, Ethics, and the Truth Be damned!

We want to keep our power!

“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”–Candidate Obama

And Now, A Word From Charles

“Look, advertising is legalized mendacity. When you see an ad in a football game that tells you essentially if you drink the right beer or you drive the right car, you are going to get chicks, nobody sues them on the grounds of false advertising. So everybody understands that.

Those are the rules of the game. I draw the line — personal attacks on family or personal issues which I think are completely out of bounds. And that happens as well. But I think if it’s on policy or how a person has conducted himself in office, absolutely OK.”— Charles Krauthammer on “Special Report with Bret Baier” setting the boundaries for political attack ads.

But when the end justifies the means there are no boundaries.

Nothing is off-limits.

Nothing matters but winning.

The carnage is immaterial.

The Truth doesn’t matter.

There is only the Power.

And that is what needs to change.

Current polls suggest that these clueless and unappreciative Americans apparently believe that an elite education does not ensure their officials can balance a budget, pay their own taxes or speak candidly.

What an outrageous “How dare they!” thought.

Adverse Selection

The leftists are all in a tizzy. A tizzy of their own making mind you.

But they’ll never see it that way. Because it was done “for the children” and the Insufferably Morally Superior Left doesn’t care about reality in their fantasies and delusions of “fairness” and “equality” in their own minds.

It makes them “feel good”.

Here’s a little lesson the Left refuses to hear about reality:

People who buy insurance often have a better idea of the risks they face than do the sellers of insurance. People who know that they face large risks are more likely to buy insurance than people who face small risks. Insurance companies try to minimize the problem that only the people with big risks will buy their product, which is the problem of adverse selection, by trying to measure risk and to adjust prices they charge for this risk. Thus, life insurance companies require medical examinations and will refuse policies to people who have terminal illnesses, and automobile insurance companies charge much more to people with a conviction for drunk driving or if you get into an accident (or if your neighbors are idiots you’re going to pay more because of a more adverse selection–that’s why “my rates keep going up but I haven’t caused any accidents”).

It describes a situation where an individual’s demand for insurance (either the propensity to buy insurance, or the quantity purchased, or both) is positively correlated with the individual’s risk of loss (e.g. higher risks buy more insurance), and the insurer is unable to allow for this correlation in the price of insurance. This may be because of private information known only to the individual (information asymmetry), or because of regulations or social norms which prevent the insurer from using certain categories of known information to set prices (e.g. the insurer may be prohibited from using information such as gender or ethnic origin or genetic test results). The latter scenario is sometimes referred to as ‘regulatory adverse selection’.

And regulatory adverse selection is what we have in droves in the Insufferably Morally Superior Left Health Care Cramdown.

And the little superior moralists are shocked and applauded that the insurance industry would actually follow these principle laid out above and not just roll over and kiss their morally superior asses and do  “the right thing for the children” and as they are told like a good little doggie.

Health plans in at least four states have announced they’re dropping children’s coverage just days ahead of new rules created by the healthcare reform law, according to the liberal grassroots group Health Care for America Now (HCAN).

The new healthcare law forbids insurers from turning down children with pre-existing conditions starting Thursday, one of several reforms Democrats are eager to highlight this week as they try to build support for the law ahead of the mid-term elections. But news of insurers dropping their plans as a result of the new law has thrown a damper on that strategy and prompted fierce push-back from the administration’s allies at HCAN.

The announcement could lead to higher costs for some parents who are buying separate coverage for themselves and their children at lower cost than the family coverage that’s available to them.

“We’re just days away from a new era when insurance companies must stop denying coverage to kids just because they are sick, and now some of the biggest changed their minds and decided to refuse to sell child-only coverage,” HCAN Executive Director Ethan Rome said in a statement. “The latest announcement by the insurance companies that they won’t cover kids is immoral, and to blame their appalling behavior on the new law is patently dishonest.

“Instead, they should reverse their actions immediately and simply follow the law. If the insurance companies can casually turn their backs on sick children now, who will they abandon next? This offensive behavior by the insurance companies is yet another reminder of why the new law is so important and why the Republicans’ call for repeal is so misguided.”

Health plans and state insurance commissioners in July raised concerns that the new rules could lead some insurers to stop children-only coverage because families could wait until their children get sick to buy coverage.

Days later, the Obama administration issued regulations clarifying that insurers would still be able to establish enrollment periods in accordance with state law.

“To address concerns over adverse selection, issuers in the individual market may restrict enrollment of children under 19, whether in family or individual coverage, to specific open enrollment periods if allowed under state law,” the Department of Health and Human Services clarified.

The issue had largely dropped out of sight since then, but insurers including WellPoint and CoventryOne have announced in recent days that they’re dropping children’s coverage in California, Colorado, Ohio and Missouri, according to HCAN. (The Hill)

I guarantee this is only the beginning. Trust me.

But the Insufferably Morally Superior Left will just sit there and be “appalled” and kick and scream and whine and moan “they aren’t doing what we told them to do whaaaahh!!!”

Then go to their government buddies and pass more regulations to have their way.

I say a new term in a headline recently that fit, LAWFARE. Waging a war by lawsuits and REGFARE, waging war by regulation.

That’s the Insufferably Morally Superior Left in a nutshell.

As I said repeatedly and often during the Health Care debate, it’s about the government and leftists wanting total control of who lives and who dies and you dependent on them for everything. Period. End of Story.

They want private insurance gone. But private insurance is not going quietly.

That would be a moral hazard.

In insurance markets, moral hazard occurs when the behavior of the insured party changes in a way that raises costs for the insurer, since the insured party no longer bears the full costs of that behavior. Because individuals no longer bear the cost of medical services, they have an added incentive to ask for pricier and more elaborate medical service—which would otherwise not be necessary. In these instances, individuals have an incentive to over consume, simply because they no longer bear the full cost of medical services.

And does this not sound like ObamaCare to you?? 🙂

Political Cartoon by Chuck Asay

Recipe for Control

I took up cooking, one, because I found I really enjoy it, but also because it’s better for me to control my own food rather than trust it to a heart attack in a box (have you read the fat & sodium contents on some of those pre-prepared meals!).

But the difference between my approach and the First Lady’s Food Police cudgel approach is I’m not preaching and I’m not trying to control other people.

She is. Just like her husband.

I often wonder who’s the more elitist, her or her husband.

“Even if we give parents all the information they need and improve school meals and build brand new supermarkets on every corner, none of that matters if when families step into a restaurant, they can’t make a healthy choice,” Mrs. Obama told them.

So we have to control you at every turn so you won’t be tempted! 😦

So, instead of speaking to parents about moderation, the first lady wants to micromanage menus, making french fries a special order item at fast-food outlets and apples the default side order of choice for kids. Butter and cream must be cut, and whole wheat pasta must replace white.

Harmless advocacy? Perhaps. But Mrs. Obama’s speeches at political rallies and conventions suggests it’s probably more. The gears of government seem to be turning to her cause.

The Department of Health and Human Services on Tuesday announced a $31 million program to combat obesity (and smoking) in eight states. It comes with a plan to go coercive: “Use price to discourage consumption of tobacco and to benefit consumption of healthy food/drinks,” the press release reads. As in price controls?

The coincidences pile up as community organizers tied quite closely to the Obama campaign, including the National Council of La Raza and the NAACP, joined the cause. To aid the effort, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation chipped in a $2 million grant.

Fascinating associates don’t you think? La Raza, a racist hispanic group and the NAACP who calls Tea Partiers racists. Fascinating…

Then there’s the anti-McDonald’s TV ad campaign just launched by the Physicians Committee for Responsibility, another pressure group with a vegetarian and animal-rights agenda. In true Alinsky style, they’ve picked a target, personalized it and laid all the problems of obesity on one fast-food operator.

The advert shows a woman weeping over the body of a man in a morgue, with the man still holding a half-eaten hamburger. Toward the end of the advert, the McDonald’s logo appears along with the tag-line “I was lovin’ it”. The commercial then urges watchers to “High cholesterol, high blood pressure, heart attacks. Tonight, make it vegetarian”.

Then you get Michael Moore who hadn’t been getting any attention lately spouting off that McDonald’s has killed more people than terrorists have.

What’s galling about all this is that Mrs. Obama’s anti-obesity campaign — like the policies pushed by her husband — presumes government has all the answers. In reality, it doesn’t.

Bu they think it does, as long as they are in control of it, that is. The Insufferably Superior Left strikes again!

Diets are a personal choice with different impacts on different people. Some children stay fit eating all the fast food they like; others can’t handle a donut. Some effective low-carbohydrate diets don’t restrict cream and butter at all, but minimize fruit. Go figure.

Micromanaging restaurant menus will only drive consumers to the junk food section at the grocery to get the goodies they crave. It won’t end childhood obesity, the causes of which are far more complex and numerous than trips to the Golden Arches.

But then you just drive the junk food purveyors out of business then and TA DA!   Instant Health! And you have Big Brother and Big Mommy to thank for it! 🙂

Like any solution imposed by big government, Mrs. Obama’s will harm business, limit choice and politicize the personal — a recipe for failure. (IBD)

You have to assume the Insufferably Superior Left actually cares. I know I don’t.

After all, her husband is frequent photographed (to look less like the elite he is) eating very unhealthy foods and he admits to being…a SMOKER!

Don’t do as I do, do as I say!

But Michelle can’t clean up her husband, oh no, she has to crusade against evil fat and salt to save you all from yourselves!

The Empress has no clothes.

She said it’s also important to change these national eating habits because they end up costing billions in additional healthcare costs.

And they want to take over your Health Care from birth to death. Hmmmm…Fascinating… 🙂

“I’m not asking any of you to make drastic changes to every single one of your recipes or to totally change the way you do business,” she said.

Not Yet, at least. 🙂

After all, when Liberals start preaching about it “being for the children” watch out!! (since they consider anyone who disagrees with them as “children” anyhow).

So how long before we “recommend” to a private business what they can serve and just force them to serve what we think is best for you?

After all, restaurants that serve crap, close. That’s business. But what if that’s all they are allowed to serve??

While suggestions that eateries serve a side of apples instead of French fries as the default side dish likely won’t go anywhere, there is another way to serve kids fewer calories. Just make the portions smaller.

Smaller portions mean less cost for the restaurant, and can help kids slim down. Charge the same, serve less food. Talk about a win-win! (Entrepeneur.com)
Exactly. The portion sizes today are about 1/3 larger than say 50 years ago.
If you can teach people to eat less, not just control what they eat, then you can lose weight!
After all, you have to burn more calories than you take in to do it.
And I fail but not as often as I used to and I have cleaned up my diet. So a lot of it is   also because of lack of proper regular exercise to on this middle-aged frame. But that’s another story…
But I don’t want to control you.
I trust with proper education and not liberal hysterics and Alinsky scare tactics that you are capable of make reasonable decisions and understand and accept the consequences of your actions.
But I also know that that part is nearly impossible in today’s liberal entitlement and evade responsibility for everything environment.
That’s what has to change. Not the menu.
“The delusion is that we all make free choices,”- Anti-soda crusader Harold Goldstein
* Obesity lawsuit instigator John “Sue the Bastards” Banzhaf lashes out: “All these platitudes about, ‘people should eat less,’ ‘responsibility,’ all this crap!”

* Marion Nestle, queen of the food scolds, thinks that “balance, moderation and exercise” have no practical importance. “I don’t support that,” she says.

* Discussing “The Politics of Food,” Skip Spitzer of the radical Pesticide Action Network maintains that “the idea of personal responsibility is a cultural construct.”

* PETA medical “expert” Neal Barnard tells tales of food addiction, arguing that “it’s high time we stopped blaming ourselves for over-eating.”

* Kelly “Big Brother” Brownell advocates “a more militant attitude about the toxic food environment, like we have about tobacco… [smoking] became so serious that society overlooked the intrusion on individual rights for the greater social good.” He also suggests that human beings have no more control over their food choices than animals in a cage.

* Margo Wootan, one of the top killjoys at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), implores: “We have got to move beyond personal responsibility.” And when the World Health Organization added a single, understated sentence referencing the “exercise of individual responsibility” to its anti-obesity strategy, CSPI raged: “Obesity is not merely a matter of individual responsibility. Such suggestions are naive and simplistic.”


Here’s how noted food critic Robert Shoffner describes their philosophy: “People are children and have to be protected by Big Brother or Big Nanny from the awful free-market predators … That’s what drives these people — a desire for control of other people’s lives.” (consumerfreedom.com)
So they aren’t the Insufferably Superior are they? 🙂
You are just children who must be led to do what is best for you.
Just like the fact that the fabulously beautiful planet Bethselamin is now so worried about the cumulative erosion by ten billion visiting tourists a year that any net imbalance between the amount you eat and the amount you excrete whilst on the planet is surgically removed from your bodyweight when you leave: so every time you go to the lavatory it is vitally important to get a receipt. (Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) 🙂

John Stossel: For what it’s worth, here is some of the research we dug up to prepare my Michelle Obama discussion:

In his article “Egg on their Faces,” Steve Malanga points out that “Government dietary advice often proves disastrous.”

Starting in the 1970s… the American Heart Association advised people to reduce drastically their consumption of eggs as part of a goal to limit total cholesterol intake to 300 milligrams a day (a single egg can have 250 milligrams). The recommendation, seconded by government and other public-health groups, prompted a sharp drop in the consumption of eggs, a food that nutritionists praise as low in calories and high in nutrients. In 2000, the AHA revised its restrictions on eggs to one a day (from a onetime low of three a week)… To what purpose? A 2004 article in The Journal of Nutrition that looked at worldwide studies of egg consumption noted that the current restrictions on eating eggs are “unwarranted for the majority of people and are not supported by scientific data.”

Furthermore:

As a recent review of the latest research in Scientific American pointed out, ever since the first set of federal guidelines appeared in 1980, Americans heard that they had to reduce their intake of saturated fat by cutting back on meat and dairy products and replacing them with carbohydrates. Americans dutifully complied. Since then, obesity has increased sharply, and the progress that the country has made against heart disease has largely come from medical breakthroughs like statin drugs, which lower cholesterol, and more effective medications to control blood pressure.

Malanga also notes that new FDA guidelines recommend a maximum of 1500 milligrams of salt daily (down from 2300).  One hypertension expert observed  that the government’s salt war is a giant uncontrolled experiment with the public’s health.

Here are a few more reasons why government shouldn’t tell us what to eat:

We’re living longer than ever! 80 yrs today vs. 57 yrs  80 yrs ago

A CDC study found that more people die every year from being underweight than overweight!  And that moderately overweight people live longer than those at normal weight.

Government was once excited about BMI index. (body-mass index) Gov Mike Huckabee had all Arkansas kids tested!  But BMI is a lousy measure of health.  According to BMI: Tom Cruise and Arnold Schwarzenegger are obese; GWBush and George Clooney are “overweight”

Calorie counts on menu boards don’t work: people STILL don’t take in fewer calories! A study at McDonald’s , Burger King, Wendy’s, and Kentucky Fried Chicken found that people ordered MORE calories after the labeling law went into effect.

What’s junk food?  Chicago’s new candy tax defines sweets that contain flour as “food” – w/o flour as “candy.”  (Hershey bar? Candy. But Kit Kats, Twix, Twizzlers –are “food”) O.j. and apple juice? More calories than Coke! (97 v 120/cup)

“Protect the children?”  Children are the responsibility of their parents. When the state assumes the role of parent, it makes children of all of us.

It’s a good sign that America has food nannies – means were so rich that these are the things we’re worried about!

The food police haven’t jailed anyone yet, but who knows 20 years down the road?  MeMe Roth suggests annual obesity screenings at school; serving soft drinks to only those over 18; child abuse laws for parents with obese kids; taxes on soda and sweetened drinks.

If the government is allowed to dictate our diet, what’s next? Do they start deciding who we’ll marry, where we’ll work?

Thomas Jefferson said “A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.”

Cartoon

I’m Laughing at Your Superior Intellect

The NAACP partnered with Media Matters (socialist Billionaire George Soros and others), Think Progress and New Left Media (where two guys pose as “journalism students”) to launch  a website that will specifically publish and monitor “racism and other forms of extremism within the Tea Party movement.”

Media Matters and Think Progress representatives said their content and reporting haven’t changed and that the NAACP approached their organizations seeking only to republish select content they’ve produced. The NAACP’s new website  is aimed specifically at highlighting “racism” in the Tea Party.

But don’t worry, if they can’t find it, they’ll invent it. They have to, it’s their core belief and they can’t possibly be wrong. After all, they are way smarter, more moral, and more sensitive than you can ever dream of being! 🙂

So they can’t possibly be wrong!

One “extremist” button they photographed, “I stand with Arizona”.

EVIL!  PURE EVIL! 🙂

So it’s going to work like this. Tea Partiers are “extremists”. All Tea partiers are Republicans. So all Republicans are “extremists”.

See, doesn’t that just make total sense. 🙂

“It’s called projection,” Media Resource Center’s Andrew Breitbart said. “The alliance of the left, the Think Progress, the Media Matters and the NAACP are projecting onto the Tea Party. The accusations are a projection of who the coordinated, well-funded left is. They are manufacturing the racism. They are the ones who are fomenting the violence, the ones who are the only perpetrators of violence over the last year.”
True. But it’s not like the Media or these nuts care about that.
AP’s Liz Sidoti writes about the extent to which the tea is becoming the “new Grand Old Party.”

Obviously, this is a meme that Democrats hope to exploit to their advantage; take the fringiest elements of the tea party (and yes, as with all movements, there are some) and attempt to portray them as the face of the party as a whole.


Remember yesterday’s scribe about over-generalization to paint your opponents “nuts”  as out of the  mainstream  and your “nuts” as mainstream?
And remember, the AP is supposed to be a news organization, not a propaganda factory. 🙂
Supposed to be.
Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy found 81 percent of registered voters approved of requiring people to produce documents that show they’re in the country legally.

It found that 74 percent believe police should be allowed to detain anyone who’s unable to verify their legal immigration status, and 68 percent say police should be allowed to question anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.

“A nation without borders is not a nation.” -Ronald Reagan

Oh No! More extremists! Someone call the NAACP!! 🙂
Now for a more “mainstream” view 🙂  MSDNC’s Rachael “Mad Cow” Maddow on the ‘end’ of the Iraq War and Obama’s Not-Victory speech…
“I think we shouldn’t get past how remarkable it is, how much the proponents of the Iraq war are getting off easy here.”
“To have in this speech, as combat operations are ending, to have…the President not only not addressing the circumstances in which we went to war, but these kind words for President Bush, describing his “commitment to our security” despite the recklessness with which President Bush discarded that national security  in favor of this war of choice, which only diminished our security, and is responsible, probably, for the Afghanistan war still going on today, for the deaths of people who have died in Afghanistan after the time after which that war would have ended had we not gone to Iraq — not to mention all of the people who died in Iraq.
After finally taking a breath, she continued:
To talk about him having a demonstrated “commitment to our security,” having started this war on the terms on which he started it, I mean, it’s beyond restraint from President Obama and anybody in the pro-Iraq war, pro-Bush camp who doesn’t feel like they’ve been given the greatest political present they never deserved, was not listening to this speech.” (MRC)
But don’t  think they aren’t the extremists. The Tea party and conservatives and anyone who disagrees with them are the radical extremists!
And the Media will be happy to go along with it, because they believe it too.
Happy. Happy. Joy. Joy!
From the Liberal Left  who brought you “Is America Islamophobic?” (TIME Aug 30, 2010)  Here’s the sequel:

These are the smarter than you, better than you, more moral and sensitive, more “mainstream” than you, Liberal Leftists.
Don’t you just feel stupid right now at how bigoted and ignorant you are? 🙂
And the Leftist Huffington Post asks of this cover, “So, the question is, how much more is this desperate-to-stay-in-business “news” publication going to pander to the haters and the far-right crazies as we hurtle through the mid-term sprint?”
Mind you the article is written by a Progressive Liberal. But this cover is supposed to “pander” to the “haters”.
Get it! 🙂
If one is asked to name five defining issues the Republican Party stands for, it would be easy: Lower taxes (for the rich), Pro-business (corporate welfare), Discrimination (gays, blacks, Muslims immigrants, etc.), Family Values (undermining separation of church & State) and a strong defense (dumb wars we can’t afford). I know it can be difficult to dumb down the rhetoric. But, it is better than feeling stupid on Election Day, watching Republicans trick the American people into voting against their own interests.(Wayne Besen, Huffington Post)
Gee, don’t you just feel stupid and ignorant! 🙂
These are the smarter than you, better than you, more moral and sensitive, more “mainstream” than you, Liberal Leftists.
They are your intellectual superiors and you should bow down to their vastly over-your-head superiority. 🙂
Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Recession 2 “Summer of Recovery” 0

“We are going to take on the barbarism of war, the decadence of racism, and the scourge of poverty, that the Ku Klux — I meant to say the Tea Party,” The Rev. Walter Fauntroy told a news conference today at the National Press Club. “You all forgive me, but I — you have to use them interchangeably.”

But don’t worry, if you disagree with a Liberal you’re the hyperbolic racist! 🙂

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

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

The government is about to confirm what many people have felt for some time: The economy barely has a pulse.

The Commerce Department on Friday will revise its estimate for economic growth in the April-to-June period and Wall Street economists forecast it will be cut almost in half, to a 1.4 percent annual rate from 2.4 percent.

That’s a sharp slowdown from the first quarter, when the economy grew at a 3.7 percent annual rate, and economists say it’s a taste of the weakness to come. The current quarter isn’t expected to be much better, with many economists forecasting growth of only 1.7 percent.

Such slow growth won’t feel much like an economic recovery and won’t lead to much hiring. The unemployment rate, now at 9.5 percent, could even rise by the end of the year.

“The economy is going to limp along for the next few months,” said Gus Faucher, an economist at Moody’s Analytics. There’s even a one in three chance it could slip back into recession, he said.

The report confirms the economy has lost significant momentum in recent months. Most analysts expect the nation’s GDP will continue to grow at a similarly weak pace in the current July-to-September quarter and for the rest of this year.

The economy has grown for four straight quarters, but that growth has averaged only 2.9 percent, a weak pace after such a steep recession. The economy needs to expand at about 3 percent just to keep the unemployment rate, currently 9.5 percent, from rising.

According to data released earlier this week, home prices fell as much as five percent across the country in the month of July, and existing home sales fell 27%.

The worst in 15 years.

But if you listen to the liberals and their pundits, it slow but it’s all good. You just to have more hope. Give it more time. Don’t be so impatient.

So what if GDP growth has gone for 5% in the last quarter of 2009 to 1.6% now it’s still improving! 🙂

And you wouldn’t to hand the keys back over to Bush now would you!

After all, Bush was Republican and all Republicans are Bush. (a gold star to anyone who can spot the logical fallacy in that statement 🙂 ) But isn’t that what the Democrats ARE saying…

Cue Sisyphus! 🙂

Will the economy actually enter a double dip, with G.D.P. shrinking? Who cares? If unemployment rises for the rest of this year, which seems likely, it won’t matter whether the G.D.P. numbers are slightly positive or slightly negative.

All of this is obvious. Yet policy makers are in denial. Why are people who know better sugar-coating economic reality? The answer, I’m sorry to say, is that it’s all about evading responsibility.(Paul Krugman)

After all, it’s Bush’s Fault! and you wouldn’t want <cue evil organ music> Republicans! they’ll just wreck the car again like they did before! 🙂

After all, Bush was Republican and all Republicans are Bush.

And as Mr Krugman also says, showing his liberal roots,”The administration has less freedom of action, since it can’t get legislation past the Republican blockade.”

The Democrats currently have an overwhelming majority in the House and 59/100 seats in the Senate and The Presidency.

Yet, it’s a “republican blockade”.

The problem is that the Democrats can’t get all the Democrats to vote for all of this crap so they have to blame the minority party for it!

It sure as hell can’t possibly be their fault! 🙂

So, if November happens as predicted and the Democrats are the minority, it will be the tyranny of the majority then right? 🙂 They will be the victims yet again, as they are now in the majority. 🙂

Perpetual Victimization!

But the Democrats will focus again on the 1 tree in the forest that isn’t on fire and say that’s you’re hope and change, just be patient, socialism wasn’t built in a day! 🙂

On Thursday, Standard & Poor’s said action is needed soon if the U.S. is to keep the much-coveted AAA bond rating that lets the government borrow in global markets at the lowest rates possible.

S&P’s warning came just days after Morgan Stanley asserted that the U.S., along with a number of other developed nations, is likely to default on some debt. Such defaults are “inevitable,” it said, given the growing number of retirees in developed nations who will have to be taken care of by a shrinking pool of workers.

The sovereign debt crisis “is not over,” said the investment bank’s Arnaud Mares, and that includes in the U.S.

What worries Wall Street is a public debt-to-GDP ratio of around 53%. That’s high enough as it is, but it’s about to go a lot higher. By 2020, recent data suggest, the ratio will top 100% — a red line that virtually all economists agree is dangerous.

In raw numbers, we owed roughly $7.5 trillion at the start of this year. By 2020 that explodes to $23.5 trillion, according to an analysis of Congressional Budget Office data by economist Brian Riedl.

What do these numbers mean? To begin with, we spend $187 billion a year, or 1.3% of GDP, to pay our debts now. Just 10 years from now, that will surge to $1.1 trillion, or 4.8% of estimated GDP. Fiscally speaking, we’ll be gasping for air.

Debt can be a good thing, but in big doses it’s poison. If, as some fear, the U.S. should simply say it can’t pay its debts and default — or do a de facto default by printing money to retire our debt — the consequences would be dire.

No nation would want our bonds in their portfolios. To entice them to buy, we’d have to offer a much higher risk premium — that is, higher interest rates.

That means our debt service could go even higher, squeezing out even more of our economy’s spending.

The dollar would implode, and prices for foreign goods — which now make up 15% of our economy — would soar. Private investment would shrink and, along with it, private-sector GDP

Americans’ standard of living, once the envy of the world, would recede into the pack of mediocre, government-run nations.

It doesn’t have to be this way. All this is due to unrestrained spending. The federal government now spends about $29,000 per household. That will rise to $38,000 by 2020. If you think “the rich” will, or can, pay for it all, think again.

Unless we begin to control spending, we can kiss our American lifestyles goodbye. It’s that simple.

Sadly, the White House is unwilling to see reality. Which may explain why, as our debts mount to ruinous heights, Vice President Joe Biden — President Obama’s point man on the recovery — can burble, “This is a chance to do something big, man!”

Yeah, man, something big — like wreck a country.

Warnings about America’s impending financial car wreck are being sounded, loud and clear. The only question is whether those driving the car will slam on the brakes before it’s too late.(IBD)

Got the car out of the ditch and drove it straight off a cliff and into a bottomless pit!

Way to go Barack & Co!

Yours is the Superior Intellect! 🙂

Quintessential Partisan

More of David Limbaugh (Daily Caller): President Obama is the quintessential partisan, for sure, but he doesn’t reserve his vitriol for Republican politicians. He’ll turn on anyone who stands in his way, and he’ll make it personal through bullying, ridicule, and demonizing. Obama believes he can use his presidential bully pulpit to say whatever he wants about anyone or any group, whether foreign leaders, bankers, or tea party protesters.

Consistent with his narcissistic proclivities, Obama is angrily intolerant of his critics. He dismissed President Bush’s rare criticism by snapping, “We won.” Likewise, he lashed out at Senator John McCain for objecting to his stance on Iran, declaring, “Only I’m the president of the United States . . . and I’ll carry out my responsibilities the way I think is appropriate”—completely ignoring the substance of McCain’s criticism.

This is a hallmark of Obama’s governing style: he takes things personally and keeps score. He exudes a sense of entitlement about his agenda, expecting legislators to vote as he commands, as opposed to, say, their consciences or the wishes of their constituents.

For Obama, it’s more than just a matter of political power. There’s also his egotistical sense that he is absolutely right about everything, that everyone else is wrong, and that if given enough time, he can persuade the rest of the rubes of the superiority of his positions.

It has been my experience, online and in the media (say MSDNC), that the more Progressive Left they are they more that condescending snottiness and absolute Right of God comes out. The more left they are the more they are The Insufferably Superior Left. And thus, they are utterly incapable of being wrong and even if you can prove it, they will just attack you like a rabid raptor.

In their heads there is no such thing as them being wrong. EVER!

An easy test: Ask one of these nuts when will it not be George Bush’s fault?

Get out a wetsuit because the dripping condescending snottiness  and Bush Derangement Syndrome will flow like the flood of the century!

And don’t expect the Mainstream Media, The Ministry of Truth, to be there to protect you they are ideological now and they’re not news reporters. And they are in favor of Obama’s agenda and so they are going to disregard the kind of things he does and will make you (or Bush) the cause not him.

They still love him. Some on the far-far left are mad, it’s true, but that’s because he’s not been to far left ENOUGH  for their tastes!

He didn’t get the Public Option. He didn’t get Cap & Trade in full. He hasn’t redistributed the wealth enough for them. He hasn’t crushed Wall Street and the “rich” enough for them.

Yes, they are that radically out of touch with reality.

We’ve seen how he attributed the public’s repudiation of his agenda via the Massachusetts Senate election to his failure to sufficiently explain his healthcare position—though he had talked ad nauseam on the issue. But it was true of other issues as well—even strong moral issues for which there would never be a consensus, as with his attempt to confront pro-life forces at Notre Dame.

He took the same tack with the issue of homosexuality. At a White House celebration of Gay Pride Month—a controversial act in itself—Obama said he aspired to persuade all Americans to accept homosexuality—as if the issue were simply about “accepting homosexuals,” and that anyone opposing special legal classifications for homosexuality was prejudiced, discriminatory, and as Obama claimed, possessed of “worn arguments and old attitudes.” He added, “There are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters—not yet.”

As a candidate, Obama usually told voters what he thought they wanted to hear. He told an audience in Las Vegas he wanted to help “not just the folks who own casinos but the folks who are serving in casinos.” But after becoming president he wasn’t quite as solicitous. In one of his many anti-capitalist riffs he took a cheap shot at CEOs at a townhall meeting in Elkhart, Indiana, in February 2009. “You can’t take a trip to Las Vegas or down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers’ dime.” Obama’s careless statement elicited a strong reaction from Las Vegas businessmen, many pointing out that if their business suffers, the first and hardest hit are the front line workers—the people at the front desk, the bell staff, and the taxi drivers, precisely the people Obama courted during the campaign.

The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority reported that more than 400 conventions and business meetings scheduled in the city had been canceled, translating into 111,800 guests and more than 250,000 “room nights,” costing the city’s economy more than $100 million, apart from lost gaming revenue.

And despite British Petroleum’s assurances that it was “absolutely” responsible for the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama unleashed on BP a non-stop barrage of verbal abuse. Using language not usually heard from a U.S. president, he told NBC’s Today Show that he consults experts about the spill to find out “whose ass to kick.”

Even Obama’s supporters recognized he was resorting to sheer intimidation. As Democratic strategist James Carville noted, “It looks as if President Obama applied a little old-school Chicago persuasion to the oil executives.” But American presidents, of course, are not supposed to resort to this kind of outright thuggery to get their way. As Conn Carroll remarked on the Heritage Foundation’s blog, “Making ‘offers you can’t refuse’ may be a great way to run the mob, but it is no way to run a country.”

And the President oh-so-political Oil Drilling Moratorium (even now that the leak has been plugged it continues) has cost 10’s of thousands of jobs and continues to hurt the Gulf States, especially Louisiana.

But he doesn’t care. He has the backing of his environmentalist apparatchiks. So what does he care about jobs lost in a recession due directly to his meddling. It’s not his fault!

He’s scoring points for his agenda.

And leaving other apparatchiks to do the job for him also, Like the EPA and there declaration that “that carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels poses a threat to human health and welfare, a designation that set the federal government on the path toward regulating of emissions from power plants, factories, automobiles and other major sources.” (see also: https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2009/12/08/stop-breathing-save-the-planet/) statement and now apparently Connecticut’s attorney general and Democratic nominee for the Senate, Richard Blumenthal, is working to get courts to declare “cap and trade” regulations the law of the land.

Blumenthal’s suit, Connecticut v. American Electric Power, is the most prominent of a handful of “climate change” lawsuits filed by environmental activists, state attorneys general and trial lawyers. These suits threaten to impose a steep tax on the American economy, with no input from our national elected representatives.

In 2004, Connecticut, along with seven other states, New York City and three environmental groups, filed suit against five companies responsible for “approximately one-quarter of the U.S. electric power sector’s carbon dioxide emissions.”

Their lawsuit sought to hold the companies “jointly and severally liable for contributing to an ongoing public nuisance, global warming” and asked the court to force each company “to abate its contribution to the nuisance by capping its emissions of carbon dioxide and then reducing those emissions by a specified percentage each year.”(IBD)

So Congress doesn’t have the stomach to do it, the Progressives will just use their judicial apparatchiks to force it down your throat!!

The Bully that never gives up.

Based on his behavior as president, it is clear he truly believes his own hype. He behaves and governs as though he has been sheltered all his life, or at least since he was a young adult, living in a bizarre bubble, hearing only positive reinforcement and made to believe in his own supernatural powers. This is a major reason he cannot bear opposition; this is a major reason he is not, in the end, a man of the people and deferential to their will, but a top-down autocrat determined to permanently change America and its place in the world despite intense resistance from the American people themselves.

David Limbaugh:  This is a guy who’s taken over private companies. This is a guy who — contravening the rule of law — allocates and pledges $140 billion to the IMF when Congress specifically said you cannot do that without our authority.

And he said — with an Orwellian argument, I can — this is foreign policy, I can divert $140 billion to the IMF for wealth redistribution in third world countries. Nothing to do with what the IMF was originally been set up for.

He can go after Gerald Walpin who is an IG for AmeriCorps because he uncovered fraud on the part of Obama’s friends and so he fires him without notice in total contravention of the rule of law there.

It’s a means to an end for him. He appoints judges who will rewrite the law. He will circumvent Congress when it comes to environmental policy by having his EPA declare carbon dioxide a toxic pollutant.

He will go out and thwart the secured creditors’ legal rights under the law — their rights under the law and favor the unions who are unsecured creditors, give them 50 percent on the dollar. Give the secured creditors 20 percent and then slam and slander the lawyer and slander them as speculators when they’re just trying to enforce their own rights under the law. (FOX)

“I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president,” Obama told ABC’s “World News” anchor Diane Sawyer last year.

And in his mind, and The Ministry of Truth, he is really good. Look at all the “legislative victories” he’s had!!

So what if 60+% of the people hate them. He won! That’s all that matters.

Like he cares.  As long as he’s right and the Ministry of Truth tell him he’s right and cover up any gaffes or “misquotes” he’s perfectly fine with doing whatever he wants.

After all, as he told Sen. McCain during the Health Care roundtable, He won the election! Get over it 😦

But there’s also the fact that he’s tone-deaf. In addition to not caring what we think, he’s also tone-deaf because he has no clue after he passed – – he crammed Obamacare through he says, I’m going to continue to fight for the American people.

Oh, you are? So 24 percent of the people support what you’re doing and you’re fighting for us? How oblivious.

And how many times has he said that he will focus on jobs, then a shiny object like Health Care or Oil or some other Liberal fantasy distracts him and he just wanders off on vacation…

We either go full blown toward socialism, Marxism, Statism or we turn back and restore our founding principles. This upcoming election in November will tell the tale.

Freedom matters.

We The People

It has often been a theme in my blog for this nearly first year about the dishonesty of this administration, the Orwellian Tactics, and the Alinsky maneuvers. How the dripping contempt for the ‘little people’ from the political Elite Class has boiled over and how the Ministry of Truth (The Mainstream Media) is both a partner, a sucker, and a toadie for it all.

How the Left like to define everything in their own terms and you aren’t allowed to disagree with them.

Leaving you and me, the average citizen, hung out to dry.

Now Thomas Sowell, a evil abomination that liberals don’t want to exist – a black Conservative- a great piece today.

‘We the people” are the central concern of the Constitution, as well as its opening words, since it is a Constitution for a self-governing nation. But “we the people” are treated as an obstacle to circumvent by the current administration.

One way of circumventing the people is to rush legislation through Congress so fast that no one knows what is buried in it. Did you know that the so-called health care reform bill contained a provision creating a tax on people who buy and sell gold coins?

You might debate whether that tax is a good or a bad idea. But the whole point of burying it in legislation about medical insurance is to make sure “we the people” don’t even know about it, much less have a chance to debate it, before it becomes law.

Did you know that the financial reform bill that’s been similarly rushed through Congress, too fast for anyone to read, has a provision about “inclusion” of women and minorities? Pretty words like “inclusion” mean ugly realities like quotas. But that too isn’t something “we the people” are to be allowed to debate, because it too was sneaked through.

Not since the Norman conquerors of England published their laws in French, for an English-speaking nation, centuries ago, has there been such contempt for the people’s right to know what laws were being imposed on them.

Yet another ploy is to pass laws worded in vague generalities, leaving it up to the federal bureaucracies to issue specific regulations based on those laws. “We the people” can’t vote on bureaucrats. And, since it takes time for all the bureaucratic rules to be formulated and then put into practice, we won’t know what either the rules or their effects are prior to this fall’s elections when we vote for (or against) those who passed these clever laws.

The biggest circumvention of “we the people” was of course the so-called “health care reform” bill. This bill was passed with the proviso that it would not really take effect until after the 2012 presidential elections. Between now and then, the Obama administration can tell us in glowing words how wonderful this bill is, what good things it will do for us, and how it has rescued us from the evil insurance companies, among its many other glories.

But we won’t really know what the actual effects of this bill are until after the next presidential elections — which is to say, after it is too late. Quite simply, we are being played for fools.

Much has been made of the fact that families making less than $250,000 a year will not see their taxes raised. Of course they won’t see it, because what they see could affect how they vote. But when huge tax increases are put on electric utility companies, the people will see electricity bills go up. When huge taxes are put on other businesses as well, they will see the prices of the things those businesses sell go up.

If you are not in that “rich” category, you will not see your own taxes go up. But you will be paying someone else’s higher taxes, unless of course you can do without electricity and other products of heavily taxed businesses. If you don’t see this, so much the better for the administration politically.

This country has been changed in a more profound way by corrupting its fundamental values. The Obama administration has begun bribing people with the promise of getting their medical care and other benefits paid for by other people, so long as those other people can be called “the rich.” Incidentally, most of those who are called “the rich” are nowhere close to being rich.

A couple making $125,000 a year each are not rich, even though together they reach that magic $250,000 income level. In most cases, they haven’t been making $125,000 a year all their working lives. Far more often, they have reached this level after decades of working their way up from lower incomes — and now the government steps in to grab the reward they have earned over the years.

There was a time when most Americans would have resented the suggestion that they wanted someone else to pay their bills. But now, envy and resentment have been cultivated to the point where even people who contribute nothing to society feel that they have a right to a “fair share” of what others have produced.

The most dangerous corruption is a corruption of a nation’s soul. That is what this administration is doing.

I would add in the socialist corruption of the Education process so that even if they can’t destroy you they can destroy the future and the little darling brains full of mush will never know because they will never tell them.

It starts in grade school where you just don’t mention certain things, events and concepts and moves on through college life. So that by the end of 16 years of “education” you’re effectively a mindless idiot willing do what the government says because “it’s fair” and “it’s sensitive”.

And you wouldn’t want to be “unfair” and “insensitive” now would you? 🙂

A central goal of these programs is to uproot “internalized oppression,” a crucial concept in the diversity education planning documents of most universities. Like the Leninists’ notion of “false consciousness,” from which it ultimately is derived, it identifies as a major barrier to progressive change the fact that the victims of oppression have internalized the very values and ways of thinking by which society oppresses them. What could workers possibly know, compared to intellectuals, about what workers truly should want? What could students possibly know, compared to those creating programs for offices of student life and residence, about what students truly should feel? Any desire for assimilation or for individualism reflects the imprint of white America’s strategy for racial hegemony.

Planning for New Student Week at Northwestern University, a member of the Cultural Diversity Project Committee explained to the Weekly Northwestern Review in 1989 that the committee’s goal was “changing the world, or at least the way [undergraduates] perceive it.” In 1993, Ana Maria Garcia, assistant dean of Haverford College, proudly told the Philadelphia Inquirer of official freshman dormitory programs there, which divided students into two groups: happy, unselfish Alphas and grim, acquisitive Betas. For Garcia, the exercise was wonderfully successful: “Students in both groups said the game made them feel excluded, confused, awkward, and foolish,” which, for Garcia, accomplished the purpose of Haverford’s program: “to raise student awareness of racial and ethnic diversity.”

In the early 1990s, Bryn Mawr College shared its mandatory “Building Pluralism” program with any school that requested it. Bryn Mawr probed the most private experiences of every first-year student: difference and discomfort; racial, ethnic, and class experiences; sexual orientation; religious beliefs. By the end of this “orientation,” students were devising “individual and collective action plans” for “breaking free” of “the cycle of oppression” and for achieving “new meaning” as “change agents.” Although the public relations savvy of universities has changed since the early 1990s, these programs proliferate apace.

The darkest nightmare of the literature on power is George Orwell’s 1984, where there is not even an interior space of privacy and self. Winston Smith faces the ultimate and consistent logic of the argument that everything is political, and he can only dream of “a time when there were still privacy, love, and friendship, and when members of a family stood by one another without needing to know the reason.”(reason.com)

Let’s take that a step farther. The liberal left says that you are “insensitive” to muslims if you object to the mosque being built next to Ground Zero.

But you also “insensitive” to Latinos if you want the border secured. That’s “racial profiling”. You’re a “racist”.

But yet, if you’re a devout Christian who doesn’t believe in Gay marriage, because of your religion, You’re an insensitive, homophobic bigot!

So you’re insensitive to the Muslim religion if you object, but if you object based on your Christian religion you’re also insensitive.

And if you tell the proponents of the mosque that building it there is “insensitive” they will shoot back that you’re stereotyping all Muslims and that the Constitution protects there right to build it there.

So they can tell you you’re “insensitive” but you can’t tell THEM they are “insensitive” because they are your Insufferably Moral Superiors and you can’t even begin to judge them.

Orwell couldn’t do much better than that. You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

O’Brien’s re-education of Winston in 1984 went to the heart of such invasiveness. “We are not content with negative obedience…. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will.” The Party wanted not to destroy the heretic but to “capture his inner mind.” Where others were content to command “Thou shalt not” or “Thou shalt,” O’Brien explains, “Our command is ‘Thou art.'” To reach that end requires “learning… understanding [and] acceptance,” and the realization that one has no control even over one’s inner soul.

The school must become a therapeutic and political agent of progressive change. For your own good. But especially, before you figure out you’ve been had.

And the liberal media is there to reinforce it.

Look at how they frame the Ground Zero Mosque issue, for instance.

It’s all about Constitutional Right to worship as they please. The fact that this is a perversion of the First Amendment aside, it’s a clever little Alinsky tactic. Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

So you wouldn’t want to go against The Constitution now would you? 🙂

The fact that that isn’t even the real issue isn’t even the point. It’s a tactic. They don’t care about the Constitutionality of it. They know that’s irrelevant.

But they also know they can off-put you by pushing it. Just like when they call you a “racist” when you object to illegal immigration.

And if that’s the only argument you hear, then that’s they only argument you know.

If the free speech and religious freedoms protected in First Amendment are suddenly so sacrosanct, why is it that Obama and his left-wing allies continuously push for a return of the fairness doctrine and for getting religion (except islam) out of schools and everywhere else??

And if the Constitution is so all important to Liberals all of the sudden why do they continuously push for gun bans (aka The Second Amendment)?

And where in the Constitution does a Health Care Mandate come from? And what other Mandates can they come up with if they think there is??

And then you get the counter. It’s not the Imam and the Mosque next to Ground Zero that is the problem, it’s YOU who object to it, you’re the problem.

Speaker Pelosi on a radio show: “There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City.”

Calls to investigate the funding for those proposing the $100 million “Cordoba House” have fallen on deaf ears, though, as New York’s Mayor Mike Bloomberg has described such an investigation as “un-American.”(Washington Times)

The only thing the majority of American opposed to this haven’t been called yet is…. RACIST! 🙂

But I’m sure it’s coming. It’s always coming…

And have you noticed, the proposed memorial to the victims of 9/11 hasn’t been finished 10 years later?

And a Greek Orthodox church crushed by the twin towers falling can’t get the zoning and building permits to rebuild?

Funny that. 🙂

And the final word today goes to former Obama Communication toadie Anita Dunn on MSDNC when challenged by Pat Buchanan on “tolerance”,“Anita, let me ask you about this word tolerance. I mean, what about tolerance for the views of the thousands of families of those who died on 9/11, the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who are saying, ‘Please, you have a right to move the mosque there but please don’t do it. It doesn’t belong there,’ and the vast majority of Americans who say the same thing?” Buchanan said.

“They have a right to build a mosque, but for heavens’ sakes given the fact that the terrorists were Islamic, it was crucial to their identity and their mission, please don’t put an Islamic mosque just two blocks from where this happened. What about tolerance for the vast majority of Americans and their opinions?” he said.

Dunn responded: “Well, you know, I have to ask, it’s two blocks … It’s a center that is supposed to be about promoting interfaith, and really reaching out, which in many ways is I think what President Bush back in those horrible days of 2001, really tried to promote.”

“And how many blocks is ok? Is nine blocks okay? Is 10? I don’t know where you go with this argument,” Dunn said.

“Morning Joe” co-host Mika Brzezinski ended the segment with a non-sequitur.

“And Anita, they have, like, other things that a lot of people have issues with, like peep shows. So, I mean, I think you bring up a really good point,” Brzezinski said.

Last impression: it’s about peep shows, not “sensitivity”.

Doing Orwell proud. 🙂

The Politics of Food

As an amateur home cook and a junkie for The Food Network and other Food Shows I take food seriously.

But not like our President and his Food Nazis.

And no, I don’t mean “Seinfeld”.

This is not a comedy.

This is your usual socialist tragedy.

Busy bodies with a moral superiority complex.

You may laugh about the White House assistant chef being appointed “Senior Policy Adviser.” You’ll stop laughing when you realize that those in power really do want to tell you what to eat.

You just can’t cook these things up. The 29-year-old Chicago chef that the Obama family for years paid to be their private cook, Sam Kass, was quietly promoted last month from his job as assistant chef at the White House residence and “food initiative coordinator” to the position of “senior policy adviser for healthy food initiatives.”

The long-suffering American people don’t get to know if an increase in salary is involved, because Kass is on the residence staff rather than the West Wing’s.

But we should know how much the taxpayers are paying this “bald, intense young man” who, according to the New York Times, is “part chef and part policy wonk” and is “reinventing the role of official gastronome in the Executive Mansion.”

He plays golf with the president at Martha’s Vineyard, attends the administration’s child-health briefings, and quizzes senior White House staff about policy.

“Do we have a toxicologist who specializes in colony collapse disorder?” Kass once asked in an e-mail to the Agriculture Department, according to the New York Times story.

Add the fact that Kass isn’t even a formally trained chef and you really start to wonder what’s going on here.

The law lets the president appoint anyone he wants as “senior policy adviser.” But if he wants to be the first president to employ a cook/food czar, he should make that plain to the public — and publish the man’s taxpayer-funded salary, as is the case with other White House policy advisers.

Of course, it all begs the question: Why on earth do the American people need a government-paid “food initiative coordinator”? This administration has been attempting to elevate nutrition to the level of a civil rights issue.

How much harassment is enough in regard to food? New York City has opened the door for every local government to ban trans fats. Then there are the ubiquitous nutrition labels on every food item in supermarkets and fast-food restaurants.

The food nannies are everywhere. Now in the White House, too.

If President Obama really wants to appoint a butcher, baker or candlestick maker to a top White House policy job, we humbly propose a better suggestion: Joe the Plumber. (IBD)

Because it’s such a dire situation, she has convinced her husband’s administration to spend $400 million a year to bring “healthy foods” to low-income neighborhoods and $10 billion to revise a decades-old federal measure that already feeds tens of millions of poor children at school for free.

This culinary revolution no doubt requires a trusted senior policy adviser—like Kass—who is an expert in healthy cuisine. The First Lady refers to her cook as a “partner in crime” and says it’s “just pretty powerful” to see what started out as talk in her South Side Chicago kitchen turn into a major initiative that “hopefully will change the way we think as a country.”

Makes you wonder what Kass, who also doubles as a White House chef, has been putting in the Obama’s food all these years. Incidentally, the “most transparent administration” in history doesn’t want Americans to know how much the famous family cook earns. Although he’s an important administration wonk, Kass’s salary is excluded in the Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff because he’s considered “residence staff” and those salaries don’t need to be disclosed. (Judicial Watch)

Even the private chef of the President is a political hack, for god’s sake!

Yet more “czars” from the “I’m not a socialist!” President. 🙂

In a statement released on June 22, the liberal Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) announced it was filing a lawsuit against McDonald’s for marketing toys with their signature Happy Meals. The statement’s creepy hyperbole nearly implied that Ronald McDonald should be featured on an episode of “To Catch a Predator:”

’McDonald’s is the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner.

And the Liberal Media just easts it up.

“But would children still be happy with their meal without the joy of a new toy? That’ll be up to kids, and possibly a judge,” chided NBC’s Erika Edwards.

“It’s entirely appropriate and not at all intrusive for city government to take steps to discourage the sale of sugary sodas on city property.”–San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom after he “regulated” the sale of non-diet drinks in city vending machines.

“On its own, popcorn is a low-fat, low-cal, whole grain food,” said Good Morning America’s consumer correspondent Elizabeth Leamy, “but the Center (for Science in The Public Interest) says that the way some movie theaters prepare it, it’s more like eating a rack of ribs with a scoop of ice cream on top.”

UK Daily Mail: Teachers have used ‘Big Brother’ tactics to spy on children’s lunchboxes, it has been revealed. They secretly photographed pupils’ packed lunches over six months and analysed the contents.

Staff awarded marks to the food and then showed their findings to outraged parents, offering them advice on how to improve nutrition.

Education bosses have now put a stop to the scheme in Gloucestershire after discovering the extent of the surveillance.

Nineteen primary schools have been using the ‘packed lunch toolkit’, which was devised by Gloucestershire county council and NHS Gloucestershire.

Contents were taken out of a random sample of lunchboxes and then photographs taken.

Staff rated the contents against set nutritional standards. They looked for high fat, salt and sugary foods as well as fruit and vegetables.

NHS= National Health Service. HHS= Health and Human Services.

Brothers from a different mother? 🙂

But Yvette Gayle, whose nine-year-old daughter Renee Dougan attends the school, said she didn’t mind.

‘It might encourage parents to pack a healthier lunch for their kids anyway,’ she said.

Cheryl Ridler, an education co-ordinator at the school, said the scheme has led to ‘a definite improvement in the quality of food’ brought in.

‘All the parents were very positive about it and we did it in a very nice and careful way, and in no way demanding and intrusive,’ she added.

Big Brother smiles upon you Citizen. Rejoice. 🙂

Maybe we could have a reality show, showing a Nutritional Intervention or maybe an actual Food Police show, showcasing the worst slovenly, offensive offenders against the public good. 🙂

Unfortunately, it is their business, because too many of us have insisted on treating healthcare services as an entitlement rather than a commodity. As a result, we’ve implicitly given government the permission to interfere with anything having to do with “public health,” including our food choices. And for the most part, many people support these dumb food bans because they imagine it’s doing some kind of good. I find it hard to believe that could be true. As the failed war on drugs has taught us, government regulation is no match for the forces of supply and demand.(411mania.com)

And where have we heard of Health Care as an entitlement?

The Left

Who are the Food Police?

The Left.

Funny how that worked out. 😦

And with Comedy comes Tragedy.

And her it is folks.

The reason why the Food Police are coming to get you.

You’re too Fat!!!, and that’s a negative impact on ObamaCare.

So we can’t have that.

If the government gets to decide who lives and who dies, they get to decide what you eat as well.

It’s for your own good, after all.

Rejoice. 🙂

Obesity Rating for Every American Must Be Included in Stimulus-Mandated Electronic Health Records, Says HHS

(CNSNews.com) – New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records–that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year–must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.

The obesity-rating regulation states that every American’s electronic health record must: “Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.”

The law also requires that these electronic health records be available–with appropriate security measures–on a national exchange.

The new regulations are one of the first steps towards the government’s goal of universal adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) by 2014, as outlined in the 2009 economic stimulus law.  Specifically, the regulations issued on Tuesday by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Dr. David Blumenthal, the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, define the “meaningful use” of electronic records. Under the stimulus law, health care providers–including doctors and hospitals–must establish “meaningful use” of EHRs by 2014 in order to qualify for federal subsidies. After that, they will be subjected to penalties in the form of diminished Medicare and Medicaid payments for not establishing “meaningful use” of EHRs.

Section 3001 of the stimulus law says: “The National Coordinator shall, in consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies (including the National Institute of Standards and Technology), update the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan (developed as of June 3, 2008) to include specific objectives, milestones, and metrics with respect to the following: (i) The electronic exchange and use of health information and the enterprise integration of such information.‘‘(ii) The utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the United States by 2014.”

Under this mandate in the stimulus law, Secretary Sebelius issued a regulation–developed by Dr. Blumenthal–that requires that all EHRs keep track of a person’s Body Mass Index (BMI) score. Body Mass Index is a ratio between a person’s weight and height, and is used to determine whether or not someone is overweight or obese. It is the preferred method of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for measuring obesity.

Michelle Obama has made dealing with the problem of childhood obesity the main theme of her term as First Lady.

According to the CDC,  “BMI provides a reliable indicator of body fatness for most people and is used to screen for weight categories that may lead to health problems.”

A person’s BMI score is used as a tool to screen for obesity or excessive body fat that could lead to other health problems. While it does not actually measure body fat directly, according to CDC, the BMI scores generally correlate with a person’s body fat percentage.

The new regulations also stipulate that the new electronic records be capable of sending public health data to state and federal health agencies such as HHS and CDC. The CDC, which calls American society “obesogenic” – meaning that American society itself promotes obesity – collects BMI scores from state health agencies every year to monitor obesity nationwide.

“Electronically record, retrieve, and transmit syndrome based public health surveillance information to public health agencies,” the regulations read.

With the spread of electronic health records, the CDC apparently will be able to collect such data more efficiently and with greater accuracy because the electronic record keeping systems can send the data automatically, eliminating the need for government – both state and federal – to keep, send, and process physical records.

So how long until the BMI Tax or mandatory “health education”??

So you want that Big Mac, well, there’s a 20%  surcharge Tax and we have to record how many of them you have and when you have reached your limit you will not be allowed to eat it anymore until such time as the National Coordinator’s guidelines for your better health says so.

How far off is that?

Not far enough for my tastes.

But that’s why I was so vehemently against the whole thing to begin with.

But what do I know, I’m just a “racist” “teabagger” “idiot” who wants what’s bad for you, at least according to the Left and it’s Media pit bulls.

Have that Big Mac now, because in a few years it will be banned or so heavily regulated and taxed it will cost you $20 for just one and it will have to be registered with the HHS.

And if your BMI says you can’t have it, well, the Food Police will coming knocking on your door to “educate” you Citizen.

Just you wait and see.

Big Momma Michelle is watching you…