Free Speech Lesson

First Amendment, US Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

You’d think a law professor would know that the First Amendment, by its very nature, protects speech that is deeply unpopular.

But the interim vice chancellor for inclusion, diversity and equity at the University of Missouri has apparently not brushed up on the Bill of Rights since he took his position this fall.

Amid the racial tensions on the University of Missouri’s campus that culminated last semester, a school administrator is promoting “inclusive terminology” and stating that the First Amendment does not give people the right to say whatever they wish.

In an interview with the Economist published over the weekend, Mizzou Interim Vice-Chancellor for Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity Chuck Henson criticized defenders of the First Amendment for leading the backlash against the recent changes at the school — including the resignation of President Tim Wolfe, who is white. Henson also asserted that the First Amendment does not give people the right to say “hateful things.”

It most certainly does, Mr. “LAW” Professor.

The Economist reported:

Yet the First Amendment does not give people a free pass to go round saying hateful things, points out Mr. Henson. To help students and faculty realise this, Mizzou has developed a new guide to ‘inclusive terminology’ which ensures a healthy level of respect for all minority groups. It includes terms such as ‘adultism’ (prejudice against the young), ‘minoritised’ (when under-represented groups are made to feel inferior) and intersextionality (obscure). Some will see this stuff as movement in the right direction. But it is also likely to increase the ire of those who watched the protests and thought they saw a group of privileged college students complaining about how terrible their lot is.

Henson, who is also a law professor, received immediate criticism.

“The idea that the First Amendment does not give a ‘free pass’ to say ‘hateful things’ is demonstrably incorrect,” Ari Cohn, a lawyer with the Foundation of Individual Rights in Education, told TheBlaze Monday. “Speech that might be considered ‘hateful’ is entitled to full First Amendment protection unless it falls under one of the very narrow categories of unprotected speech defined by the Supreme Court.”

“History has taught us that the right to free speech is an essential tool for oppressed minorities,” Cohn continued. “It would be tragically ironic to curtail free speech in the pursuit of remedying oppression.”

FIRE, a nonprofit organization that focuses on civil liberties in academia, has assigned the University of Missouri a “red light” speech code rating. According to the organization, that rating means the public school has a least one policy that clearly restricts speech.

Henson told the Economist that he has received multiple death threats since assuming his leadership position at the university.

Cohn said that death threats do fall under the narrow definition of what constitutes a “true threat” and would be subject to disciplinary action or prosecution.

“But Mizzou may not, consistent with the First Amendment and decades of legal precedent, ban merely hateful speech, or mandate respectfulness and civility,” he said. “The university may certainly encourage students to be respectful and nice to one another by using its own speech and educating students, but it may not enforce such values at the expense of students’ rights.”

Prior to winter break, the university published a series of posts to its website that reaffirmed the school’s commitment to fostering a free exchange of ideas and its support of civil liberties, including free expression.

As Long as it’s politically correct, that is. 🙂

University officials declined to comment to TheBlaze on Henson’s allegations of death threats he has received. A Mizzou police department spokesperson told TheBlaze that the local police department would typically conduct a criminal investigation into any death threats brought to its attention. If the threat was found to have been made by university personnel or a student, then punishment would be handed down through the “proper channels.”

But “hate speech”, especially to a Progressive is more than just “death threats” it usually just involves disagreeing with their Agenda or being Politically incorrect. 🙂

Unfortunately, the Department of Education under the Obama administration has been much more aggressive, granting itself new powers and redefining harassment in such broad language that virtually any offensive speech could be considered a matter of federal oversight.

The biggest and most noticeable change in campus censorship in recent years has been the shift in student attitudes. Today, students often demand freedom from speech rather than freedom of speech.

The Liberals got beat in court on Speech Codes years ago so they just decided that teaching self-censorship to the Crybaby Generation was more effective because them THEY would demand it and they have.

These troubling results were echoed by a November 2015 global survey from Pew Research Center finding that a whopping 40 percent of U.S. millennials [ages 18–34] believe the government should be able to punish speech offensive to minority groups (as compared to only 12 percent of the Silent generation [70–87 year-olds], 24 percent of the Boomer generation [51–69 year-olds], and 27 percent of Gen Xers [35–50 year-olds]).

So welcome to Orwell’s 1984 where the idiot students are demanding limits to free speech without even understanding “free speech” to begin with.

But I’m just and white guy, after all.

I am a right wing Bigot, misogynist, hater and a racist for even opposing it. 🙂

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

FREE SPEECH IS ONLY FREE WHEN IT’S NOT “HATEFUL”.

🙂

 

 

 

 

The Lion’s Den

Fascinating Video.

Watch the Leftist indoctrinator/puppet mistress in the Left corner of the screen for extra credit.

FYI: Amherst says it is charging students $60,400 in tuition, fees, room and board. By comparison, it charged $43,300 in 2000-01, in inflation-adjusted dollars. So even after Amherst’s prices have been adjusted for economywide inflation, the cost has jumped 34 percent in only 14 years.

For perspective: Arizona State $21,000 in state, $35,000 out of state.

Now that’s White Privilege. 🙂

Dinesh D’Souza is a brave man and a very good speaker, but did the Leftists learn anything?

Of course not.

That, dear Citizens, would be a Thought Crime. Not to mention they are far to narcissistic for that.

If you enjoyed the viral clip of Dinesh destroying a self-satisfied campus leftist at Amherst earlier this year, check out this full-length video of the entire discussion on America’s role in the world.

Love this guy. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Grand Re-Opening

 Since I have been obsessed with this case for the last week+ because of the Left’s amoral attempt at the destruction of a business for the sole purpose that they don’t agree with the Left’s agenda.

The hate the Left poured into this little town with their “gotcha” journalism and their viciousness should not go unchallenged.

The majority should stand up to these bullies.

The Left has only one modus operandi- They bring a Nuclear weapon to a knife fight. You disagree with them and they just nuke you. That’s it.

And they have their schoolyard gang, The Liberal Media, who will back them up and make your life a living hell for opposing them.

That’s there idea of “tolerance”. You tolerate their rule over you completely or else.

They have cowed people for a long time with their disagree with me you’re a “racist”, a “bigot”, a “homophobe”, “islamophobic” or “misogynistic”.

It’s all very extreme. No chance for discussion or dialogue when the first thing they do is nuke you, intimidate you and bully you.

And the Left thinks they are on the side of morality and righteousness so you deserve to be nuked for disagreeing with them.

As Mike Adams put it a few days ago: As usual, their views on the issue are driven by emotion, not reason. That is because liberalism is not really a political philosophy. It is a stage of arrested emotional development.

They are bratty, nasty 5 year old bullies who want what they want when they want it because they want it and you a poopie head for not letting them have it.

The level of pure hatred I’ve seen on more Leftist websites has been amazingly vicious. They have even taken to questioning  the gays who contributed to the GoFundMe for Memories Pizza as to whether they were even gay, gay enough, brainwashed or just plain stupid because no legitimately gay person would ever have compassion for evil religious nutters who just want to oppress them.

This small example, a small town, family-owned pizza joint, showed the world (but not the Left-they are oblivious) just how broken this society is and just how Us vs. Them is almost all that remains.

Especially, with the Left. You’re either 100% with us (or don’t oppose us in any way) or else!

The Irony is appalling…So with that, a little sun must shine (until the Left decides to eclipse with their hate this is). 🙂

WALKERTON, Ind. (AP) — A northern Indiana pizzeria that closed after its owner said his religious beliefs wouldn’t allow him to cater a gay wedding opened Thursday to a full house of friends, regulars and people wanting to show their support.

“It’s a relief to get going again and try to get back to normal,” said Kevin O’Connor, owner of Memories Pizza.

The aftermath of a Liberal nuclear holocaust, the survivors pick up and try to resume their lives.

O’Connor closed the shop for eight days after comments by him and his daughter, Crystal, to a local television station supporting a new religious objections law. The law, which has since been revised, sparked a boycott of Indiana.

O’Connor said the criticism hasn’t changed his beliefs. He said gays are welcome in his restaurant in the small, one-traffic-light town of Walkerton, 20 miles southwest of South Bend, but that he would decline to cater a same-sex wedding because it would conflict with his Christian beliefs.

“I’d do the same thing again. It’s my belief. It’s our belief. It’s what we grew up on,” he said. “I’m just sorry it comes to this because neither one of us dislike any of those people. I don’t hold any grudges.”

A crowdfunding campaign started by supporters raised more than $842,000 with donations from 29,160 contributors in 48 hours. O’Connor said he hasn’t received the money yet, but said he plans to give some to charity and use some money to make improvements to the restaurant.

The 61-year-old father of eight who has owned the restaurant for nine years said he never thought about taking the money and retiring.

“I enjoy it. I don’t want to leave here,” he said. “I want this to be something that my daughter can enjoy.”

Crystal O’Connor said the amount of money was overwhelming.

“We were like, ‘Stop! Stop! Stop!'” she said.

“It was really making us uncomfortable,” her father said.

The restaurant reopened about 4 p.m. Thursday. He says that within an hour, all eight tables were filled and six people were waiting for carryout orders. There were no protests as of 7 p.m.

Jeanne and Ken Gumm from outside LaPorte, about 20 miles northwest of Walkerton, said they had been waiting for the pizzeria to reopen so they could show their support.

“We couldn’t wait to get down here,” said Ken Gumm, 66, a tank truck driver. “To us this whole thing isn’t about gay marriage. It’s mostly about freedom of religion.”

Not to the Left, to them it’s about defying their holy crusade to destroy anyone who stands in their way to ultimate power for they are the saviors of mankind (in their heads) whether you like it or not! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 You could say the same thing about The Left, curiously enough… 🙂

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

Rhetorical Reality

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” —  Ben Franklin

Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise” — Ben Franklin.

Then Liberals want to attack him for being a greedy, selfish, SOB. 🙂

A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins.“– Ben Franklin

And ignorance is much prized by the Left.

“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.”— Ben Franklin

USDA has an agreement with Mexico to promote American food assistance programs, including food stamps, among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America.

The goal, for USDA, is to get rid of what they see as enrollment obstacles and increase access among potentially eligible populations by working with arms of the Mexican government in America. Benefits are not guaranteed or provided under the program — the purpose is outreach and education.

Some of the materials the USDA encourages the Mexican government to use to educate and promote the benefit programs are available free online for order and download. A partial list of materials include English and Spanish brochures titled “Five Easy Steps To Snap Benefits,” “How To Get Food Help — A Consumer’s Guide to FNCS Programs,” “Ending Hunger Improving Nutrition Combating Obesity,” and posters with slogans like “Food Stamps Make America Stronger.”

When asked for details and to elaborate on the program, USDA stressed it was established in 2004 and not meant for illegal immigrants.

Aka, “It’s Bush’s Fault so don’t blame me” and “oh, no, we aren’t targeting Illegal immigrants (at the same time that Obama is wanting to close 9 border crossing stations).
So advertising free food in Mexico is NOT going to encourage more illegals. 🙂

“If you talk to economists, they will tell you there are two things that are the most stimulative that you can do — one’s unemployment insurance, the other’s food stamps, okay?”

“Why is that?” he said. “Because those folks who receive those resources must spend them. And they’ll spend them almost upon receipt. Most economists with whom I talk believe that those with significant discretionary income, that that’s not the case.”–House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)

Unemployment and Food Stamps stimulate the economy. So obviously we need even more of it. 🙂

And the persistent 8%+ unemployment and 1/7 of the US population on Food Stamps is good for us. We should be happy.

Government is here for you. 🙂

“USDA does not perform outreach to immigrants that are undocumented, and therefore not eligible for SNAP.” (RELATED: USDA buckles, removes Spanish food stamp soap operas from website)

Tell, me another fairy story, grandma…

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families bill incentivized states to create welfare-to-work programs, trying to transition Americans from government dependency to financial solvency.

In 1996, Republicans forced through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) bill, also known as welfare reform (and embraced by President Clinton for political reasons). It incentivized states to create welfare-to-work programs, trying to transition Americans from government dependency to financial solvency. But states quickly acted to poke holes in that legislation, calling the following activities “work” for purposes of the statute: bed rest, personal care activities, massage, exercise, journaling, motivational reading, smoking cessation, weight loss promotion, participation in parent-teacher meetings, or helping friends or family with household tasks and errands.

This was idiotic. So in 2005, Congress closed the loophole, over the objections of then-Senator Obama.

Now, Obama has walked back the 2005 legislation, using his Department of Health and Human Services to unilaterally waive those work requirements. “This Administration is unbelievable,” said Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). “Green-lighting new regulations to change bipartisan welfare reform without consultation from Congress is an outright abuse of the federal government’s system of checks and balances and an insult to American taxpayers.”

A high-ranking Republican staffer commented, “Only someone with a religious faith in government would change the rules such that ‘journaling’ now qualifies you for welfare assistance.”

But this is Obama’s new definition of work: anything that allows you to receive government assistance. After all, welfare, unemployment benefits, and all other payouts forward the economy, according to our magnificent president.  (Ben Shapiro)

Being on the Government dole stimulates the economy. And boy is it over-stimulated!

More people go on SSI disability than get hired for jobs. So the “private sector is doing fine” 🙂

Thomas Sowell: There was a time, within living memory, when the achievements of others were not only admired but often taken as an inspiration for imitation of the same qualities that had served these achievers well, even if we were not in the same field of endeavor and were not expecting to achieve on the same scale.

The perseverance of Thomas Edison, as he tried scores of materials before finally trying tungsten as the filament for the light bulb he was inventing; the dedication of Abraham Lincoln as he studied law on his own while struggling to make a living — these were things young people were taught to admire, even if they had no intention of becoming inventors or lawyers, much less president.

Somewhere along the way, all that changed. Today, the very concept of achievement is de-emphasized and sometimes attacked. Following in the footsteps of Barack Obama, Professor Elizabeth Warren of Harvard has made the downgrading of high achievers the centerpiece of her campaign against Sen. Scott Brown.

To cheering audiences, Professor Warren says, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You build a factory out there, good for you, but I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers that the rest of us paid to educate.”

Do the people who cheer this kind of talk bother to stop and think through what she is saying? Or is heady rhetoric enough for them? People who run businesses are benefitting from things paid for by others? Since when are people in business, or high-income earners in general, exempt from paying taxes like everybody else?

At a time when a small fraction of high-income taxpayers pay the vast majority of all the taxes collected, it is sheer chutzpah to depict high-income earners as somehow being subsidized by “the rest of us,” whether in paying for roads or the educating the young.

Since everybody else uses the roads and the schools, why should high achievers be expected to feel like free loaders who owe still more to the government, because schools and roads are among the things that facilitate their work? According to Elizabeth Warren, because it is part of an “underlying social contract.”

Conjuring up some mythical agreement that nobody saw, much less signed, is an old ploy on the left — one that goes back at least a century, when Herbert Croly, the first editor of The New Republic magazine, wrote a book titled “The Promise of American Life.”

Whatever policy Herbert Croly happened to favor was magically transformed by rhetoric into a “promise” that American society was supposed to have made — and, implicitly, that American taxpayers should be forced to pay for. This pious hokum was so successful politically that all sorts of “social contracts” began to appear magically in the rhetoric of the left.

If talking in this mystical way is enough to get you control of billions of dollars of the taxpayers’ hard-earned money, why not?

Certainly someone who claimed to be part Indian, as Warren did when applying for academic appointments in an affirmative action environment, is unlikely to be squeamish about using imaginative words in a campaign.

Sadly, this kind of cute use of words is not confined to one political candidate or to this election year. The very concept of achievement is a threat to the vision of the left, and has long been attacked by those on the left.

People who succeed — whether in business or anywhere else — are often said to be “privileged,” even if they started out poor and worked their way up the hard way.

Outcome differences are called “class” differences. Thus when two white women, who came from families in very similar social and economic circumstances, made different decisions and got different results, this was the basis for a front-page story titled “Two Classes, Divided by ‘I Do'” in the New York Times.

Personal responsibility, whether for achievement or failure, is a threat to the whole vision of the left, and a threat the left goes all-out to combat, using rhetoric uninhibited by reality.

AMEN

Yea, because hearing both sides of a presidential campaign is unnecessary when Obama is running for a second term.

That’s political discourse in AMERICA 2012.

NOVEMBER IS COMING

 

Armageddon Is Upon Us! Repent!

The so-called (by themselves) “Last Hope of the Middle Class” lost yesterday.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The nearly month-long standoff in the Wisconsin Legislature over explosive union rights legislation rocketed toward a dramatic finish Thursday after Senate Republicans outmaneuvered their missing Democratic counterparts and pushed through the bill.

The dramatic turn of events late Wednesday set up a perfunctory vote Thursday morning in the Assembly on the measure that would strip nearly all collective bargaining rights from most public workers. Once the bill passes the Assembly, it heads to Republican Gov. Scott Walker for his signature.

So the 88% of people not in any Union and the 93% of us not in a Public Sector union are now doomed to be slaves of our oppressive capitalist bosses!

Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

Evil! Pure Evil! Armageddon is upon us all!

For the 93% of us not in a Union we are all doomed!!

Uh…yeah…whatever…

Senate Democratic leader Mark Miller of Monona says Democrats will “join the people of Wisconsin in taking back their government,” but he refused to say when.

Gee, we’ve been saying that about  the Left, Obama, and ObamaCare for 2 years now. 🙂

Funny how the Left won’t see it that way. 🙂

“In 30 minutes, 18 state senators undid 50 years of civil rights in Wisconsin. Their disrespect for the people of Wisconsin and their rights is an outrage that will never be forgotten,” said Democratic Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller. “Tonight, 18 Senate Republicans conspired to take government away from the people.”

Public Sector Union= Civil Rights. Interesting juxtaposition. 😦

But, you know what, I and many of the Tea Party have said the exact same thing about Obama and The Left.

Funny how that happened?

And electing Obama was supposed to unify us all, after all he was “The First Black President”.

I don’t think The Left will see the irony.

So what are the Democrats (not in the Legislature) up to now that they lost.

Simple. Recall the Republicans. The dirty rotten bastards defied us!!

How’s this for states’ rights?

This morning (Wednesday), Wisconsin Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said in a radio interview that President Obama’s political team is directly involved in burgeoning efforts to recall Republican elected officials (emphasis on the word “elected,” as in chosen by the people of Wisconsin in a democratic vote four months ago):

“There’s many people that are beginning to believe this is a delay tactic by the Democrats in the Senate so that these recall elections can be organized by the Obama team out of Chicago, which they are, as we start to do the research on the people that have filed the petition,” Fitzgerald told Newsradio 620 WTMJ’s “Wisconsin’s Morning News.”

The Chicago Union Leg-breakers are on the case.

Expect to see “expose’s” a plenty as the smear campaign ratchets up. After all, no one does smear jobs better than pissed off Democrats who don’t get their way.

Nationwide liberal groups Progressive Change Campaign Committee, based in Washington, and Democracy for America, based in Vermont, have raised more than $500,000 online in the past week.

Not the People of Wisconsin, you notice.  Oh no! This is Liberal Moral Outrage!

How dare you defy them!! The Almighty!

You heathens! You will be struck down!

Obama, Jan 12, 2011: But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.

So much for the “New Tone”, “Civility” or “Adult Conversations” This is all out war!

We are the Rebels. They are Qaddafi and it’s War!!  JIHAD HAS BEEN DECLARED!!

The gauntlet has been thrown down.

The LEFT will destroy you for this you heathen peasants!

HOW DARE YOU!!!!

Meanwhile the 88% of us not in Unions and the 93% of us who aren’t in a Public Sector Union still have to pay for own benefits and our own ObamaCare largely by ourselves.

And the Federal Union employees who had their collective bargaining outlawed by President Jimmy Carter and the Democrats themselves just look on incredulously.

But don’t worry, The Liberal hyperbole machine is going into high gear– Armageddon is upon us.

The Rapture is just minutes away. So you must repent for your sins against the Liberal Orthodoxy or be cast down in the fires of Hell forever!

Repent you evil sinners! 🙂

NPR : Republican state senators in Wisconsin figured out how to pass controversial budget repair legislation without the help of missing senate Democrats. In a sudden move Wednesday evening, GOP senators stripped all the financial proposals from the bill but kept the language ending many collective bargaining rights from nearly all public sector unions.

Now imagine a year ago, after 15 months of “debate” by Democrats on Obamacare, the same opening paragraph:

Democrat senators in Washington figured out how to pass controversial health care legislation without the help of senate Republicans . In a sudden move Wednesday evening, Democrat senators passed the House version of the bill without any changes in a parliamentary maneuver.

Gee, sounds familiar somehow? 🙂

But, remember, Liberals get REALLY REALLY PISSED OFF when you do exactly as they do to them and not just do as they say!!

A Leftist at Us News and World Report: When a politician says that something is just about the budget and not about grinding ideological axes, it’s really grinding ideological axes.

I wonder if he said that about Obamacare, The FDA, EPA, Cap & Trade, Dodd Financial Reform, Homeland Security, The Justice Department, Illegal Immigration, Suing Arizona….probably not.

It was HIS AXE!! 🙂

The “new tone” is even MORE VITRIOL than before, if that is even possible.

So much for “civility”. This is war!!

We have defied the will of the Left and that shall not stand! 🙂

The Evil Corporate Fascists who passed this must be crushed!

(am I going over-the-top just a bit? am I really?)

Ann Coulter: Can we stop acting as if people who work for the government are the heroes of working people?

Fine, we understand that Wisconsin public sector employees like the system that pays them an average of $76,500 per year, with splendiferous benefits, and are fighting like wildcats against any proposed reforms to that system. But it’s madness to keep treating people who are promoting their own self-interest as if they are James Meredith walking into the University of Mississippi.

This isn’t how we usually view people fighting for their own economic interests.

When Wall Street opposes financial reforms or a tobacco company opposes new cigarette taxes, no one hails them as “working men and women” who “deserve a decent pay and decent retirement.” We’re not told Wall Street has a “fundamental right” not to be regulated, or tobacco companies promoting their own interests are just trying to “help working people and middle-class people retain a good job in America.” People on the other side of the issue aren’t said to be “just trying to kick the other guy in the shin and exterminate him.”

And yet all that was said by the Democratic governor of Illinois, Pat Quinn, on MSNBC’s “Hardball” last week, about government workers fighting to preserve their own Alex Rodriguez-like employment contracts.

Yes, we understand that public sector employees got themselves terrific overtime, holiday, pension and health care deals through buying politicians with their votes and campaign money. But now, responsible elected officials in Wisconsin are trying to balance the budget.

MSNBC is covering the fight in Wisconsin as if it’s the 9/11 attack — and the Republicans are al-Qaida. Its entire prime-time schedule is dedicated to portraying self- interested government employees as if they’re Marines taking on the Taliban. The network’s Ed Schultz bellows that it is “morally wrong” to oppose the demands of government employees.

Yes, and I guess pornographers are noble when they launch a full-scale offensive against obscenity laws.

Public sector workers are pursuing their own narrow financial interests to the detriment of everyone else in their states. That’s fine, but can we stop pretending it’s virtuous?

Because of the insane union contracts in Wisconsin, one Madison bus driver, John E. Nelson, was able to make $159,000 in 2009 — about $100,000 of which in overtime pay. Jackie Gleason didn’t make that much playing bus driver Ralph Kramden on “The Honeymooners.” Seven bus drivers took home more than $100,000 that year.

When asked about the outrageous overtime pay for bus drivers — totaling $1.94 million in 2009 alone — Transit and Parking Commission Chairman Gary Poulson said: “That’s the contract.”

It’s ludicrous to suggest that these union contracts were fairly bargained. Only one side was at the negotiating table. Ordinary people with jobs were not at the meetings where public sector compensation was discussed.

Union hacks play on our heartstrings, weeping about the valuable work government employees do: These are the people who educate our children, run into burning buildings and take dangerous criminals off our streets!

Politicians who do not immediately acquiesce to insane union demands are invariably accused of hating teachers, nurses or cops. In California, this has been standard operating procedure for decades. The voters never seem to catch on.

In 1972, E. Richard Barnes lost his re-election campaign to the California state Assembly after being accused by cops and firefighters of coddling criminals.

In fact, Barnes, a conservative Republican, had one of the toughest records on crime. But he had voted against fringe benefits and better pension benefits for public employees.

Years later, in 2005, Don Perata, Democratic state senator from Oakland, suggested that the legislature reconsider the requirement that 40 percent of the entire state budget be spent on public schools. The teachers’ unions instantly plastered his district with fliers calling him anti-education. Perata is a far-left Democrat, who had himself been a teacher for 15 years before entering politics.

Fine, we like teachers, firemen and police officers. We appreciate them. (And for the record, it is statistically more dangerous to be a farmer, fisherman, steelworker or pilot than a cop or fireman. Soldiers also have pretty dangerous jobs, and they don’t get to strike.)

Does that mean we should pay them $1 million dollars a year? How about $10 million? After all, these are the people who educate our kids, run into burning buildings and take dangerous criminals off our streets!

Assuming the answer is no, then apparently we’re allowed to discuss government workers’ compensation — even though they do important work. As George Bernard Shaw concluded his famous quip (often attributed to Winston Churchill), “Now, we’re just negotiating over the price.”

Why do public sector employees have absurd overtime rules? Why don’t they pay for their own health insurance? Why do they get to retire at age 45 with a guaranteed pension of 65 percent of their last year’s pay — as state police in New Jersey do?

This is asymmetrical warfare. Seven percent of the population cares intensely about public sector union contracts — and nothing else. The remaining 93 percent of voters can’t be bothered to care.

Meanwhile, state after state spirals into bankruptcy.

But it’s not as if the Democrats and Unions actually care. This is THEIR MONEY  and THEIR SACRED RIGHT to suck off your money for their own good that matters and how dare you defy them!!

Who cares if 88% of America is not in a Union and has to pay for their own retirement with their own money.

Not Democrats.

Armageddon is upon us all. And the democrats will be sure to beat that drum 24/7 from now until Hell freezes over!

Larry Elder: Charlie Sheen, at least, has an excuse. He’s on a drug he calls “Charlie Sheen.”

But what powerful hallucinogen inhaled by the left induces the mental fantasy that makes them believe:

Spending nearly a trillion dollars in “stimulus” money “created or saved” 3.5 million jobs?

A “tax cut” means giving checks to the nearly 40 percent of the workforce that pays no federal income taxes?

Racism drives the tea party/conservative/right-wing criticism of a left-wing black president — who received more of the white vote than John Kerry, in every age demographic, and who at one time enjoyed an approval rating of almost 70 percent?

Government can “invest” in “green jobs of the future” better than can the private sector, can pick winners and losers better than the marketplace, and can do this while not rewarding those with political influence or punishing those without it?

The rich pay no taxes — even though the top 1 percent of income-earners pay nearly 40 percent of all federal income taxes?

Tax cuts only benefit the rich — even though they disproportionately pay the income taxes (see above)?

Federal and state budget problems can be solved by simply raising taxes on “the rich” and making them pay “their fair share”?

Governors’ attempts to rein in public-sector compensation — because it vastly exceeds the private-sector counterparts — constitute an “assault” on “all unions”?

Expensive, anti-competitive, job-killing “global warming” regulations imposed on U.S. businesses can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions — even though the No. 1 and No. 4 “polluters,” China and India, respectively, say, “Go to hell, we’re growing our economies”?

ObamaCare adds 30 million uninsured to the insured; allows people to keep their doctor or health insurance; forces health insurance companies to “insure” applicants with pre-existing illnesses — all while saving money, lowering costs and retaining the same quality?

President Barack Obama presented a “fiscally responsible” 2012 budget — even though it adds to the debt, continues high annual deficits and changes nothing about the three autopilot entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?

“Greed” and lack of Wall Street regulation caused the housing meltdown — even though the Community Reinvestment Act, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and the Federal Housing Administration distorted behavior; pressured lenders to give loans to the “underrepresented”; incentivized people who should have been renting to buy homes; and put taxpayers on the hook for the losses?

“ObamaCare” is a racist and offensive word — but not “RomneyCare” or HillaryCare?

The Muslim Brotherhood is “primarily secular”?

Health care is a “right” — but keeping a handgun in your own home should be a crime?

Public education can be fixed by spending more money — without allowing greater parental choice and more competition against government schools?

If millions of illegal aliens would likely vote Republican, liberals would (SET ITAL) still (END ITAL) support putting them on a pathway to citizenship?

If convicted felons would likely vote Republican, liberals would (SET ITAL) still (END ITAL) push to restore their full “voting rights”?

Right-wing “vitriolic rhetoric” caused the mass shooting in Tucson — but left-wing rhetoric like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews’ description of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as “a car bomber” does no damage?

The Bush tax cuts for the rich “caused the deficit” — even though Obama says maintaining the current rates for the top 2 percent of income-earners “costs” $700 billion over 10 years, or for each year, less than 5 percent of the current annual deficit?

The war in Iraq caused the deficit — even though the combined annual costs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars represent about 10 percent of the current annual deficit?

President George W. Bush and his policies made America hated in the Middle East — even though polls show the Egyptians have a lower opinion of America under Obama than they did under Bush?

Obama can convince Iran from continuing its nuclear weapons programs — by criticizing Israel for building “settlements,” and by breaking missile defense promises made to the Czech Republic and Poland to get Russia’s help in pressuring Iran?

Questioning Obama’s place of birth or religion is insanity — but not believing that “Bush lied, people died”; Bush had prior knowledge of 9-11; Bush allowed America to be attacked on 9-11 to provide a pretext for war in Iraq; 9-11 was a government-involved inside job; and that WTC Building 7 imploded from planted explosives?

Bush governed as an evil, civil liberty-crushing warmonger — even though Obama continues the same war on terror programs and policies, including the use of the “state secrets” courtroom defense to prevent national-security-sensitive documents from being turned over to the defense; rendition; the terrorist surveillance program; the Patriot Act, including the despised library provision; drone attacks in Pakistan; and the continued use of Guantanamo Bay prison?

Obama fulfilled his campaign promise to reduce the influence of lobbyists — while members of his administration hold meetings (SET ITAL) off White House premises (END ITAL) to avoid the requirement of having to keep a record of the meetings?

So here’s the question. As between Charlie Sheen and the nonsense-believing left-wingers, who should be drug tested?

I already now the Left is on drugs, it’s call Power and money begets Power. And Democrats get the majority of their money from Unions and Unions take it forcefully from taxpayers.

And Wisconsin just cut them off and the addicts are howling!!!!

make money

 

 

 

The Speech

I will give the President props. He gave a great speech.

“Bad things happen,” Obama said, “and we must guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.”

Hello, Mainstream Media and MSDNC!

He took shots at the LEFT and the media that went crazy, which I didn’t think he would.

He sounded Presidential for the first time ever.

But will it last and will he and the Democrats grow up and be that angel of our better nature and be able to live up to soaring speech about living up to the child’s vision of Christina Taylor Green. “I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it,” Obama said.

“We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another is entirely up to us.” -President Obama.

“Let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy. It did not,” the president said.

He admonished against any instinct to point blame or to drift into political pettiness or to latch onto simple explanations that may have no merit.

Lofty words. But will his party of Social Justice nutbags temper themselves and be more civil to those with whom they disagree?

I doubt it.

I am too cynical.

I just have to think, I will get them to re-elect me in 2012 and then we got them! Heh heh heh… This is my cunning plan!

That and when he gets back to Washington DC Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the Queen, will slap him and say “I am not amused…” 🙂

Sorry, that’s me.

Arizona has been through a lot in the last few years.

Illegal Immigration gangs and Cartel killings.

A Governor who abandons her post to be the Peter Principle of the New President and then blows us off. (Janet Napalitano)

She said Illegal Immigration was a “federal problem” and then we she was the Fed she largely ignored us and said “it’s more secure than ever”.

So that’s why we have snipers in the hills of the border and thousands of drug dealers coming over the border, agents killed, ranchers killed, and signs near the border saying Americans should stay away because it’s too dangerous IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

So when we try and address the issue, the Government sues us and we all get tarred as “racists”.

When I saw Napalitano at the Memorial my first thought was “Well, we finally got her to come back here. Can we rope her and tie her to border”.

And I saw Eric Holder, and wondered if now that he was here we could convince him that we aren’t all angry white racists and bigots.

Both decided to read for the Bible instead at the Memorial.

They know the Bible?? Aren’t most Progressives secular and God and Christianity is evil (clinging to their guns and religion, right-wingers, etc)??

Isn’t this “government sanctioning religion”??

Will the ACLU sue them. 🙂

“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized — at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do — it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds,” the president said.

I would like to believe it, but I am too cynical. So I take the Ronald Reagan attitude of “trust but verify”. I don’t trust the Left. Period.

It sounded good. But if it is not acted on it is but sound and “fury” signifying nothing.

The Day before the shooting the Obama administration planned to announce plans for an Internet identity system that will limit fraud and streamline online transactions, leading to a surge in Web commerce, officials said.

What it will really do is make the government the nanny of the internet and of course with Mr Loughner’s well known use of the Internet it will be the Left’s opportunity to regulate the internet to our death.

Ve vill be vatching you! (bad german accent)

So not much has changed.

Been There. Done that got the T-Shirt.

The “capitalist” T-Shirt sold at the McKale Center at U of A Memorial service.
“i don’t understand how the Right can get all butthurt about coming together…it just seems…i mean…someone was shot in the fu**ing head…a congresswoman…and you can’t, for one goddamn second stop with all the BS and just join hands and even if you’re not a believer…at least close your eyes and hope?…wtf is wrong with these people?” (TPM-a liberal blog- reader comment)

Now that’s striking a new tone, don’t you think! 🙂

Can the Left grow up and stop the childish and churlish ad hominems and be civil.
I very much doubt it.
So, American Left, prove me wrong. I dare you! 🙂

Political Cartoon

Political Cartoon

Previous Political Cartoon Political Cartoon