Barking Moonbat lays out the proof right here.
Sonia "el racista" Sotomayor threw a big bean-counting tanrum when she was in Princeton back in '74. This included letters. Here are some of her bullshit gripes....
The facts of the complaint are these: 1) There is not one Puerto Rican or Chicano administrator or faculty member in the university; 2) There are two million Puerto Ricans in the United States and two and a half million more on the island itself. Yet there were only 66 Puerto Rican applicants this year, and only 31 Puerto Rican stuents on campus. While there are 12 million Chicanos in the United States, there were only 111 Chicano applicants and 27 students on campus this year; 3) Not one permanent course in this university now deals in any notable detail with the Puerto Rican or Chicano cultures.
And as Barking Moonbat stated - "Somewhere in the Lefty Mind there is this concept that any “minority” group should have representation at all walks in life, at least equal to their numbers in the overall population. Otherwise evil discrimination exists!!"
This is so, so true. If there were only 111 Chicano applicants, then maybe, there just weren't a whole hell of a lot of Chicanos that wanted to go to this school. No one is stopping anyone from applying. It's classic left-wing ethnic bean counting. It never dawns on these fools that maybe, just maybe, people of their demographic are on average, less interested in certain things than people of another demographic might be. Take the NBA or the NHL for example. One is almost all black, the other almost all white. And it'd be crazy to call either of them racist outfits. And just yesterday, a young girl of Indian descent won the national spelling bee. And I wasn't shocked. Indian children often excel in these competetions. Ya know what else - a lot of black kids like rap. And a lot of white guys are into politics and the stock market. This phenomenon does in fact happen. And it's normal, and hardly evidence of some evil racist conspiracy. And here's Sotomayor insinuating that Princeton - a reputable university that should only hire the best and brightest - ought to be handing out jobs to people based on their ethnicity.
This rat of a woman makes me sick. She is bigot. She is a racist. And she has no business being on the SCOTUS. She represents everything that is wrong with this country. This woman is a giant step backwards for our nation. And had I expected anything more out of Obama, I'd actually be disappointed in him for this.
Hope! Change! Kill Whitey!
May 31, 2009
May 30, 2009
Mancow's Water Boarding Faked?
Via Five Feet of Fury, I came across a story at Gawker that seems to show "Mancow" Muller's waterboarding was faked!
Here's the key email that was sent, one day before he was waterboarded,
From: [redacted]Date: Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:38 PMTo: [redacted]Cc: [redacted]Subject: Re: URGENT
You are a ROCK STAR!!!
It is going to have to look "real" but of course would be simulated with Mancow acting like he is drowning. It will be a hoax but have to look real. Would be great if they could dress in fatigues and bring whatever is needed. We will supply the water
Of course, they're denying this is a hoax, but assuming Gawker has the real deal -- and I have no reason to think that they don't -- I doubt they'll stick to their story for long.
Now, here's a guy who's supposed to be a "right wing" shock jock (I've heard of the guy, but have never listened to his show nor even knew prior to his waterboarding that he was supposed to be "right wing"). So naturally, when he said waterboarding was "torture," liberals loved it. It made news all over the place. This guy was on Olbermann. He got tremendous publicity out of this -- and meanwhile, it was playing all of you. All you liberals got suckered. I love it!
Let me also just say this: not only is Mancow a worthless piece of human debris for doing this, all of the liberals who rushed out to shout, "Waterboarding is torture because Mancow says so" are almost as idiotic as the guy who hoaxed you.
Now, consider the facts as people knew them, even before he admitted this was a hoax:
1) Mancow volunteered to do this live on his radio show. How many people would genuinely volunteer to be tortured? Anybody out there want to have your toes broken with a hammer? Okay then, who wants to have bamboo shoots jammed under your fingernails? Anybody? All right, lets go halfway and use a technique the terrorists actually use against our guys -- who volunteers to have a power drill run through his leg? Nobody? But, but, but...people are falling all over themselves to get waterboarded, so they can talk to the press about it? Why aren't they willing to have these other forms of "torture" done to them? It's obvious. The reason people are willing to be waterboarded is that while it may be extremely unpleasant, it's not torture. They know it will be a short, miserable experience, then it will be over and they'll suffer no lasting effects or trauma from the experience.
2) 30 seconds after Mancow was waterboarding, he was talking live on the radio. How can that be if it's "torture?"
Let me just put it this way: waterboarding isn't torture. I'm not the least bit sorry, embarrassed, or troubled that it was used at Guantanamo Bay. In fact, I wouldn't have been troubled if it had been used on fifty times as many prisoners. They're terrorists who use real torture on our men. Stop crying into your pillow about how tough they have it. Last but not least, I hope the United States uses waterboarding again after Obama is out of office.
Update #1: Mancow has responded to the people saying his waterboarding was faked and to his credit, it's at Big Hollywood, not at the Daily Beast, where the pretend conservatives post.
Bored Bloggers Are All Wet
I am not a magician. Many news cameras were there!Obviously, it was on the radio and I wasn't in prison. I'm also not a radicalized Muslim terrorist. But it was not a hoax! I repeat: NOT A HOAX.
We kept telling management, the insurance companies, and the local Chicago cops we weren't really going to do it until we did. Otherwise, they weren't gonna let us do it!
...It would be insane to equate what I did with anything that happens in prison. I am simply a free man in a radio studio that always tries to get inside the big issues. This is an ugly issue with no easy answers. But I now see it's easier for some to dismiss me than to do any real soul searching on this very heady issue.
I learned about this post from an email I received from Linda Shafran, the publicist, who sent the "It will be a hoax" email.
Quite naturally, I had some questions. So, we had a brief email exchange, most of which I am going to excerpt here.
John Hawkins: So, just to be clear: Are you saying the email Gawker has up is fake?
Linda Shafran: There was nothing fake about the waterboarding.
John Hawkins: I am having a hard time reconciling the fact that you say that it was a real waterboarding (with the fact that) these lines were written the day before:
"It is going to have to look "real" but of course would be simulatedwith Mancow acting like he is drowning. It will be a hoax but have tolook real."
If it's a real waterboarding, can you give me an explanation that makes sense for those lines? Again, I am willing to be convinced, but it's hard to square the idea that this was real with that email.
Linda Shafran: Per Mancow's statement:We kept telling management, the insurance companies, and the local Chicago cops we weren't really going to do it - until we did. Otherwise, they weren't gonna let us do it!
John Hawkins: Linda
That would make sense -- except this was a private email, was it not? Was there someone from the management, insurance companies, or local police who was cc'd on the emails?
Again, I'm just trying to make sure I understand.
As of yet, I haven't gotten a response to the last email and if I get one that makes sense, I'll be certain to post it.
Here's the problem: there's still no explanation for what happened. It's understandable that they wouldn't want management, insurance companies, or local police to know about it prior to the event happening, for fear of their stopping it. But, why would they still be referring to it as fake during private email conversations?
It doesn't make any sense and although, just as I said in the email, I am keeping an open mind and willing to be persuaded otherwise, I don't think Mancow's post at Big Hollywood changes things one iota. For the moment, it still looks like Mancow faked the whole thing as a publicity stunt.
PS: Olbermann knew this whole thing was a fake when he put Mancow on the air. If MSNBC had any journalistic integrity, at a minimum, they would suspend Olbermann for a couple of weeks over this,
Astonishingly, MSNBC is standing by its flackery for Muller's hoax. An MSNBC spokeswoman acknowledged that Olbermann's producers had been made aware prior to airing the Muller interview that his publicist had described it as a hoax, saying, "We asked the publicist and were assured by her that she just used a poor choice of words." But when asked if MSNBC still believes that publicist, in light of the fact that Muller's waterboarder had no idea what he was doing, she declined to comment.
Here's the key email that was sent, one day before he was waterboarded,
From: [redacted]Date: Thu, May 21, 2009 at 1:38 PMTo: [redacted]Cc: [redacted]Subject: Re: URGENT
You are a ROCK STAR!!!
It is going to have to look "real" but of course would be simulated with Mancow acting like he is drowning. It will be a hoax but have to look real. Would be great if they could dress in fatigues and bring whatever is needed. We will supply the water
Of course, they're denying this is a hoax, but assuming Gawker has the real deal -- and I have no reason to think that they don't -- I doubt they'll stick to their story for long.
Now, here's a guy who's supposed to be a "right wing" shock jock (I've heard of the guy, but have never listened to his show nor even knew prior to his waterboarding that he was supposed to be "right wing"). So naturally, when he said waterboarding was "torture," liberals loved it. It made news all over the place. This guy was on Olbermann. He got tremendous publicity out of this -- and meanwhile, it was playing all of you. All you liberals got suckered. I love it!
Let me also just say this: not only is Mancow a worthless piece of human debris for doing this, all of the liberals who rushed out to shout, "Waterboarding is torture because Mancow says so" are almost as idiotic as the guy who hoaxed you.
Now, consider the facts as people knew them, even before he admitted this was a hoax:
1) Mancow volunteered to do this live on his radio show. How many people would genuinely volunteer to be tortured? Anybody out there want to have your toes broken with a hammer? Okay then, who wants to have bamboo shoots jammed under your fingernails? Anybody? All right, lets go halfway and use a technique the terrorists actually use against our guys -- who volunteers to have a power drill run through his leg? Nobody? But, but, but...people are falling all over themselves to get waterboarded, so they can talk to the press about it? Why aren't they willing to have these other forms of "torture" done to them? It's obvious. The reason people are willing to be waterboarded is that while it may be extremely unpleasant, it's not torture. They know it will be a short, miserable experience, then it will be over and they'll suffer no lasting effects or trauma from the experience.
2) 30 seconds after Mancow was waterboarding, he was talking live on the radio. How can that be if it's "torture?"
Let me just put it this way: waterboarding isn't torture. I'm not the least bit sorry, embarrassed, or troubled that it was used at Guantanamo Bay. In fact, I wouldn't have been troubled if it had been used on fifty times as many prisoners. They're terrorists who use real torture on our men. Stop crying into your pillow about how tough they have it. Last but not least, I hope the United States uses waterboarding again after Obama is out of office.
Update #1: Mancow has responded to the people saying his waterboarding was faked and to his credit, it's at Big Hollywood, not at the Daily Beast, where the pretend conservatives post.
Bored Bloggers Are All Wet
I am not a magician. Many news cameras were there!Obviously, it was on the radio and I wasn't in prison. I'm also not a radicalized Muslim terrorist. But it was not a hoax! I repeat: NOT A HOAX.
We kept telling management, the insurance companies, and the local Chicago cops we weren't really going to do it until we did. Otherwise, they weren't gonna let us do it!
...It would be insane to equate what I did with anything that happens in prison. I am simply a free man in a radio studio that always tries to get inside the big issues. This is an ugly issue with no easy answers. But I now see it's easier for some to dismiss me than to do any real soul searching on this very heady issue.
I learned about this post from an email I received from Linda Shafran, the publicist, who sent the "It will be a hoax" email.
Quite naturally, I had some questions. So, we had a brief email exchange, most of which I am going to excerpt here.
John Hawkins: So, just to be clear: Are you saying the email Gawker has up is fake?
Linda Shafran: There was nothing fake about the waterboarding.
John Hawkins: I am having a hard time reconciling the fact that you say that it was a real waterboarding (with the fact that) these lines were written the day before:
"It is going to have to look "real" but of course would be simulatedwith Mancow acting like he is drowning. It will be a hoax but have tolook real."
If it's a real waterboarding, can you give me an explanation that makes sense for those lines? Again, I am willing to be convinced, but it's hard to square the idea that this was real with that email.
Linda Shafran: Per Mancow's statement:We kept telling management, the insurance companies, and the local Chicago cops we weren't really going to do it - until we did. Otherwise, they weren't gonna let us do it!
John Hawkins: Linda
That would make sense -- except this was a private email, was it not? Was there someone from the management, insurance companies, or local police who was cc'd on the emails?
Again, I'm just trying to make sure I understand.
As of yet, I haven't gotten a response to the last email and if I get one that makes sense, I'll be certain to post it.
Here's the problem: there's still no explanation for what happened. It's understandable that they wouldn't want management, insurance companies, or local police to know about it prior to the event happening, for fear of their stopping it. But, why would they still be referring to it as fake during private email conversations?
It doesn't make any sense and although, just as I said in the email, I am keeping an open mind and willing to be persuaded otherwise, I don't think Mancow's post at Big Hollywood changes things one iota. For the moment, it still looks like Mancow faked the whole thing as a publicity stunt.
PS: Olbermann knew this whole thing was a fake when he put Mancow on the air. If MSNBC had any journalistic integrity, at a minimum, they would suspend Olbermann for a couple of weeks over this,
Astonishingly, MSNBC is standing by its flackery for Muller's hoax. An MSNBC spokeswoman acknowledged that Olbermann's producers had been made aware prior to airing the Muller interview that his publicist had described it as a hoax, saying, "We asked the publicist and were assured by her that she just used a poor choice of words." But when asked if MSNBC still believes that publicist, in light of the fact that Muller's waterboarder had no idea what he was doing, she declined to comment.
May 28, 2009
Cops That "Stimulus" Saved Layed Off Anyway
Red State had this report:On March 6, Obama’s mouthpiece, Robert Gibbs, happily told the nation that the Obama “stimulus” plan had saved the jobs of 25 Cops in Columbus, Ohio. This was an example, Gibbs trumpeted, of how Obama’s supposed stimulus package was “working” to set the country to rights. President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder even took a road trip to Columbus to proudly see these “saved” cops being sworn in as police officers.
It was back slaps and grins all around as Obama celebrated his successful “stimulus” program. That was less than two months ago. Today, those same 25 new policemen whose jobs were “saved” by the great father in Washington have been laid off over lack of funds.
Obama’s great hope and mirrors campaign strikes its false stance as savior again, proving that there was no “stimulus” in the stimulus plan and that it was a false front all along meant only to serve as a part of Obama’s permanent political campaign effort. In reality, there’s just no there, there.
Anyone that believes that government spending can “save” anything is the sucker every con man is waiting for. This is further proof of the un-sustainability of an ever increasing government. And what will we see from this? Will we see government trim its budget, tighten its spending? Certainly not. We will see government require more money from tax payers instead of expecting of itself a renewed effort to live within its means. And those calls have already been issued.
Columbus Police Chief Walter Distelzweig is already reminding everyone that tax increases are being sought by the city.
He stressed the cuts are not final, and city voters are being asked to approve an income tax hike in August. The half-percent increase, if passed, could avoid the firings and furloughs. Distelzweig said the announced cuts are not meant to be a threat to voters. “It’s math — whatever money is available,” he said.
Not meant to threaten voters? Yeah, right.
So, Obama’s feels-good “stimulus” plan was a pointless waste of money because it solved no problem but merely acted as a bandaid over the gaping wound of wasteful government spending, a wound that returned to a fully festering sore once the temporary “stimulus” money ran out.
On the other hand, Obama got a national platform to pretend that his policy was a “success” and was handed one more opportunity to propagandize the public, a public that will likely never hear that these “saved” cops are out of a job but two months later, anyway.
Obama’s entire presidency thus far is little else but smoke and mirrors. Or, as I say, hope and mirrors.
It was back slaps and grins all around as Obama celebrated his successful “stimulus” program. That was less than two months ago. Today, those same 25 new policemen whose jobs were “saved” by the great father in Washington have been laid off over lack of funds.
Obama’s great hope and mirrors campaign strikes its false stance as savior again, proving that there was no “stimulus” in the stimulus plan and that it was a false front all along meant only to serve as a part of Obama’s permanent political campaign effort. In reality, there’s just no there, there.
Anyone that believes that government spending can “save” anything is the sucker every con man is waiting for. This is further proof of the un-sustainability of an ever increasing government. And what will we see from this? Will we see government trim its budget, tighten its spending? Certainly not. We will see government require more money from tax payers instead of expecting of itself a renewed effort to live within its means. And those calls have already been issued.
Columbus Police Chief Walter Distelzweig is already reminding everyone that tax increases are being sought by the city.
He stressed the cuts are not final, and city voters are being asked to approve an income tax hike in August. The half-percent increase, if passed, could avoid the firings and furloughs. Distelzweig said the announced cuts are not meant to be a threat to voters. “It’s math — whatever money is available,” he said.
Not meant to threaten voters? Yeah, right.
So, Obama’s feels-good “stimulus” plan was a pointless waste of money because it solved no problem but merely acted as a bandaid over the gaping wound of wasteful government spending, a wound that returned to a fully festering sore once the temporary “stimulus” money ran out.
On the other hand, Obama got a national platform to pretend that his policy was a “success” and was handed one more opportunity to propagandize the public, a public that will likely never hear that these “saved” cops are out of a job but two months later, anyway.
Obama’s entire presidency thus far is little else but smoke and mirrors. Or, as I say, hope and mirrors.
May 27, 2009
Nominee: Bully On The Bench
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's nominee for US Supreme Court is described by Law Clerks on the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as being "not so smart" and is "a bully on the bench" according to people who have worked with her.One former Second Circuit clerk for another judge went so far as to say "She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren't penetrating and don't get to the heart of the issue."During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, "Will you please stop talking and let them talk?"Her opinions, although competent, are viewed by former prosecutors as not especially clean or tight, and sometimes miss the forest for the trees. It's customary, for example, for Second Circuit judges to circulate their draft opinions to invite a robust exchange of views. Sotomayor, several former clerks complained, rankled her colleagues by sending long memos that didn't distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestions--fixing typos and the like--rather than focusing on the core analytical issues.Competent but overtly racist and decidedly activistSome former clerks and prosecutors expressed concerns about her command of technical legal details: In 2001, for example, a conservative colleague, Ralph Winter, included an unusual footnote in a case suggesting that an earlier opinion by Sotomayor might have inadvertently misstated the law in a way that misled litigants.The most controversial case in which Sotomayor participated is Ricci v. DeStefano, the explosive case involving affirmative action in the New Haven fire department, which is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court.The City of New Haven, CT - a cesspool of politically-correct elected officials who are, collectively, Traitors to America and who deserve to be assassinated -- administered a written test for promotions in the City Fire Department.When the test results came back, only White firefighters passed the test; Blacks and Hispanics all failed. The Blacks and Hispanics threw a temper tantrum and the politically-correct charlatans on the City Council THREW OUT the test results!The White firefighters who passed, sued for reverse discrimination. A panel including Sotomayor ruled against the firefighters in a perfunctory unpublished opinion.This provoked Judge Cabranes, a fellow Clinton appointee on the Second Circuit, to object to the panel's opinion that contained "no reference whatsoever to the constitutional issues at the core of this case." (The extent of Sotomayor's involvement in the opinion itself is not publicly known.)In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor, as an appeals court judge, gave a speech declaring that the ethnicity and sex of a judge “may and will make a difference in our judging.”In her speech, Judge Sotomayor questioned the famous notion — often invoked by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her retired Supreme Court colleague, Sandra Day O’Connor — that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male . . . . ."Her remarks, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture at the University of California, Berkeley, were not the only instance in which she has publicly described her view of judging.This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”Judge Sotomayor has given several speeches about the importance of diversity. But her 2001 remarks at Berkeley, which were published by the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, went further, asserting that judges’ identities will affect legal outcomes.“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said, for jurists who are women and nonwhite, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”Her remarks came in the context of reflecting her own life experiences as a Hispanic female judge and on how the increasing diversity on the federal bench “will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging.COMMENTARY: This woman is absolutely unqualified to be on the bench in any capacity, never mind the U.S. Supreme Court. Her own law clerks say she isn't smart enough, she cannot delve into the issues of cases. Her own Judicial Colleagues have to tell her to shut up and let the lawyers argue a case. She makes no secret of the fact that she feels courts are where policy is made rather than by elected Legislatures and, she overtly claims that her gender and race causes her to come to different legal conclusions.For years, I have stated on my radio show that the reason Third World countries remain that way is because the occupants of those countries are genetically incapable of doing better. For that, I have been slammed as a racist.This Judge now admits that her race will affect the way she Judges things and will affect the development of the law. This absolutely confirms in every regard, my assessment about genetic capability for which I have been vilified.If we allow Third-World Judges to interpret our First (New) World ideals, America will devolve into a third world country just like the cesspools that heathen such a Sotomayor came from.
Update To This Blogs Breaking Story Of Donations Of Chrysler Donations
It's amazing how this blog was the first one to report the Chrysler dealership campaign contributions to the GOP and the effect it had on their closings. It seems now that every blog in the world has caught on to this fact. This blog doesn't have the high traffic that others have so we were lost in the dust. Gateway Pundit had this to say earlier, of course remember where you heard about the original story first.. .** Earlier it was reported that the Obama Administration may have targeted GOP donors in deciding which Chrysler dealerships would have to close their doors.** Last night it was discovered that a Big Dem Donor Group was allowed to keep all 6 Chrysler dealerships open.... And, their local competitors were eliminated by Obama's task force!!2008 Red and Blue Counties (Flickr)Now here is the latest on the Chrysler closings-- I was sent this earlier today:
I have obtained two pdf files from the bankruptcy court.One is the list of dealers to close and the other is the list to stay open.I am in the process right now of editing the data into comma delimited format for import to Excell and am about 2/3rd of the way through the closure listing.I haven't done any donation cross references yet and that will come.This has to be done manually ,which is very time consuming due to formatting issues with the data.But, so far in the shutdown list there is an extremely high correlation between dealers closing and congressional districts BHO lost.Texas is getting killed and Blue States are sliding by. Florida is also taking major hits and nearly all are in Republican Congressional Districts.Little West Virginia is getting hammered.I will know much better when I start doing all the cross reference work after I finally get the data into Excel, but that is going to take time since the data has to be formatted up manually and there are over 2000 dealers involved between the two lists.So far what I see smells big time.And, Reboot Congress is asking for some assistance:
I’ve created a list of the cut dealers that *simplifies* the process of gathering donation information from OpenSecrets. It’s a partial solution that needs lots of help from folks on the web. It’s a crowd sourced project.Previously:Hope, Change & Marxism: Did Obama Target GOP Donors In Chrysler Dealer Closings? (Video) Shock! Big Dem Donor Group Allowed to Keep Their 6 Chrysler Dealerships Open
I have obtained two pdf files from the bankruptcy court.One is the list of dealers to close and the other is the list to stay open.I am in the process right now of editing the data into comma delimited format for import to Excell and am about 2/3rd of the way through the closure listing.I haven't done any donation cross references yet and that will come.This has to be done manually ,which is very time consuming due to formatting issues with the data.But, so far in the shutdown list there is an extremely high correlation between dealers closing and congressional districts BHO lost.Texas is getting killed and Blue States are sliding by. Florida is also taking major hits and nearly all are in Republican Congressional Districts.Little West Virginia is getting hammered.I will know much better when I start doing all the cross reference work after I finally get the data into Excel, but that is going to take time since the data has to be formatted up manually and there are over 2000 dealers involved between the two lists.So far what I see smells big time.And, Reboot Congress is asking for some assistance:
I’ve created a list of the cut dealers that *simplifies* the process of gathering donation information from OpenSecrets. It’s a partial solution that needs lots of help from folks on the web. It’s a crowd sourced project.Previously:Hope, Change & Marxism: Did Obama Target GOP Donors In Chrysler Dealer Closings? (Video) Shock! Big Dem Donor Group Allowed to Keep Their 6 Chrysler Dealerships Open
May 26, 2009
President Numb Nuts In Action
How many of us have been to a carnival and saw the different shows and played at the rigged games and had a great time? Probably us all. Well here is another great game, TEST YOUR STOMACH. Here are some videos of what the liberals elected, Soros' puppet in action, a clueless stooge without a shred of executive experience, actually elected to office (with help from ACORN), and having a negative impact on our lives. So test your stomach and see if you can watch these videos without projectile vomiting into the nearest sh*tcan. This is what passes for a leader in the Dummycrat Nazi Party. Well liberals, hope it was worth it because these videos WILL be seen again, in 2011 and 2012. You elected a moron, a puppet of George Soros and when your party fragments because of it, we'll make sure to kick you when you're down...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5R6kVry4_c&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt6C1Sl3ZrU&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5R6kVry4_c&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt6C1Sl3ZrU&feature=player_embedded
Obama's Pick For The Supreme Court
EXCERPT: WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. President Barack Obama tapped U.S. Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice. If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.The trouble is, is that she is a member of the National Council of La Raza.LA RAZA means, The Race. There are many immigrant groups joined in the overall "La Raza" movement. The most prominent and mainstream organization is the National Council de La Raza -- the Council of "The Race". To most of the mainstream media, most members of Congress, and even many of their own members, the National Council of La Raza is no more than a Hispanic Rotary Club. But the National Council of La Raza succeeded in raking in over $15.2 million in federal grants last year alone, of which $7.9 million was in U.S. Department of Education grants for Charter Schools, and undisclosed amounts were for get-out-the-vote efforts supporting La Raza political positions. The Council of La Raza succeeded in having itself added to congressional hearings by Republican House and Senate leaders. And an anonymous senator even gave the Council of La Raza an extra $4 million in earmarked taxpayer money, supposedly for "housing reform," while La Raza continues to lobby the Senate for virtual open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens.
MEChA is a part of La Raza: "Chicano is our identity; it defines who we are as people. It rejects the notion that we...should assimilate into the Anglo-American melting pot...Aztlan was the legendary homeland of the Aztecas ... It became synonymous with the vast territories of the Southwest, brutally stolen from a Mexican people marginalized and betrayed by the hostile custodians of the Manifest Destiny." (Statement on University of Oregon MEChA Website, Jan. 3, 2006) This is their plan. "El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan" (The Spiritual Plan for Aztlan): "In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historical heritage but also of the brutal gringo invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the northern land of Aztlan from whence came our forefathers, reclaiming the land of their birth and consecrating the determination of our people of the sun, declare that the call of our blood is our power, our responsibility, and our inevitable destiny. ... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. ... We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan. For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada."They claim equal rights for all but their closing sentence in their motto means: "For The Race everything. Outside The Race, nothing."
Trust one anti-American to nominate another one.
MEChA is a part of La Raza: "Chicano is our identity; it defines who we are as people. It rejects the notion that we...should assimilate into the Anglo-American melting pot...Aztlan was the legendary homeland of the Aztecas ... It became synonymous with the vast territories of the Southwest, brutally stolen from a Mexican people marginalized and betrayed by the hostile custodians of the Manifest Destiny." (Statement on University of Oregon MEChA Website, Jan. 3, 2006) This is their plan. "El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan" (The Spiritual Plan for Aztlan): "In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historical heritage but also of the brutal gringo invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the northern land of Aztlan from whence came our forefathers, reclaiming the land of their birth and consecrating the determination of our people of the sun, declare that the call of our blood is our power, our responsibility, and our inevitable destiny. ... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. ... We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan. For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada."They claim equal rights for all but their closing sentence in their motto means: "For The Race everything. Outside The Race, nothing."
Trust one anti-American to nominate another one.
May 25, 2009
Pelosi And The Marxists
Like the president, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not have to go through a background investigation in order to get a security clearance. This loophole in the law enables the president and members of Congress to automatically qualify for security clearances, even if they have controversial backgrounds and associations, by virtue of the fact that they get elected to high office in Washington, D.C.
In the case of Speaker Pelosi, who is second in the line of succession to the presidency after the vice president, there is increasing concern about whether she can be trusted with national security secrets. But the concern not only involves her unsubstantiated charges against the CIA over what officials told her about the treatment of terrorists, but her close personal relationship with pro-Castro Rep. Barbara Lee and the "progressive" Hallinan family of San Francisco, once under scrutiny by the California Senate Fact-finding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities for their pro-Soviet propaganda efforts.
Pelosi used a Friday news conference to offer up other members of the House Democratic leadership as "human shields" to deflect questions from the press about the CIA controversy. They droned on about the liberal legislative agenda.
At the very end of the news conference, as Pelosi was trying to leave the podium and had already issued an edict that she didn't have anything more to say about the CIA matter, a reporter tried to ask a question about Rep. Steve King's intention to introduce a resolution asking the House to suspend Pelosi's security clearance until the controversy is resolved. The reporter asked, "And were you aware that Steve King is asking for your security clearance to be revoked?" But Pelosi walked away without commenting.
With the help of the mainstream media, Pelosi is obviously hoping that she can stonewall further inquiry. On Sunday's "Meet the Press," Washington Post liberal columnist Eugene Robinson, a follower of the Democratic Party line, declared that he wasn't sure that she was "in such terrible political danger" and that "People underestimate Nancy Pelosi sometimes as a politician."
Pelosi the politician is clearly depending on the press to stop asking questions.
However, since Pelosi and other elected officials don't have to go through background investigations, it is the job of the media to perform this function. In the case of Pelosi, it is long overdue.
San Francisco Democrat
Pelosi has represented the city of San Francisco, perhaps the most liberal in the nation, since 1987, and is a very close friend of Rep. Barbara Lee, who represents neighboring Oakland and Berkeley, California, and is the most vocal apologist for Communist Cuba in Congress today. Lee, head of the Congressional Black Caucus, recently led a delegation to Cuba to meet with the Castro brothers to discuss normalization of relations. But she paid no attention to political dissidents or political prisoners being held on the communist island.
Lee, who calls Pelosi "a magnificent woman" and "one of California's greatest representatives," began her career in the California state legislature as a secret member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a spin-off from the Communist Party. As a member of the staff of Rep. Ron Dellums, Lee was shown to have been collaborating with communist officials on the island of Grenada, according to documents captured after the liberation of that island nation. These revelations have not hurt Lee's standing with Pelosi and other "progressives." Indeed, Lee also served as the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
But even more interesting than the Barbara Lee connection is Pelosi's long-time friendship and association with Vincent and Vivian Hallinan, one of the most radical left-wing families in San Francisco over the course of five decades.
Pelosi hailed them as "one of San Francisco's great Irish families" in a March 17, 1999, statement, after the passing of Vivian Hallinan. "Vivian was a pioneer, a mentor and a leader," Pelosi said. "Our community was blessed by her presence and will long remember her many significant contributions to improving society. I will miss my friend, Vivian."
Notice use of the term "mentor."
Pelosi called Vivian Hallinan, who openly held "socialist" views, a "pioneer" in "a wide range of progressive causes."
But these causes included support for communists in Central America during the 1980s, when Soviet- and Cuban-backed forces were subverting Central America through violence and terrorism and fighting for control of the region.
Indeed, Pelosi paid tribute to Vivian Hallinan by inserting into the Congressional Record an article saying that she had "opposed U.S. policy in Central America" under President Reagan, had "befriended Daniel Ortega, Nicaragua's [Communist] Sandinista leader," and had met with Cuban dictator Castro.
"She was a role model for many of us," Pelosi said. "If Vincent was the lion, Vivian was the lioness."
"My mother and Nancy were pretty close," acknowledges Conn Hallinan, one of their sons.
Official Scrutiny
The names of the Hallinans, including some of their sons, are included in the annual volumes of the California State Senate Fact-Finding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities. The subcommittee was a well-regarded investigative body which examined not only communist activities in California but right-wing groups such as the John Birch Society and the Minutemen.
In the case of the Hallinans, there was a lot to examine. Vincent Hallinan, a lawyer who died in 1992, was a founding member of the San Francisco chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, officially designated a front of the Communist Party, and defended secret Communist Party member and labor leader Harry Bridges.
In addition, he was a self-described "roaring atheist" who specialized in attacks on the Catholic Church. In one case, according to the New York Times, he "sued the Roman Catholic Church for fraud, demanding that it prove the existence of heaven and hell."
Vincent Hallinan also ran for president on the ticket of the Progressive Party, "a creature of the Communist apparatus, and completely dominated by the Communist Party from start to finish," the subcommittee said.
A 1961 subcommittee report says that Vincent Hallinan traveled to the Soviet Union with his wife to vouch for the legitimacy of the communist show trial of Francis Gary Powers, the American U-2 pilot shot down over the Soviet Union. Powers' mission had been to document the Soviet missile build-up. It adds, "[Vincent] Hallinan's glowing accounts of the Soviet Union and favorable comments concerning the fairness accorded Powers at his trial were sold in great quantity by the Communist Book Stores both in San Francisco and in Los Angeles."
A 1953 edition of the report states that Vincent Hallinan was a participant in a meeting of the Committee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case, a "Communist front organization." The Rosenbergs were communists executed for committing atomic espionage against the United States on behalf of the Soviet Union.
A wealthy woman, Vivian Hallinan had contributed financially to one of Pelosi's campaigns. Her only other political contributions on the federal level, as recorded by the Federal Election Commission, went to Senator Barbara Boxer and Reps. Barbara Lee and Ronald V. Dellums.
The "Progressive Champion"
Despite her pro-communist record, Lee will be honored as a "progressive champion" at the June 2 "awards gala" sponsored by the Campaign for America's Future, perhaps the largest "progressive" group in the U.S. The gala, held in conjunction with a conference, is being chaired by the AFL-CIO, whose president, John Sweeney, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, is also being honored; the Service Employees International Union; the National Education Association; and Hollywood producer Norman Lear, among others.
Fenton Communications, the public relations firm which represented George Soros during his attempt to buy the White House in 2004, is one of several groups and individuals on the Gala Awards host committee.
At the group's 2006 conference, Pelosi was a featured attraction, telling the assembled "progressives" that if Democrats took control of Congress and made her speaker that Democrats would "make the most corrupt, closed Congress in history the most open and honest Congress in history."
On Friday, however, Pelosi tried desperately to avoid being open and honest about her charges against the CIA.
Time to Drop the Matter
One reporter did note that after Pelosi charged that she had been misled by the CIA, Republican House Leader John Boehner had said that she needed to produce the evidence or apologize, and that CIA director Leon Panetta has said the CIA was not in the practice of misleading Congress.
Pelosi replied, "I have made the statement that I'm going to make on this. I don't have anything more to say about it. I stand by my comments. And what we are doing is staying on our course and not be distracted from it in this distractive mode. We're going forward in a bipartisan way for jobs, health care, and energy for our country. And on the subject that you asked, I've made the statement that I'm going to make. I won't have anything more to that about it."
Pressed for further explanation, she reiterated, "I won't have anything more to say about it."
The New York Times thought the performance was impressive, declaring that Pelosi had stuck to the "script" and had not succumbed to "the impatient media horde."
This is a signal to the rest of the press that they should drop the matter.
In the case of Speaker Pelosi, who is second in the line of succession to the presidency after the vice president, there is increasing concern about whether she can be trusted with national security secrets. But the concern not only involves her unsubstantiated charges against the CIA over what officials told her about the treatment of terrorists, but her close personal relationship with pro-Castro Rep. Barbara Lee and the "progressive" Hallinan family of San Francisco, once under scrutiny by the California Senate Fact-finding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities for their pro-Soviet propaganda efforts.
Pelosi used a Friday news conference to offer up other members of the House Democratic leadership as "human shields" to deflect questions from the press about the CIA controversy. They droned on about the liberal legislative agenda.
At the very end of the news conference, as Pelosi was trying to leave the podium and had already issued an edict that she didn't have anything more to say about the CIA matter, a reporter tried to ask a question about Rep. Steve King's intention to introduce a resolution asking the House to suspend Pelosi's security clearance until the controversy is resolved. The reporter asked, "And were you aware that Steve King is asking for your security clearance to be revoked?" But Pelosi walked away without commenting.
With the help of the mainstream media, Pelosi is obviously hoping that she can stonewall further inquiry. On Sunday's "Meet the Press," Washington Post liberal columnist Eugene Robinson, a follower of the Democratic Party line, declared that he wasn't sure that she was "in such terrible political danger" and that "People underestimate Nancy Pelosi sometimes as a politician."
Pelosi the politician is clearly depending on the press to stop asking questions.
However, since Pelosi and other elected officials don't have to go through background investigations, it is the job of the media to perform this function. In the case of Pelosi, it is long overdue.
San Francisco Democrat
Pelosi has represented the city of San Francisco, perhaps the most liberal in the nation, since 1987, and is a very close friend of Rep. Barbara Lee, who represents neighboring Oakland and Berkeley, California, and is the most vocal apologist for Communist Cuba in Congress today. Lee, head of the Congressional Black Caucus, recently led a delegation to Cuba to meet with the Castro brothers to discuss normalization of relations. But she paid no attention to political dissidents or political prisoners being held on the communist island.
Lee, who calls Pelosi "a magnificent woman" and "one of California's greatest representatives," began her career in the California state legislature as a secret member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a spin-off from the Communist Party. As a member of the staff of Rep. Ron Dellums, Lee was shown to have been collaborating with communist officials on the island of Grenada, according to documents captured after the liberation of that island nation. These revelations have not hurt Lee's standing with Pelosi and other "progressives." Indeed, Lee also served as the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
But even more interesting than the Barbara Lee connection is Pelosi's long-time friendship and association with Vincent and Vivian Hallinan, one of the most radical left-wing families in San Francisco over the course of five decades.
Pelosi hailed them as "one of San Francisco's great Irish families" in a March 17, 1999, statement, after the passing of Vivian Hallinan. "Vivian was a pioneer, a mentor and a leader," Pelosi said. "Our community was blessed by her presence and will long remember her many significant contributions to improving society. I will miss my friend, Vivian."
Notice use of the term "mentor."
Pelosi called Vivian Hallinan, who openly held "socialist" views, a "pioneer" in "a wide range of progressive causes."
But these causes included support for communists in Central America during the 1980s, when Soviet- and Cuban-backed forces were subverting Central America through violence and terrorism and fighting for control of the region.
Indeed, Pelosi paid tribute to Vivian Hallinan by inserting into the Congressional Record an article saying that she had "opposed U.S. policy in Central America" under President Reagan, had "befriended Daniel Ortega, Nicaragua's [Communist] Sandinista leader," and had met with Cuban dictator Castro.
"She was a role model for many of us," Pelosi said. "If Vincent was the lion, Vivian was the lioness."
"My mother and Nancy were pretty close," acknowledges Conn Hallinan, one of their sons.
Official Scrutiny
The names of the Hallinans, including some of their sons, are included in the annual volumes of the California State Senate Fact-Finding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities. The subcommittee was a well-regarded investigative body which examined not only communist activities in California but right-wing groups such as the John Birch Society and the Minutemen.
In the case of the Hallinans, there was a lot to examine. Vincent Hallinan, a lawyer who died in 1992, was a founding member of the San Francisco chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, officially designated a front of the Communist Party, and defended secret Communist Party member and labor leader Harry Bridges.
In addition, he was a self-described "roaring atheist" who specialized in attacks on the Catholic Church. In one case, according to the New York Times, he "sued the Roman Catholic Church for fraud, demanding that it prove the existence of heaven and hell."
Vincent Hallinan also ran for president on the ticket of the Progressive Party, "a creature of the Communist apparatus, and completely dominated by the Communist Party from start to finish," the subcommittee said.
A 1961 subcommittee report says that Vincent Hallinan traveled to the Soviet Union with his wife to vouch for the legitimacy of the communist show trial of Francis Gary Powers, the American U-2 pilot shot down over the Soviet Union. Powers' mission had been to document the Soviet missile build-up. It adds, "[Vincent] Hallinan's glowing accounts of the Soviet Union and favorable comments concerning the fairness accorded Powers at his trial were sold in great quantity by the Communist Book Stores both in San Francisco and in Los Angeles."
A 1953 edition of the report states that Vincent Hallinan was a participant in a meeting of the Committee to Secure Justice in the Rosenberg Case, a "Communist front organization." The Rosenbergs were communists executed for committing atomic espionage against the United States on behalf of the Soviet Union.
A wealthy woman, Vivian Hallinan had contributed financially to one of Pelosi's campaigns. Her only other political contributions on the federal level, as recorded by the Federal Election Commission, went to Senator Barbara Boxer and Reps. Barbara Lee and Ronald V. Dellums.
The "Progressive Champion"
Despite her pro-communist record, Lee will be honored as a "progressive champion" at the June 2 "awards gala" sponsored by the Campaign for America's Future, perhaps the largest "progressive" group in the U.S. The gala, held in conjunction with a conference, is being chaired by the AFL-CIO, whose president, John Sweeney, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, is also being honored; the Service Employees International Union; the National Education Association; and Hollywood producer Norman Lear, among others.
Fenton Communications, the public relations firm which represented George Soros during his attempt to buy the White House in 2004, is one of several groups and individuals on the Gala Awards host committee.
At the group's 2006 conference, Pelosi was a featured attraction, telling the assembled "progressives" that if Democrats took control of Congress and made her speaker that Democrats would "make the most corrupt, closed Congress in history the most open and honest Congress in history."
On Friday, however, Pelosi tried desperately to avoid being open and honest about her charges against the CIA.
Time to Drop the Matter
One reporter did note that after Pelosi charged that she had been misled by the CIA, Republican House Leader John Boehner had said that she needed to produce the evidence or apologize, and that CIA director Leon Panetta has said the CIA was not in the practice of misleading Congress.
Pelosi replied, "I have made the statement that I'm going to make on this. I don't have anything more to say about it. I stand by my comments. And what we are doing is staying on our course and not be distracted from it in this distractive mode. We're going forward in a bipartisan way for jobs, health care, and energy for our country. And on the subject that you asked, I've made the statement that I'm going to make. I won't have anything more to that about it."
Pressed for further explanation, she reiterated, "I won't have anything more to say about it."
The New York Times thought the performance was impressive, declaring that Pelosi had stuck to the "script" and had not succumbed to "the impatient media horde."
This is a signal to the rest of the press that they should drop the matter.
May 21, 2009
This Is Why You Don't Put Muslim Terrorists In U.S. Jails Obama!!
The New York Post reports: "Four homegrown Muslim terrorists on a mission from hell were arrested last night as they planted what they thought were high-powered plastic explosives at two Bronx synagogues, authorities said." Why would they do something like that? "They stated they wanted to commit jihad," NYPD Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said in a press conference. Three of the four jihadi wannabes (to borrow the Post's formulation) converted to Islam after recent stints in jail.
JOHN adds: This case illustrates one of the perils of putting terrorist leaders in prisons, as opposed to special facilities like Guantanamo Bay.
JOHN adds: This case illustrates one of the perils of putting terrorist leaders in prisons, as opposed to special facilities like Guantanamo Bay.
CIA Torture Briefing Logs
Washington, DC -- Who knew what and when did they know it? That is the single most vexing question facing the US public with regards to which members of Congress were briefed by the CIA on "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT)" more commonly known as "torture" of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi has been telling the public that she didn't know what was going on and/or the CIA lied to her. This document will lay that lie to rest.The link below will provide you with the actual Log kept by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), proving which members of Congress knew what, when they knew it and which of their staff members were also present at these briefings!Once again, we have obtained documents from a government agency labeled FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY which are not supposed to be given to the media or to the public.We publish this document in the public interest because only an informed public can hold its government accountable.Click Here to download the official CIA - Congressional Torture Briefings LogClick Here for the Cover Letter sent with the log above
Dems Defeat Resolution of Pelosi Investigation
And, we were so hoping to see the liar frogmarched from the Capital.House Democrats smacked down an investigation on Speaker Pelosi today.FOX News reported:
House Democrats have defeated a Republican push to investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's claims that the CIA misled her in 2002 about whether waterboarding had been used against terrorism suspects.The House voted 252-172 to block the measure that would have created a bipartisan congressional panel.
House Democrats have defeated a Republican push to investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's claims that the CIA misled her in 2002 about whether waterboarding had been used against terrorism suspects.The House voted 252-172 to block the measure that would have created a bipartisan congressional panel.
Road To Rebellion
It cannot be said enough folks, elections have consequences and we're living those consequences right now. The Gunny blames stupid white liberals for putting a liar, a thug, and a deceiver in the Oval Office. Blacks at least have a reason, they voted for Maobama for racist reasons alone just like they do in Detroit, Trenton, Camden, Filthadelphia, DC, etc, etc. Chairman Zero is a friend of the world, extorting our Ersatz allies and overt enemies to higher levels of anti-Americanism. Onward and downward comrades! The stupid liberals who installed this fool thought that once in, the world "could be as one," to quote a line from one of the stupidest songs ever puked up, yet this has failed to happen. Also failing to happen was that the rise of the oceans would halt, global cooling or global heating, depending on the day of the week, would stop, Michelle Obambi's bulbous butt would shrink, and their kids would attend public schools in DC. Now, the Angry Gargoyle in North Korean has flexed his muscle, playing the libs for idiots yet again (remember Maddy Halfbright and BJ Bubba's laughable efforts here?) while China is on the rise, flexing their muscle against US Navy ships, and Iran just shot a missile capable of taking a nuclear warhead, albeit a small one, all of the way to Israel or Europe. But WE'RE the bad guys according to the Thug-in-Chief. Evidently, reparations for blacks are out of vogue, it's now time for America to pony up reparations FOR THE WORLD!
Liberals attack the Right on a daily basis for NOT giving The Mystical Magical Negro (LA Times) a chance, just like we should have given BJ Bubba a chance, over and over and over and over and over... This is nothing new to us; we've all seen this before from a liberal potus. BJ Bubba could not tell the truth to save his fat a** during his unimpressive years as the Liar-in-Thief and the lies, scandals, and impeachment trials came at us faster than Rosie O'Donnell shoving bean burritos down her neck! One needed a program to track the players and Comrade Zero is not far behind. Here is a website that tracks the lies of the Thug-in-Chief. http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/ The main focus of effort for this bumbling idiot seems to be eroding or rather, outright dodging of the US Constitution as he seeks to command private industry, dictate car emissions standards, bow to foreign sovereigns, and utter such nonsense that the Constitution:
"must break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and [the] Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. The document says what the states can't do to you, says what the Federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf."
Stunningly, this fool was actually allowed to TEACH the Constitution to students who did not know that they were being fleeced by the best flim-flam man to come out of the Chicago political sewer! The entire purpose of the US Constitution is to, listen up Comrade Zero, LIMIT GOVERNMENT! He swore to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic but he IS the enemy! His attacks on and efforts to erode and destroy the Constitution of the United States of America are impeachable offenses but no one has the guts to say that the Anointed One has no clothes. We Conservatives would rather die than allow this pawn of Soros to turn the Constitution into a sliced and diced "living and breathing" joke. Our Founding Fathers got it right, THE FIRST TIME!
Liberals whine that we on the Right are starting a civil war, not backing the potus, being big meanies, etc, but the reality of this entire issue not only has its roots in the 1960's that birthed the radicalism of Hitlery, Alinsky, DiFi, Boxer, Waxman, Reid, Rhambutt the Ballerina, Maobama, etc, but was exacerbated when the Democratic majority Congress attacked and slandered and then blocked the 1987 SCOTUS nomination of Judge Bork. Who led the charge? Why none other than Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy! Hypocrite. Liar. Drunkard. Then they followed that with continual attacks against Bush 43, printing classified information on the front page of the NY Obama Times, gave aid to our enemies in Fallujah via Waxman and Code Pink, and continue to consider criminal prosecutions against the Bush administration for being mean to captured Islamic terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the architect of 9/11. On April 21, 2009, Comrade Zero stated that he "left open the possibility of legally pursuing the Bush administration officials who formulated the policies that led to enhanced interrogation techniques."
Well boo-hoo. The Gunny wonders what Daniel Pearl would have to say about that. The liberals in America believe that if we could just "hope" for a socialized utopian world, those terrorists and the enemies of America will "change" and why, the liberal lamb will lie down with the islamofascist lion! We'll NEVER have to worry about a terrorist attack again! The radical liberals in Congress, under the guise of "progressiveness" (codeword for socialism/communism) are ready to try ANYONE who protected the American people, as per the US Constitution, from terrorist attacks. It is the JOB of the President and elected leaders to PROTECT US from THE ENEMY! Looks like these clowns are too busy bending over and kissing the knob of the Saudi king and groveling in the land of the euro-pee-ons to be much good there. The liberal's continued attempts to prosecution Bush administration officials are simply the continuation of the attacks on the USA since 1968.
The liberal-socialists, and that is what this breed really is, fervently believes that our Constitution SHOULD BE SUBJECTED to evolving standards of the times! They are down with change for the sake of change and then they'll hope for the best. Idiots. They rule by public opinion, dig judicial activism and legislating from the bench (when the people say NO!) and use ex post facto laws like BJ Bubba loose in a Girl's college dorm after lights out! But only if they can be used against CEO's, Christians, Conservative political officials, private citizens like Rush and Hannity, and any bank or business that Comrade Zero feels like being the boss of. The civil war that the left started, and is now scared to death of losing (we're playing by TEHIR ALINSKY RULES NOW) has grown in both intensity and bitterness as we stockpile guns and ammo and Janet Napwad calls us Vets "Right-Wing extremists" and seeks to limit our freedoms. Be careful what you libs wish for because when Conservatives regain control of House, Senate, and the Oval Office, we're going lib-hunting. (Hopefully for real).
Turbo Tax Timmy now has the power to fire private industry CEOs at the behest of his master, the puppet of Soros, Chairman Zero. The Kenyan Usurper bleated that America ignores the leadership of the Eurotrash but fails to note that they've done nothing but bring us World War I, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and a failure to live up to their NATO commitment in Afghanistan. Fat Germans on patrol! Rommel would sh*t his pants. So while The Cipher chatters off of TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States), kisses the knob of Faud, p*sses off our allies in Turkey and Israel, and tells us that we are not at war with the Islamofascists, Kim Jong Il continues to counterfeit American $100 bills, works to test its nuclear capability, and the mad mullah and President "I'm-in-a-jihad" still make deals for missile technology and work their centrifuges! Maybe a nasty note to them telling them to stop it will work, right libs?
Liberals laughed at the Tea Parties on April 15th that happened in 835 cities across the USA! It should be noted that after the Boston Tea Party, the British suppressed us more, increased taxation, stole individual property, quartered their soldiers where they pleased, and restricted personal freedom. We rebelled. Then the rebellion turned into an armed conflict at Lexington Green after the Brits tried, as the libs now try, to seize our weapons. It took years and a lot of bloodshed but we were eventually free from the oppressive government. Now that the liberals are running the show, we ARE becoming less exceptional, less free (as Maobama tries to force the Euroturd mold on us), and coming under the domination of some clowns in Brussels and the UN Building in NYC more and more, and all in the name of global diplomacy, saying we're sorry (for liberating the world, being the shining city on the hill, and being the ONE to help in times of crisis.) Comrade Zero and the radical liberals are giving away our God-given rights, our Judeo-Christian judicial system (albeit that it's broke), our economic juggernaught, and our government to the UN, the ICC, and other anti-American scumbags. When we're being dictated to by the weasels in euroland, when these surrender monkeys are dictating the path of the United States (HARD APORT MAOBAMA!), telling us how to live, what to spend, how much we can make, injecting political correctness into every aspect of our lives, and taxing the crap out of us to support the subservience to elitist socialists in a centralized government, it'll be 1775 all over again. Liberals had better start paying attention to that history lesson and learn it or continue to laugh at us and ignore us at their peril. We're not hoarding ammo libs, we're STOCKPILING IT!
Liberals attack the Right on a daily basis for NOT giving The Mystical Magical Negro (LA Times) a chance, just like we should have given BJ Bubba a chance, over and over and over and over and over... This is nothing new to us; we've all seen this before from a liberal potus. BJ Bubba could not tell the truth to save his fat a** during his unimpressive years as the Liar-in-Thief and the lies, scandals, and impeachment trials came at us faster than Rosie O'Donnell shoving bean burritos down her neck! One needed a program to track the players and Comrade Zero is not far behind. Here is a website that tracks the lies of the Thug-in-Chief. http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/ The main focus of effort for this bumbling idiot seems to be eroding or rather, outright dodging of the US Constitution as he seeks to command private industry, dictate car emissions standards, bow to foreign sovereigns, and utter such nonsense that the Constitution:
"must break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and [the] Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. The document says what the states can't do to you, says what the Federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf."
Stunningly, this fool was actually allowed to TEACH the Constitution to students who did not know that they were being fleeced by the best flim-flam man to come out of the Chicago political sewer! The entire purpose of the US Constitution is to, listen up Comrade Zero, LIMIT GOVERNMENT! He swore to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic but he IS the enemy! His attacks on and efforts to erode and destroy the Constitution of the United States of America are impeachable offenses but no one has the guts to say that the Anointed One has no clothes. We Conservatives would rather die than allow this pawn of Soros to turn the Constitution into a sliced and diced "living and breathing" joke. Our Founding Fathers got it right, THE FIRST TIME!
Liberals whine that we on the Right are starting a civil war, not backing the potus, being big meanies, etc, but the reality of this entire issue not only has its roots in the 1960's that birthed the radicalism of Hitlery, Alinsky, DiFi, Boxer, Waxman, Reid, Rhambutt the Ballerina, Maobama, etc, but was exacerbated when the Democratic majority Congress attacked and slandered and then blocked the 1987 SCOTUS nomination of Judge Bork. Who led the charge? Why none other than Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy! Hypocrite. Liar. Drunkard. Then they followed that with continual attacks against Bush 43, printing classified information on the front page of the NY Obama Times, gave aid to our enemies in Fallujah via Waxman and Code Pink, and continue to consider criminal prosecutions against the Bush administration for being mean to captured Islamic terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the architect of 9/11. On April 21, 2009, Comrade Zero stated that he "left open the possibility of legally pursuing the Bush administration officials who formulated the policies that led to enhanced interrogation techniques."
Well boo-hoo. The Gunny wonders what Daniel Pearl would have to say about that. The liberals in America believe that if we could just "hope" for a socialized utopian world, those terrorists and the enemies of America will "change" and why, the liberal lamb will lie down with the islamofascist lion! We'll NEVER have to worry about a terrorist attack again! The radical liberals in Congress, under the guise of "progressiveness" (codeword for socialism/communism) are ready to try ANYONE who protected the American people, as per the US Constitution, from terrorist attacks. It is the JOB of the President and elected leaders to PROTECT US from THE ENEMY! Looks like these clowns are too busy bending over and kissing the knob of the Saudi king and groveling in the land of the euro-pee-ons to be much good there. The liberal's continued attempts to prosecution Bush administration officials are simply the continuation of the attacks on the USA since 1968.
The liberal-socialists, and that is what this breed really is, fervently believes that our Constitution SHOULD BE SUBJECTED to evolving standards of the times! They are down with change for the sake of change and then they'll hope for the best. Idiots. They rule by public opinion, dig judicial activism and legislating from the bench (when the people say NO!) and use ex post facto laws like BJ Bubba loose in a Girl's college dorm after lights out! But only if they can be used against CEO's, Christians, Conservative political officials, private citizens like Rush and Hannity, and any bank or business that Comrade Zero feels like being the boss of. The civil war that the left started, and is now scared to death of losing (we're playing by TEHIR ALINSKY RULES NOW) has grown in both intensity and bitterness as we stockpile guns and ammo and Janet Napwad calls us Vets "Right-Wing extremists" and seeks to limit our freedoms. Be careful what you libs wish for because when Conservatives regain control of House, Senate, and the Oval Office, we're going lib-hunting. (Hopefully for real).
Turbo Tax Timmy now has the power to fire private industry CEOs at the behest of his master, the puppet of Soros, Chairman Zero. The Kenyan Usurper bleated that America ignores the leadership of the Eurotrash but fails to note that they've done nothing but bring us World War I, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and a failure to live up to their NATO commitment in Afghanistan. Fat Germans on patrol! Rommel would sh*t his pants. So while The Cipher chatters off of TOTUS (Teleprompter of the United States), kisses the knob of Faud, p*sses off our allies in Turkey and Israel, and tells us that we are not at war with the Islamofascists, Kim Jong Il continues to counterfeit American $100 bills, works to test its nuclear capability, and the mad mullah and President "I'm-in-a-jihad" still make deals for missile technology and work their centrifuges! Maybe a nasty note to them telling them to stop it will work, right libs?
Liberals laughed at the Tea Parties on April 15th that happened in 835 cities across the USA! It should be noted that after the Boston Tea Party, the British suppressed us more, increased taxation, stole individual property, quartered their soldiers where they pleased, and restricted personal freedom. We rebelled. Then the rebellion turned into an armed conflict at Lexington Green after the Brits tried, as the libs now try, to seize our weapons. It took years and a lot of bloodshed but we were eventually free from the oppressive government. Now that the liberals are running the show, we ARE becoming less exceptional, less free (as Maobama tries to force the Euroturd mold on us), and coming under the domination of some clowns in Brussels and the UN Building in NYC more and more, and all in the name of global diplomacy, saying we're sorry (for liberating the world, being the shining city on the hill, and being the ONE to help in times of crisis.) Comrade Zero and the radical liberals are giving away our God-given rights, our Judeo-Christian judicial system (albeit that it's broke), our economic juggernaught, and our government to the UN, the ICC, and other anti-American scumbags. When we're being dictated to by the weasels in euroland, when these surrender monkeys are dictating the path of the United States (HARD APORT MAOBAMA!), telling us how to live, what to spend, how much we can make, injecting political correctness into every aspect of our lives, and taxing the crap out of us to support the subservience to elitist socialists in a centralized government, it'll be 1775 all over again. Liberals had better start paying attention to that history lesson and learn it or continue to laugh at us and ignore us at their peril. We're not hoarding ammo libs, we're STOCKPILING IT!
Obama Was A Proud Graduate Of Alinsky Academy
"The most significant part of Barack Obama’s education was not at Columbia University or Harvard Law School, but the years he spent being trained in the Saul Alinsky system for community organizing and then practicing what he learned.” Eagleforum.org
All practicing leftists have been influenced by Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals; the essential primer for all good America hating radicals. Written by the great granddaddy of all community organizers, Alinsky’s book lays out the tactics to be employed in creating a revolution.
When I was growing up in Chicago in the 1960’s, these folks were known as “paid agitators”, a far more accurate description of what they do. Community organizers were carpet baggers who blew into town for the express purpose of whipping the locals into frenzy over some grievance, real or imagined. This type of “organizing” is not to be compared with legitimate, local grass roots organizations that get together to put pressure on local officials to bring about a change for the better. Alinsky style organizers are not concerned members of the community who pressure city hall into putting in a new stoplight. For the Alinskyite, the actual issue is of no consequence. The organizer doesn’t care about the community. The agenda is to gin up a revolt which gives the organizer power. As Alinsky put it: “You want to cause fear, confusion and retreat in the enemy, i.e. the Haves.” (Alinsky, Saul D. Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Toronto: Random House, 1971. Pg. 127).
Remember Hoffer’s work on mass movements: the organizer’s task is to inject the society with an ailment and then offer the movement as the cure. “Agitate, aggravate, educate, then organize.”
As is always the case with socialism, Alinsky’s programs never succeed. Barack Obama’s lack of success as a community organizer is what motivated him to pursue a law degree.
By all accounts, Barack Obama was a model Alinsky student; evidently results are not considered in the grading process. In actual practice, the results of Obama’s agitating were less than spectacular. He organized the residents of the Altgeld Gardens public housing project to have dangerous asbestos removed. It was a small victory, at best. Workers sealed the asbestos in some units but quickly abandoned the project. Some tenants still have asbestos today. A $500,000.00 initiative for a jobs bank was a flop. Despite a few bright moments, overall, Obama’s community organizing was ineffective in bringing any genuine help to the people he claimed to want to represent. Obama had the benefit of receiving his training from disciples who had studied with Alinsky himself; he went on to train hundreds of others in Alinskyism. Barack Obama has said that his Alinsky training was the best education of his life. A former fellow organizer told the New Republic that Obama was the “undisputed master” of agitation. (Freddoso, David. The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate. Washington, DC: Regnery, 2008).
What distinguished Alinsky from your run of the mill revolutionary is Alinsky’s preference to wreck the system from within the existing order rather than resort to violence; not that violence out of the question, however. Alinsky was a big believer in the end justifying the means.
Saul Alinsky also subscribed to a style of ethics that has been described as “very fluid.” In other words, there is no right or wrong in any absolute sense. Marxists despise religion, the original source of morality; the Marxist has substituted the state for the church. The future president’s mentor didn’t believe integrity was an important quality, but creating the illusion of integrity is essential.
Just how does one qualify for Alinsky training? Saul had specific traits he wanted to see in his pupils, number one and most important: ego. Alinsky believed the best organizers were the ones driven to play God; who were irreverent; could demonstrate a sense of humor, and had confidence. Eagleforum.org
Undeniably, Barry Obama was just the kind of guy Alinsky was looking for.
It is astounding that Obama is using the White House to harass private citizens. But Obama surely would have earned a gold star if Saul Alinsky was still with us. L. David Alinsky, son of Saul, submitted a letter to the Boston Globe which was published, extolling the virtues of dad’s star pupil. Right after the Democratic National Convention, Alinsky Jr. wrote: “I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” Boston.com
All practicing leftists have been influenced by Saul Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals; the essential primer for all good America hating radicals. Written by the great granddaddy of all community organizers, Alinsky’s book lays out the tactics to be employed in creating a revolution.
When I was growing up in Chicago in the 1960’s, these folks were known as “paid agitators”, a far more accurate description of what they do. Community organizers were carpet baggers who blew into town for the express purpose of whipping the locals into frenzy over some grievance, real or imagined. This type of “organizing” is not to be compared with legitimate, local grass roots organizations that get together to put pressure on local officials to bring about a change for the better. Alinsky style organizers are not concerned members of the community who pressure city hall into putting in a new stoplight. For the Alinskyite, the actual issue is of no consequence. The organizer doesn’t care about the community. The agenda is to gin up a revolt which gives the organizer power. As Alinsky put it: “You want to cause fear, confusion and retreat in the enemy, i.e. the Haves.” (Alinsky, Saul D. Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Toronto: Random House, 1971. Pg. 127).
Remember Hoffer’s work on mass movements: the organizer’s task is to inject the society with an ailment and then offer the movement as the cure. “Agitate, aggravate, educate, then organize.”
As is always the case with socialism, Alinsky’s programs never succeed. Barack Obama’s lack of success as a community organizer is what motivated him to pursue a law degree.
By all accounts, Barack Obama was a model Alinsky student; evidently results are not considered in the grading process. In actual practice, the results of Obama’s agitating were less than spectacular. He organized the residents of the Altgeld Gardens public housing project to have dangerous asbestos removed. It was a small victory, at best. Workers sealed the asbestos in some units but quickly abandoned the project. Some tenants still have asbestos today. A $500,000.00 initiative for a jobs bank was a flop. Despite a few bright moments, overall, Obama’s community organizing was ineffective in bringing any genuine help to the people he claimed to want to represent. Obama had the benefit of receiving his training from disciples who had studied with Alinsky himself; he went on to train hundreds of others in Alinskyism. Barack Obama has said that his Alinsky training was the best education of his life. A former fellow organizer told the New Republic that Obama was the “undisputed master” of agitation. (Freddoso, David. The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate. Washington, DC: Regnery, 2008).
What distinguished Alinsky from your run of the mill revolutionary is Alinsky’s preference to wreck the system from within the existing order rather than resort to violence; not that violence out of the question, however. Alinsky was a big believer in the end justifying the means.
Saul Alinsky also subscribed to a style of ethics that has been described as “very fluid.” In other words, there is no right or wrong in any absolute sense. Marxists despise religion, the original source of morality; the Marxist has substituted the state for the church. The future president’s mentor didn’t believe integrity was an important quality, but creating the illusion of integrity is essential.
Just how does one qualify for Alinsky training? Saul had specific traits he wanted to see in his pupils, number one and most important: ego. Alinsky believed the best organizers were the ones driven to play God; who were irreverent; could demonstrate a sense of humor, and had confidence. Eagleforum.org
Undeniably, Barry Obama was just the kind of guy Alinsky was looking for.
It is astounding that Obama is using the White House to harass private citizens. But Obama surely would have earned a gold star if Saul Alinsky was still with us. L. David Alinsky, son of Saul, submitted a letter to the Boston Globe which was published, extolling the virtues of dad’s star pupil. Right after the Democratic National Convention, Alinsky Jr. wrote: “I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” Boston.com
May 20, 2009
Campaign Donations Of Chrysler Dealerships That Are Closing
Before reading this post which has been up for about 8 days as of May 27th take note that every blog in the world has jumped on this story that was FIRST POSTED HERE...Chrysler announced the closing of 789 dealerships earlier this month. On today's radio program, Rush Limbaugh spoke for a few seconds about whether or not some of the dealership closings are the result of politics (campaign contributions). After hearing this, I decided to look up the contributions of the dealers on the Internet.Here are a few examples of the campaign donations made by some of the dealers who will close their doors shortly. I'm not anywhere close to going through the entire list yet. The figures are only from the 2004, 2006, and 2008 Election cycles:
(1) Michael E. Maroone
Mr. Maroone has 6 dealerships in Fort Lauderdale, FL that will close. Since 2003, he has donated $12,700 to the RNC, $10,000 to the Florida Republican party, and $2,300 to Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign.
(2) Vernon Buchanan
Vernon Buchanan is a member of the U.S. House from Florida since 2007. One of his dealerships in Venice, FL will close. In the past 3 election cycles, Mr. Buchanan has given $50,000 to the RNC, $20,000 to the Florida Republican party, $4,000 to President Bush's campaign, and numerous amounts of money to other Republican candidates for Congress.
(3) Larry Crain
Mr. Crain's dealership in Little Rock will close. He has given $1,000 to President Bush, $1,000 to Marvin Parks (U.S. House cndidate in Arkansas), $2,300 to Mike Huckabee's Presidential campaign, and $2,300 to John McCain's Presidential run.
(4) Thomas Ganley
Mr. Ganley has 3 dealership that will close in Lakewood, Ohio. He has given $1,250 to Sen. Voinovich, $200 to Sen. Dewine, $7,750 to the National Auto Dealers Association, and $250 to Steven Latourette.
(5) Ray Huffines
Mr. Huffines will have a dealership in Denton, TX lose. He and his family are huge donors to the GOP. He has gave at least $1,000 each to Sen. Brownback, Gov. Huckabee, and Sen. McCain during their Presidential runs. He gave $3,400 to Sen. Cornyn, $5,900 to Rep. Sam Johnson, $800 to Rep. Tom DeLay, and $5,000 to Jeb Hensarling.
(6) Ronald Hoover
Mr. Hoover has 2 dealerships in Charleston, SC that will close. He gave $1,000 to Pres. Bush, $1,000 to Senator Graham, $750 to Henry Brown, $500 to Charlie Condon, and $500 to the RNC.
(7) Roger Penske
Roger Penske has a delearship in Michigan that will close soon. He has given $28,500 to the republican Senate Committee and $15,000 to the RNC. He gave $2,300 to Guiliani's Presidential run, and more money to Senators Kyl, Alxander, Collins, and Elizabeth Dole. In the interests of fairness, he also gave small amounts to Michigan politicians Kilpatrick, Dingell, and Stabenow.
(8) J.J. Fitzgerald
The most interesting find so far is John Fitzgerald, Jr. and J.J. Fitzgerald III. They have two dealerships that will close soon in Maryland.
While the previous entries gave mostly to Republicans, these two guys gave most of their donations to the Democrats.
The two gave $3,800 to Chris Van Hollen, $1,000 to Rep. Hoyer, over $3,000 to Ben Cardin, and other small amounts to Barbara Mikulski, Wynn, and Dennis Hastert.
Since 2004, they gave $300 to Wesley Clark's Presidential run during the Primaries. In the General Election, they gave $1,000 to John Kerry. In the 2008 Democratic primaries, they gave $2,000 to Hillary Clinton. When the 2008 General Election came down to John McCain vs. Barack Obama, they didn't donate any money to Barack Obama. The Fitzgeralds gave $4,600 from May to September 2008 to John McCain's Presidential run.
(1) Michael E. Maroone
Mr. Maroone has 6 dealerships in Fort Lauderdale, FL that will close. Since 2003, he has donated $12,700 to the RNC, $10,000 to the Florida Republican party, and $2,300 to Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign.
(2) Vernon Buchanan
Vernon Buchanan is a member of the U.S. House from Florida since 2007. One of his dealerships in Venice, FL will close. In the past 3 election cycles, Mr. Buchanan has given $50,000 to the RNC, $20,000 to the Florida Republican party, $4,000 to President Bush's campaign, and numerous amounts of money to other Republican candidates for Congress.
(3) Larry Crain
Mr. Crain's dealership in Little Rock will close. He has given $1,000 to President Bush, $1,000 to Marvin Parks (U.S. House cndidate in Arkansas), $2,300 to Mike Huckabee's Presidential campaign, and $2,300 to John McCain's Presidential run.
(4) Thomas Ganley
Mr. Ganley has 3 dealership that will close in Lakewood, Ohio. He has given $1,250 to Sen. Voinovich, $200 to Sen. Dewine, $7,750 to the National Auto Dealers Association, and $250 to Steven Latourette.
(5) Ray Huffines
Mr. Huffines will have a dealership in Denton, TX lose. He and his family are huge donors to the GOP. He has gave at least $1,000 each to Sen. Brownback, Gov. Huckabee, and Sen. McCain during their Presidential runs. He gave $3,400 to Sen. Cornyn, $5,900 to Rep. Sam Johnson, $800 to Rep. Tom DeLay, and $5,000 to Jeb Hensarling.
(6) Ronald Hoover
Mr. Hoover has 2 dealerships in Charleston, SC that will close. He gave $1,000 to Pres. Bush, $1,000 to Senator Graham, $750 to Henry Brown, $500 to Charlie Condon, and $500 to the RNC.
(7) Roger Penske
Roger Penske has a delearship in Michigan that will close soon. He has given $28,500 to the republican Senate Committee and $15,000 to the RNC. He gave $2,300 to Guiliani's Presidential run, and more money to Senators Kyl, Alxander, Collins, and Elizabeth Dole. In the interests of fairness, he also gave small amounts to Michigan politicians Kilpatrick, Dingell, and Stabenow.
(8) J.J. Fitzgerald
The most interesting find so far is John Fitzgerald, Jr. and J.J. Fitzgerald III. They have two dealerships that will close soon in Maryland.
While the previous entries gave mostly to Republicans, these two guys gave most of their donations to the Democrats.
The two gave $3,800 to Chris Van Hollen, $1,000 to Rep. Hoyer, over $3,000 to Ben Cardin, and other small amounts to Barbara Mikulski, Wynn, and Dennis Hastert.
Since 2004, they gave $300 to Wesley Clark's Presidential run during the Primaries. In the General Election, they gave $1,000 to John Kerry. In the 2008 Democratic primaries, they gave $2,000 to Hillary Clinton. When the 2008 General Election came down to John McCain vs. Barack Obama, they didn't donate any money to Barack Obama. The Fitzgeralds gave $4,600 from May to September 2008 to John McCain's Presidential run.
Another View Of The Credit Card Legislation
Talk about rewarding bad behavior. From the NYT via HotAir: Responsible credit-card users to “subsidize” deadbeats now.
Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.
Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.
“It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”…
The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders.You. Have. Got. To. Be. Kidding. Me. Uh - isn't this going to basically be the death of the credit card industry? I mean, the only reason I have a credit card is for the goodies and convenience. I rack up frequent flyer miles and get cash back at the end of the year. I don't have any revolving credit card debt and therefore pay no finance charges or fees. Should the credit card companies try to charge me immediate interest or an annual fee, I will cancel the cards and just go with the debit card which is just as convenient to use. It's that simple. I will go Galt on the credit card companies. I dare say I won't be the only one either.It used to be that personal responsibility was treasured in this country, even by the government. In these days, that virtue is on its head as it appears that personal irresponsibility is held to a higher stand. Why the redistribution? Well, who do you think vote for Obama? The deadbeats or the responsible cardholders? In fact, since statistics will likely show racial disparities (it's more a function of income, but the party of identity politics always gets race involved) between deadbeats and those responsible, couldn't this be viewed as a form of reparations as well? HotAir adds:
Just a little friendly congressional intervention in the marketplace to shift risk from people who can’t afford the product to people who can. Hey — it worked out with mortgages, didn’t it? You’re already helping to pay off deadbeats’ homes. Why not help free them up to rack up some more credit-card debt too? This is simply a horrible idea foisted upon us at the worst possible time. It's rather funny how the Democrats turn a blind eye to responsible. Case-in-point is this quote in the Detroit News on the topic:
"Today is a victory for all credit cardholders," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who had sponsored a similar measure that passed the House earlier this month. "All" cardholders. I guess it depends on what the definition of "all" is... More on this topic over at Memorandum.
var addthis_pub="theblogprof";
Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.
Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.
“It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”…
The industry says that the proposals will force banks to issue fewer credit cards at greater cost to the current cardholders.You. Have. Got. To. Be. Kidding. Me. Uh - isn't this going to basically be the death of the credit card industry? I mean, the only reason I have a credit card is for the goodies and convenience. I rack up frequent flyer miles and get cash back at the end of the year. I don't have any revolving credit card debt and therefore pay no finance charges or fees. Should the credit card companies try to charge me immediate interest or an annual fee, I will cancel the cards and just go with the debit card which is just as convenient to use. It's that simple. I will go Galt on the credit card companies. I dare say I won't be the only one either.It used to be that personal responsibility was treasured in this country, even by the government. In these days, that virtue is on its head as it appears that personal irresponsibility is held to a higher stand. Why the redistribution? Well, who do you think vote for Obama? The deadbeats or the responsible cardholders? In fact, since statistics will likely show racial disparities (it's more a function of income, but the party of identity politics always gets race involved) between deadbeats and those responsible, couldn't this be viewed as a form of reparations as well? HotAir adds:
Just a little friendly congressional intervention in the marketplace to shift risk from people who can’t afford the product to people who can. Hey — it worked out with mortgages, didn’t it? You’re already helping to pay off deadbeats’ homes. Why not help free them up to rack up some more credit-card debt too? This is simply a horrible idea foisted upon us at the worst possible time. It's rather funny how the Democrats turn a blind eye to responsible. Case-in-point is this quote in the Detroit News on the topic:
"Today is a victory for all credit cardholders," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who had sponsored a similar measure that passed the House earlier this month. "All" cardholders. I guess it depends on what the definition of "all" is... More on this topic over at Memorandum.
var addthis_pub="theblogprof";
Obama's Credit Card Plan
The imperial president Obama was inaugurated four months ago.
The question: Am I better off today than I was four months ago?
NO!
Another question: Is there any hope that I will be better off a year from now than I am today?
HELL NO!
On Tuesday, Andrew Martin, the New York Times, warned that Obama's credit card plan would punish responsible card users.
Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years.
Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.
Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.
“It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”
Whether it's mortgages or credit cards or whatever, I'm sick of being PUNISHED for being responsible and having my act together.
I believe in being charitable. My household is not stingy with donations. Our total dramatically exceeds what Joe Biden and his wife give to charity, and what the Obamas gave before they had their eyes on the White House.
When it comes to spreading our wealth around, I want control. I don't want the government to determine my charitable giving.
But here we go again.
I have to bail out people that are irresponsible and living beyond their means.
I'm getting screwed.
...People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks.
“Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you’re making out like a bandit,” he said. “That’s a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.”
Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy cardholders — “deadbeats” in industry parlance, because they generate scant fee revenue.
“They aren’t charities. They have shareholders to report to,” he said, referring to banks and credit card companies. “Whatever is left in the model to work from, they will start to maneuver.”
I played by the rules, yet I'm going to be punished.
I have to pay because other people don't have the self-control and discipline to manage their spending.
I'm sick of being tapped to clean up others' messes. I'm sick of the Obama government planning ways to seize more and more of my money, taking away my freedoms, and generally messing with my life.
Today, Ron Lieber, the New York Times, is putting a happy face on the Obama plan to screw me.
At first glance, the sweeping credit card legislation that passed the Senate on Tuesday looks like a huge victory for consumers. The bill, after all, contains relief from penalty fees and certain interest rate spikes.
But for people who pay off their bills each month, and milk the card rewards programs for everything they’re worth, there is some cause for concern.
For months now, the card companies have been threatening to cut rewards programs sharply to make up for revenue lost because of the new restrictions.
My guess, however, is that this talk is just so much saber-rattling.
Card companies want to make money, and big spenders help them do it, even if those cardholders do not go into debt.
First, let’s lay out the things we know will change because of the new legislation. The bill is chock-full of new rules, which will take effect at various points in the year after President Obama signs the final legislation.
Lieber discusses eight of the changed rules, ones that don't really impact responsible card users.
Then, he delivers the good news!
...So will credit card companies kill reward programs or drastically scale most of them back? Of course not.
“If you strip away the reward component of a credit card, it’s essentially a commodity,” said Rick Ferguson, editorial director at the loyalty marketing company LoyaltyOne. “The reward is what gives it its personality. It works from a branding perspective as well as a mechanism to influence customer behavior and consolidate spending on a particular card.”
That last part is crucial. People who spend a ton generate fees galore from merchants, and that money helps the card company stay in business. So you may soon see card companies giving away more goodies or lowering annual fees for people who hit certain spending thresholds each year. American Express already does this on a number of cards.
The NYT has done an about-face. Only the day before, Martin spread the doom and gloom message.
Now, Lieber is spreading the word that responsible card users WILL NOT have to carry the burden of those who made irresponsible choices with their credit cards.
In fact, people like me "may see card companies giving away more goodies."
This has the scent of pure propaganda.
Lieber concludes his column with another turnaround.
Also, keep in mind that you may have more control over what the card companies do to you than you may think.
If you don’t like the new fees and other things that banks will soon be testing as they grapple with their new economic reality, then make some noise. Send a note to me at rlieber@nytimes.com, so I can write about the latest foolishness — or consumer-friendly twist. At the very least, all of our complaints to the higher-ups at the banks may help persuade the companies to head in another direction.
“Work your way up the chain,” said Dennis C. Moroney, research director for bank cards at TowerGroup, a MasterCard-owned financial services consultant. After all, it may cost less to appease you than it would to replace you.
All of a sudden, Lieber talks about "new fees and other things that banks will soon be testing." Huh?
Everything was rosy. Don't worry, be happy. Then, POW. He does a 180, back to reality. Forget Lieber's heavy duty sugarcoating.
He wants aggravated people to send him their complaints so he can try to persuade the credit card "companies to head in another direction." Sure.
Send in those complaints to Lieber. That will help.
The fact is, once again, responsible people will have to bail out the irresponsible. We will be punished because we did the right thing. We will have to carry the irresponsible on our backs.
Here's a thought: Why not hold the irresponsible responsible for their own choices?
I use credit cards as a convenience. If it costs me, I'll stop using the cards if necessary.
Kiss this customer goodbye.
The solution on the credit card matter is simple for me, but it's still disturbing to have the out of control Dems and imperial president Obama screwing up my life.
The question: Am I better off today than I was four months ago?
NO!
Another question: Is there any hope that I will be better off a year from now than I am today?
HELL NO!
On Tuesday, Andrew Martin, the New York Times, warned that Obama's credit card plan would punish responsible card users.
Credit cards have long been a very good deal for people who pay their bills on time and in full. Even as card companies imposed punitive fees and penalties on those late with their payments, the best customers racked up cash-back rewards, frequent-flier miles and other perks in recent years.
Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.
Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.
“It will be a different business,” said Edward L. Yingling, the chief executive of the American Bankers Association, which has been lobbying Congress for more lenient legislation on behalf of the nation’s biggest banks. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.”
Whether it's mortgages or credit cards or whatever, I'm sick of being PUNISHED for being responsible and having my act together.
I believe in being charitable. My household is not stingy with donations. Our total dramatically exceeds what Joe Biden and his wife give to charity, and what the Obamas gave before they had their eyes on the White House.
When it comes to spreading our wealth around, I want control. I don't want the government to determine my charitable giving.
But here we go again.
I have to bail out people that are irresponsible and living beyond their means.
I'm getting screwed.
...People who routinely pay off their credit card balances have been enjoying the equivalent of a free ride, he said, because many have not had to pay an annual fee even as they collect points for air travel and other perks.
“Despite all the terrible things that have been said, you’re making out like a bandit,” he said. “That’s a third of credit card customers, 50 million people who have gotten a great deal.”
Robert Hammer, an industry consultant, said the legislation might have the broad effect of encouraging card issuers to become ever more reliant on fees from marginal customers as well as creditworthy cardholders — “deadbeats” in industry parlance, because they generate scant fee revenue.
“They aren’t charities. They have shareholders to report to,” he said, referring to banks and credit card companies. “Whatever is left in the model to work from, they will start to maneuver.”
I played by the rules, yet I'm going to be punished.
I have to pay because other people don't have the self-control and discipline to manage their spending.
I'm sick of being tapped to clean up others' messes. I'm sick of the Obama government planning ways to seize more and more of my money, taking away my freedoms, and generally messing with my life.
Today, Ron Lieber, the New York Times, is putting a happy face on the Obama plan to screw me.
At first glance, the sweeping credit card legislation that passed the Senate on Tuesday looks like a huge victory for consumers. The bill, after all, contains relief from penalty fees and certain interest rate spikes.
But for people who pay off their bills each month, and milk the card rewards programs for everything they’re worth, there is some cause for concern.
For months now, the card companies have been threatening to cut rewards programs sharply to make up for revenue lost because of the new restrictions.
My guess, however, is that this talk is just so much saber-rattling.
Card companies want to make money, and big spenders help them do it, even if those cardholders do not go into debt.
First, let’s lay out the things we know will change because of the new legislation. The bill is chock-full of new rules, which will take effect at various points in the year after President Obama signs the final legislation.
Lieber discusses eight of the changed rules, ones that don't really impact responsible card users.
Then, he delivers the good news!
...So will credit card companies kill reward programs or drastically scale most of them back? Of course not.
“If you strip away the reward component of a credit card, it’s essentially a commodity,” said Rick Ferguson, editorial director at the loyalty marketing company LoyaltyOne. “The reward is what gives it its personality. It works from a branding perspective as well as a mechanism to influence customer behavior and consolidate spending on a particular card.”
That last part is crucial. People who spend a ton generate fees galore from merchants, and that money helps the card company stay in business. So you may soon see card companies giving away more goodies or lowering annual fees for people who hit certain spending thresholds each year. American Express already does this on a number of cards.
The NYT has done an about-face. Only the day before, Martin spread the doom and gloom message.
Now, Lieber is spreading the word that responsible card users WILL NOT have to carry the burden of those who made irresponsible choices with their credit cards.
In fact, people like me "may see card companies giving away more goodies."
This has the scent of pure propaganda.
Lieber concludes his column with another turnaround.
Also, keep in mind that you may have more control over what the card companies do to you than you may think.
If you don’t like the new fees and other things that banks will soon be testing as they grapple with their new economic reality, then make some noise. Send a note to me at rlieber@nytimes.com, so I can write about the latest foolishness — or consumer-friendly twist. At the very least, all of our complaints to the higher-ups at the banks may help persuade the companies to head in another direction.
“Work your way up the chain,” said Dennis C. Moroney, research director for bank cards at TowerGroup, a MasterCard-owned financial services consultant. After all, it may cost less to appease you than it would to replace you.
All of a sudden, Lieber talks about "new fees and other things that banks will soon be testing." Huh?
Everything was rosy. Don't worry, be happy. Then, POW. He does a 180, back to reality. Forget Lieber's heavy duty sugarcoating.
He wants aggravated people to send him their complaints so he can try to persuade the credit card "companies to head in another direction." Sure.
Send in those complaints to Lieber. That will help.
The fact is, once again, responsible people will have to bail out the irresponsible. We will be punished because we did the right thing. We will have to carry the irresponsible on our backs.
Here's a thought: Why not hold the irresponsible responsible for their own choices?
I use credit cards as a convenience. If it costs me, I'll stop using the cards if necessary.
Kiss this customer goodbye.
The solution on the credit card matter is simple for me, but it's still disturbing to have the out of control Dems and imperial president Obama screwing up my life.
L.A. Times Demanding Torture Photos Be Released
Oh, this is rich!The LA Times demanded this week that President Obama release the detainee torture photos:The Times insisted, "The truth must come out."Of course, this is the same outfit that hid a video of Barack Obama attending a Jew-bash and toasting a former PLO operative Rashid Khalidi before the election.Rashid Khalidi and Bill Ayers were practically best friends.And, both Ayers and Obama signed the commemorative book given to Khalidi at his going away party.But the LA Times would not release the video.In case they forgot... There was even a "Free the Tape" protest outside their building before the election:Mere Rhetoric has more photos and video.Oh, the irony.
May 19, 2009
Taxpayers To Shell Out Money To Chinese Hookers
Via Redstate:
Chinese hookers have a drinking problem. Obama has the answer: U.S. Tax money. So it appears that the President of “change” seems to be The One that drunken Chinese prostitutes “have been waiting for.”
Our informative friends at CNSNews.com discovered that the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse (NIAA) has been awarded $2.6 million U.S. tax dollars to help train Chinese prostitutes to “drink responsibly on the job.” Yes, I said Chinese prostitutes… in China. One wonders if the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse missed the salient fact that they have the word National in their moniker? Or perhaps the NIAA just missed that the nation in their title is supposed to be our nation, not China’s?
I guess it’s heartwarming that the NIAA cares so deeply about China’s FSWs (that is university speak for whores — Female Sex Workers), and all, but what of American prostitutes? Are they unworthy of the attention of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse? Don’t our oh, so intellectual university pinheads care about our own home-grown drunken whores?hereGuess not.
I wonder what we could have done with that money here in the States. How about investing in small business! What a novel idea. It is unbelievable how inept our government is.
For the full story click here
Chinese hookers have a drinking problem. Obama has the answer: U.S. Tax money. So it appears that the President of “change” seems to be The One that drunken Chinese prostitutes “have been waiting for.”
Our informative friends at CNSNews.com discovered that the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse (NIAA) has been awarded $2.6 million U.S. tax dollars to help train Chinese prostitutes to “drink responsibly on the job.” Yes, I said Chinese prostitutes… in China. One wonders if the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse missed the salient fact that they have the word National in their moniker? Or perhaps the NIAA just missed that the nation in their title is supposed to be our nation, not China’s?
I guess it’s heartwarming that the NIAA cares so deeply about China’s FSWs (that is university speak for whores — Female Sex Workers), and all, but what of American prostitutes? Are they unworthy of the attention of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse? Don’t our oh, so intellectual university pinheads care about our own home-grown drunken whores?hereGuess not.
I wonder what we could have done with that money here in the States. How about investing in small business! What a novel idea. It is unbelievable how inept our government is.
For the full story click here
President Orwell
It was George Orwell who gave us the phrase “Double Speak” in his famous novel, “1984”, an allegory of totalitarian dictatorship and a warning against the threat of Communism embodied in the then Soviet Union. The Russians and the people in the captive Soviet satellite nations all knew they were being lied to by the leadership and their media.
The glow is beginning to dim around President Obama. It hasn’t taken long because of an intense flow of legislation and appointments, virtually all of which has been dubious, if not directly harmful to the nation’s economy and security.
That said, he was warmly greeted by the many students and others attending the commencement at Notre Dame. It wasn’t merely that he is President, but that the students in that audience were simply too young, too naïve, too unschooled in the history of our nation and the world to recognize a great deceiver like Obama.
Obama’s ability to impose crushing outlays of billions from the public treasury and then warn against the dangers of those same actions were captured recently in a Bloomberg News article that began, “President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending ‘unsustainable’, warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.”
In his first hundred days, with the complicity of the Congress, President Obama has saddled more debt on U.S. citizens than all of the combined Presidents that preceded him. The debt we’ve had has always been sustained by borrowing from other nations; in more recent years, China and Japan.
It is utterly and completely duplicitous to create such debt and than warn against it.
It is Orwellian. It is pure evil.
It is illegal by the terms of the U.S. Constitution to tap into public funds, the U.S. treasury, to give billions in bailouts to private industry and to financial firms such as banks and insurance companies.
It is a crime to dismiss the sanctity of contract law by turning over ownership of an automobile company to the union that brought it to ruin and to ignore the legal rights of those who loaned billions to it under terms guaranteeing they would be the first to be repaid in the event of bankruptcy.
It is the worst folly to claim that rich people, no matter how one defines “rich”, do not have a right to the money they have earned.
President Orwell…er, President Obama is engaging in the familiar and wicked practice of class warfare, the essence of socialism and communism. It seeks to divide Americans from each other and to play on the worst emotions of envy, ignoring the abundance of opportunity our society and economic system has always offered everyone.
The ultimate goal is to impoverish every one. To destroy or drive out leading industries in America, to deny the growth of the energy industries and sources needed to power America.
In January, President Obama said, “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity prices would necessarily skyrocket. . . . Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, natural gas—you name it—whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”
So, beyond the soothing calls to be open to opposing points of view lies the implacable agenda of President Obama and his administration to do terrible harm to the United States of America.
It is Orwellian. It is pure evil.
The glow is beginning to dim around President Obama. It hasn’t taken long because of an intense flow of legislation and appointments, virtually all of which has been dubious, if not directly harmful to the nation’s economy and security.
That said, he was warmly greeted by the many students and others attending the commencement at Notre Dame. It wasn’t merely that he is President, but that the students in that audience were simply too young, too naïve, too unschooled in the history of our nation and the world to recognize a great deceiver like Obama.
Obama’s ability to impose crushing outlays of billions from the public treasury and then warn against the dangers of those same actions were captured recently in a Bloomberg News article that began, “President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending ‘unsustainable’, warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.”
In his first hundred days, with the complicity of the Congress, President Obama has saddled more debt on U.S. citizens than all of the combined Presidents that preceded him. The debt we’ve had has always been sustained by borrowing from other nations; in more recent years, China and Japan.
It is utterly and completely duplicitous to create such debt and than warn against it.
It is Orwellian. It is pure evil.
It is illegal by the terms of the U.S. Constitution to tap into public funds, the U.S. treasury, to give billions in bailouts to private industry and to financial firms such as banks and insurance companies.
It is a crime to dismiss the sanctity of contract law by turning over ownership of an automobile company to the union that brought it to ruin and to ignore the legal rights of those who loaned billions to it under terms guaranteeing they would be the first to be repaid in the event of bankruptcy.
It is the worst folly to claim that rich people, no matter how one defines “rich”, do not have a right to the money they have earned.
President Orwell…er, President Obama is engaging in the familiar and wicked practice of class warfare, the essence of socialism and communism. It seeks to divide Americans from each other and to play on the worst emotions of envy, ignoring the abundance of opportunity our society and economic system has always offered everyone.
The ultimate goal is to impoverish every one. To destroy or drive out leading industries in America, to deny the growth of the energy industries and sources needed to power America.
In January, President Obama said, “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity prices would necessarily skyrocket. . . . Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, natural gas—you name it—whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”
So, beyond the soothing calls to be open to opposing points of view lies the implacable agenda of President Obama and his administration to do terrible harm to the United States of America.
It is Orwellian. It is pure evil.
Libtards Are Just Downright Miserable
It's funny when what one knows to be true is verified by a study. The Pew Research Center released a study that shows that Republicans are happier than Democrats. No kidding. We work, live life, and enjoy the fruits of our labor (when they're not taxed to feed the parasites by liberals) and basically chase our dream. In fact, the Gunny was on the road this weekend and had the pleasure of meeting a right-wing extremist worth almost a billion dollars. He started with ONE DUMP TRUCK and worked 70-80 hours A WEEK and now owns quarries, paving companies, construction companies, etc. He is, as he put it, "chasing his dream." Appears he caught it as well. The REAL Abraham Lincoln (not the wannabe in the White house today) stated: "Most people are as happy as they make up their minds to be." We as Conservatives are far happier than the libstain moonbats who wake up angry, live angry, go to sleep angry, and die angry (but not soon enough for the Gunny). Just compare our Tea Party's to the liberal moonbats screeching hate fests, a number of them recorded on film by Zombie. http://zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/ EXCERPT: Overall happiness among U.S. residents has not changed much over the years, according to the latest survey by the Pew Research Center that finds 34 percent of adults are very happy. Among 3,014 telephone respondents, half reported being pretty happy, and 15 percent said they are not too happy. The survey, released this week, points out several disparities based on lifestyle, beliefs and political persuasion:
1. Republicans are happier than Democrats.
2. People who worship frequently are happier than those who don't.
3. Married people are happier than the unmarried.
About 45 percent of Republicans said they were very happy, compared with 30 percent of Democrats. Republicans have been happier in surveys going back to 1972, the Pew study notes. The reason might seem obvious, since "Republicans tend to have more money than Democrats, and—as we've already discovered—people who have more money tend to be happier," the report states. But even after adjusting for income, poor Republicans are happier than poor Democrats, and rich Republicans are happier than rich Democrats. What about religion? Forty-three percent of people who attend religious services weekly or more say they're very happy, compared to 26 percent of those who go seldom or never. The Pew analysis does not answer the question of how religion, Republicanism and happiness might be related, however.
Maybe what the real deal is, is that we on the Right follow what is PROVEN to be right, and that is: Life, Liberty, and the Pusuit of HAPPINESS! Something our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us and wrote it into the preamble of the Declaration of Independence. Why we're more happy than liberal drones seems to be that WE dn't count on the government for everything as they do. For example, the Obama economy sucks and it's getting worse but there are opportunities to invest and take risks that may pay off in the long run. We take those risks, libs don't. They'll take a welfare check in a NY nanosecond but buying a home to fix up and rent out? Nope. Buying stock in a company that may perform? Nope. Opening one's own business? Nope. We seek independence to use our talents (on loan from God as Rush says) to pursue our dreams, libs want everything handed to them. When we fail, we drop back ten yards and think about our avenues of approach. Stressful? HELL YES! Rewarding in the end? HELL YES! Liberals want to suck on the government teat from the cradle to the grave and when the t*tty runs dry, they start whining.
In the study, Easterbrook writes: "Research shows that people who are grateful, optimistic and forgiving have better experiences with their lives, more happiness, fewer strokes, and higher incomes." EXACTLY! WHO can't claim that Conservatves are more generous, more forgiving, more grateful for what we have (we're more religious), and that we're more optimistic about the future. They don't call the Democrat Nazi Party the party of doom and gloom for nothing. In fact, listen to the pablum spewed by the Mystical Magical Negro (LA Times) in the year PRIOR to the election and ever since the clown was sworn-in, on the bad economy, the evil capitalists, the impending doom of gloBULL warming, now gloBULL cooling, etc, etc, ad nauseum.Perhaps the most important part of the stusy is that it SHOWS Conservatives/Republicans to better able to cope with difficulties. When WE encounter a problem, WE think of a solution. When the libvermin encounter a problem as a child they run to Mommy. As an adult, they run to the government. Indeed, since the libstains seized power in the Congress in Jan 2007, they have done NOTHING but pass law after law trying to take every bump out of the road for their whiners. Typical libgirls.
It appears that Freud, theorized that unhappiness is a default condition because it takes less effort to be unhappy than to be happy. Again we see that the inherent LAZINESS of liberals keeps them oppressed and holds them back. Again, we WORK, LIVE LIFE, and are happy. Maybe the Gunny should pen a children's reading primer, "the big brown dog p*ssed on the lazy liberal!" haha. Or even better, "See the Lazy Liberals Live in Misery" and provide examples to the kiddies on how liberals suck, how to spot them, and better still, how to effectively taunt them and savor their Schadenfreude! haha.
"If you are looking for something to complain about, you are absolutely certain to find it. It requires some effort to achieve a happy outlook on life, and most people don't make it. Most people take the path of least resistance. Far too many people today don't make the steps to make their life more fulfilling one." Easterbrook.So as we can see, the whiners, parasites, crybabies, sissies, metrosexuals, dolts, drones, idiots, and malingerers all gravitate to the the Democrat Nazi Party, which is comprised, the Gunny should relate, of 100% LAWYERS! The very vermin who exist simply to feed off of others and to make OUR lives more difficult as they twist the law to suit their purposes. SO right-wingers, BE HAPPY for who you are and what you are and REVEL in the fact that our enemies are miserable creatures living a p*ss-poor life full of hate and discontent. We'll win by OUTLIVING the self-aborting vermin! haha. SUCK ON THAT LIBERALS!
1. Republicans are happier than Democrats.
2. People who worship frequently are happier than those who don't.
3. Married people are happier than the unmarried.
About 45 percent of Republicans said they were very happy, compared with 30 percent of Democrats. Republicans have been happier in surveys going back to 1972, the Pew study notes. The reason might seem obvious, since "Republicans tend to have more money than Democrats, and—as we've already discovered—people who have more money tend to be happier," the report states. But even after adjusting for income, poor Republicans are happier than poor Democrats, and rich Republicans are happier than rich Democrats. What about religion? Forty-three percent of people who attend religious services weekly or more say they're very happy, compared to 26 percent of those who go seldom or never. The Pew analysis does not answer the question of how religion, Republicanism and happiness might be related, however.
Maybe what the real deal is, is that we on the Right follow what is PROVEN to be right, and that is: Life, Liberty, and the Pusuit of HAPPINESS! Something our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us and wrote it into the preamble of the Declaration of Independence. Why we're more happy than liberal drones seems to be that WE dn't count on the government for everything as they do. For example, the Obama economy sucks and it's getting worse but there are opportunities to invest and take risks that may pay off in the long run. We take those risks, libs don't. They'll take a welfare check in a NY nanosecond but buying a home to fix up and rent out? Nope. Buying stock in a company that may perform? Nope. Opening one's own business? Nope. We seek independence to use our talents (on loan from God as Rush says) to pursue our dreams, libs want everything handed to them. When we fail, we drop back ten yards and think about our avenues of approach. Stressful? HELL YES! Rewarding in the end? HELL YES! Liberals want to suck on the government teat from the cradle to the grave and when the t*tty runs dry, they start whining.
In the study, Easterbrook writes: "Research shows that people who are grateful, optimistic and forgiving have better experiences with their lives, more happiness, fewer strokes, and higher incomes." EXACTLY! WHO can't claim that Conservatves are more generous, more forgiving, more grateful for what we have (we're more religious), and that we're more optimistic about the future. They don't call the Democrat Nazi Party the party of doom and gloom for nothing. In fact, listen to the pablum spewed by the Mystical Magical Negro (LA Times) in the year PRIOR to the election and ever since the clown was sworn-in, on the bad economy, the evil capitalists, the impending doom of gloBULL warming, now gloBULL cooling, etc, etc, ad nauseum.Perhaps the most important part of the stusy is that it SHOWS Conservatives/Republicans to better able to cope with difficulties. When WE encounter a problem, WE think of a solution. When the libvermin encounter a problem as a child they run to Mommy. As an adult, they run to the government. Indeed, since the libstains seized power in the Congress in Jan 2007, they have done NOTHING but pass law after law trying to take every bump out of the road for their whiners. Typical libgirls.
It appears that Freud, theorized that unhappiness is a default condition because it takes less effort to be unhappy than to be happy. Again we see that the inherent LAZINESS of liberals keeps them oppressed and holds them back. Again, we WORK, LIVE LIFE, and are happy. Maybe the Gunny should pen a children's reading primer, "the big brown dog p*ssed on the lazy liberal!" haha. Or even better, "See the Lazy Liberals Live in Misery" and provide examples to the kiddies on how liberals suck, how to spot them, and better still, how to effectively taunt them and savor their Schadenfreude! haha.
"If you are looking for something to complain about, you are absolutely certain to find it. It requires some effort to achieve a happy outlook on life, and most people don't make it. Most people take the path of least resistance. Far too many people today don't make the steps to make their life more fulfilling one." Easterbrook.So as we can see, the whiners, parasites, crybabies, sissies, metrosexuals, dolts, drones, idiots, and malingerers all gravitate to the the Democrat Nazi Party, which is comprised, the Gunny should relate, of 100% LAWYERS! The very vermin who exist simply to feed off of others and to make OUR lives more difficult as they twist the law to suit their purposes. SO right-wingers, BE HAPPY for who you are and what you are and REVEL in the fact that our enemies are miserable creatures living a p*ss-poor life full of hate and discontent. We'll win by OUTLIVING the self-aborting vermin! haha. SUCK ON THAT LIBERALS!
Spending Into Nowhere
"But the long-term deficit and debt that we have accumulated is unsustainable. We can't keep on just borrowing from China, or borrowing from other countries — (applause) — because part of it is, we have to pay for— we have to pay interest on that debt. And that means that we're mortgaging our children's future with more and more debt, but what's also true is that at some point they're just going to get tired of buying our debt. And when that happens, we will really have to raise interest rates to be able to borrow, and that will raise interest rates for everybody — on your auto loan, on your mortgage, on — so it will have a dampening effect on the economy." Mystical Magical Negro (LA Times)
Well, no SH*T Sherlock, what was your first clue? You know, being right ALL OF THE TIME SUCKS! The Gunny called it 18 MONTHS AGO that this guy is a flaming IDIOT and could not pour p*ss out of a boot with the instructions on the heel! He had ZERO executive level experience and IT SHOWS! So really what the idiot was saying above was that we're ALL going to enjoy higher taxes, as per the norm, under liberal rule.
"From 2010 to 2019, Obama projects annual deficits totaling $7.1 trillion; that's atop the $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009. By 2019, the ratio of publicly held federal debt to gross domestic product (GDP, or the economy) would reach 70 percent, up from 41 percent in 2008. That would be the highest since 1950 (80 percent). The Congressional Budget Office, using less optimistic economic forecasts, raises these estimates. The 2010-19 deficits would total $9.3 trillion; the debt-to-GDP ratio in 2019 would be 82 percent." Robert J. Samuelson
Here is the real deal. But UNDERFUNDING these progerams NOW, Comrade Zero can say they cose LESS than they really WILL! FDR did it with his various entitlement programs, LBJ did that with his failed War on Poverty, Carter just sucked, and now the Nitwit-in-Chief is doing it with his sprint to Marxism. For example, Comrade Zero bleats that his health plan will cost ONLY $1.2 trillion over a decade and then budgets $635 billion. Thus, the huge deficits occur and then the liberals can blame them on the Republican who gets elected in 2012 to replace this moron. And as USUAL, a review of Maobama's budget shows a SQUEEZE of defense spending and from 2008 to 2019, the libertards raise Federal spending by a whopping SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT while DoD spending increases by 17 percent. A return to the Carterism of 1977, just as the Gunny said it would. Of course, our enemies are digging it.
Well, no SH*T Sherlock, what was your first clue? You know, being right ALL OF THE TIME SUCKS! The Gunny called it 18 MONTHS AGO that this guy is a flaming IDIOT and could not pour p*ss out of a boot with the instructions on the heel! He had ZERO executive level experience and IT SHOWS! So really what the idiot was saying above was that we're ALL going to enjoy higher taxes, as per the norm, under liberal rule.
"From 2010 to 2019, Obama projects annual deficits totaling $7.1 trillion; that's atop the $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009. By 2019, the ratio of publicly held federal debt to gross domestic product (GDP, or the economy) would reach 70 percent, up from 41 percent in 2008. That would be the highest since 1950 (80 percent). The Congressional Budget Office, using less optimistic economic forecasts, raises these estimates. The 2010-19 deficits would total $9.3 trillion; the debt-to-GDP ratio in 2019 would be 82 percent." Robert J. Samuelson
Here is the real deal. But UNDERFUNDING these progerams NOW, Comrade Zero can say they cose LESS than they really WILL! FDR did it with his various entitlement programs, LBJ did that with his failed War on Poverty, Carter just sucked, and now the Nitwit-in-Chief is doing it with his sprint to Marxism. For example, Comrade Zero bleats that his health plan will cost ONLY $1.2 trillion over a decade and then budgets $635 billion. Thus, the huge deficits occur and then the liberals can blame them on the Republican who gets elected in 2012 to replace this moron. And as USUAL, a review of Maobama's budget shows a SQUEEZE of defense spending and from 2008 to 2019, the libertards raise Federal spending by a whopping SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT while DoD spending increases by 17 percent. A return to the Carterism of 1977, just as the Gunny said it would. Of course, our enemies are digging it.
May 15, 2009
Cracks In The Facade.. Pt 2
We have a rendezvous with hyperinflation, or perhaps stagflation, in that all at once we will see high interest, high inflation, low growth, and nagging unemployment as we finagle ways to service a $15 to 20 trillion debt. Expect not just high taxes, but higher Social Security retirement ages, means-testing, higher FICA taxes, rationed Medicare, and still all that will not be enough…
4) Security. Very schizophrenic. WE keep FISA, Patriot Act, rendition, military tribunals (Gitmo for now?), Predator attacks, Iraq and Afghanistan, while we trash their Bush origins, apologize abroad, and try to out CIA memos to embarrass the country between 2001-8.
At some point, Putin, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Kim Song Il, Assad, and others will conclude that Obama is either not serious or confused — and therefore ready to be tested. Right now hostility towards the U.S. garners attention and apology; loyalty and alliance win neglect and complacence: better to be an enemy than a friend of America. If we get hit again at home, then the Obama administration is effectively over as a successful governing experiment. If we are tested abroad, Obama will almost have to overreact to restore squandered deterrence. Not good. For 24 months Obama ignited the left to slur the Bush protocols as krypto-fascism, then found (1) they worked, (2) they were not fascist at all, (3) and now he cannot muzzle the left wing multi-headed Cerberus he unleashed.
5). Civil Discord. In just three months Obama has caused more disunity than most presidents in recent memory. Why and how? He has chosen to demonize as greedy (cf. the Super bowl quips, the “speculators” jab, the “fair share” and “spread the wealth” slips, etc.) capitalists en masse. Why laugh as Ms. Sykes wished for Limbaugh to die of kidney failure, which set a new low for presidential uncouthness. He treats the media with contempt as all earls do with obsequious court jesters. There is a mood of ‘them/us’ and ‘time is running out’, as the Obama administration used the panic over the autumn 2008 financial meltdown to steamroll through a statist, postmodern economic and social agenda before the people woke up. They embrace the term “100 days”; do they realize its genesis is 1815 and Napoleon’s return from Elba? (they should: it ended at Waterloo). The cynicism is now such that anytime Obama offers a grand assurance (most ethical administration, no interest in government take-overs of autos and finance, unwavering support of Israel, no desire to look backward at the Bush administration, etc.), in Pavlovian fashion we expect the very opposite to follow.
6). Race relations. Here I am worried. Far from bringing us together, I think Obama’s serial emphasis on race may achieve the unintended opposite of polarization. He should have learned in the campaign (Rev. Wright, Trinity Church, typical white person, clingers, call for reparations, his grandmother — the purported prejudicial stereotyper, etc.), the perils of seeing the world through skin color. Yet to establish his own diplomatic fides abroad, he immediately evokes race at the South American summit. His interview with al Arabiya highlights his race and family’s religion. Race appears in presidential jokes. He distances himself from America prior to his coming of age.
Stranger still, Obama’s heritage is unlike that of a Clarence Thomas, Tom Sowell, or Bill Cosby, who all knew real prejudice in 1950s America. He matured at a different time, was of African, rather than African-American, heritage, went from prep school to Occidental without the sting of experiencing the underbelly of American working class life, and yet has showcased (here I refer to his book Dreams From My Father) racial difference and knows its emphasis is a proven route to professional success. Again, there is too much disingenuousness for such racial identification to turn out well.
Missed opportunity? Obama could have had a one-time stimulus, then vowed to balance the budget. He might have praised wind and solar as he asked the carbon industry to ‘get us through.’ He could have politely disagreed with Bush, but framing differences in the tragic notion of no good choices. He might have cooled the overseas apologies, savvy that other nations have more to apologize for than his own. Obama should have established zero-tolerance for tax avoidance at a time of record tax increases. He could have remonstrated with Wall Street, and sought to rein in excess without Europeanizing the financial sector. He could have proactively reformed entitlements with bipartisan support, rather than, as will happen, drastically address them in the 11th hour. But then to do all that would be to assume he never went to Trinity Church, knew no Rev. Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, etc., did not run mysterious campaigns that eliminated opponents before the elections, was not the most partisan Senator in Congress, and avoided rather crude social and racial stereotyping while campaigning. Most who read this will not agree, given the mesmerizing effect of the Obama charisma. But in time, unless there are radical changes, I think the nation will come to learn that such talent was not put in service to our collective welfare.
4) Security. Very schizophrenic. WE keep FISA, Patriot Act, rendition, military tribunals (Gitmo for now?), Predator attacks, Iraq and Afghanistan, while we trash their Bush origins, apologize abroad, and try to out CIA memos to embarrass the country between 2001-8.
At some point, Putin, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Kim Song Il, Assad, and others will conclude that Obama is either not serious or confused — and therefore ready to be tested. Right now hostility towards the U.S. garners attention and apology; loyalty and alliance win neglect and complacence: better to be an enemy than a friend of America. If we get hit again at home, then the Obama administration is effectively over as a successful governing experiment. If we are tested abroad, Obama will almost have to overreact to restore squandered deterrence. Not good. For 24 months Obama ignited the left to slur the Bush protocols as krypto-fascism, then found (1) they worked, (2) they were not fascist at all, (3) and now he cannot muzzle the left wing multi-headed Cerberus he unleashed.
5). Civil Discord. In just three months Obama has caused more disunity than most presidents in recent memory. Why and how? He has chosen to demonize as greedy (cf. the Super bowl quips, the “speculators” jab, the “fair share” and “spread the wealth” slips, etc.) capitalists en masse. Why laugh as Ms. Sykes wished for Limbaugh to die of kidney failure, which set a new low for presidential uncouthness. He treats the media with contempt as all earls do with obsequious court jesters. There is a mood of ‘them/us’ and ‘time is running out’, as the Obama administration used the panic over the autumn 2008 financial meltdown to steamroll through a statist, postmodern economic and social agenda before the people woke up. They embrace the term “100 days”; do they realize its genesis is 1815 and Napoleon’s return from Elba? (they should: it ended at Waterloo). The cynicism is now such that anytime Obama offers a grand assurance (most ethical administration, no interest in government take-overs of autos and finance, unwavering support of Israel, no desire to look backward at the Bush administration, etc.), in Pavlovian fashion we expect the very opposite to follow.
6). Race relations. Here I am worried. Far from bringing us together, I think Obama’s serial emphasis on race may achieve the unintended opposite of polarization. He should have learned in the campaign (Rev. Wright, Trinity Church, typical white person, clingers, call for reparations, his grandmother — the purported prejudicial stereotyper, etc.), the perils of seeing the world through skin color. Yet to establish his own diplomatic fides abroad, he immediately evokes race at the South American summit. His interview with al Arabiya highlights his race and family’s religion. Race appears in presidential jokes. He distances himself from America prior to his coming of age.
Stranger still, Obama’s heritage is unlike that of a Clarence Thomas, Tom Sowell, or Bill Cosby, who all knew real prejudice in 1950s America. He matured at a different time, was of African, rather than African-American, heritage, went from prep school to Occidental without the sting of experiencing the underbelly of American working class life, and yet has showcased (here I refer to his book Dreams From My Father) racial difference and knows its emphasis is a proven route to professional success. Again, there is too much disingenuousness for such racial identification to turn out well.
Missed opportunity? Obama could have had a one-time stimulus, then vowed to balance the budget. He might have praised wind and solar as he asked the carbon industry to ‘get us through.’ He could have politely disagreed with Bush, but framing differences in the tragic notion of no good choices. He might have cooled the overseas apologies, savvy that other nations have more to apologize for than his own. Obama should have established zero-tolerance for tax avoidance at a time of record tax increases. He could have remonstrated with Wall Street, and sought to rein in excess without Europeanizing the financial sector. He could have proactively reformed entitlements with bipartisan support, rather than, as will happen, drastically address them in the 11th hour. But then to do all that would be to assume he never went to Trinity Church, knew no Rev. Wright, Ayers, Khalidi, etc., did not run mysterious campaigns that eliminated opponents before the elections, was not the most partisan Senator in Congress, and avoided rather crude social and racial stereotyping while campaigning. Most who read this will not agree, given the mesmerizing effect of the Obama charisma. But in time, unless there are radical changes, I think the nation will come to learn that such talent was not put in service to our collective welfare.
Cracks In The Facade..Pt. 1
Oh, I know that President Obama’s approval ratings are still around 62%. But I also remember that George Bush’s at the end of 2001 got even higher — and stayed at or above 60% through most of 2002, explaining why he increased his congressional majority in the midterm elections.
Nevertheless, I think we are beginning — after less than four months — to see fissures in Obama’s Pentelic statuary. And the cracks will widen, because in about six areas he has taken on human nature itself, age-old logic, and common sense-opponents that even a Harvard Law degree and Chicago organizing are no match for.
1) The Rule of Law. We are on dangerous ground here with the reordering of the bankruptcy statutes with Chrysler and the UAW; with the strong-arming of stimulus money for California predicated on the protection of unions; with the serial disdain for paying taxes on the part of Geithner, Solis, Daschle and others; and with the selective release of CIA memos, to denigrate those out of office as veritable torturers (they should reread the transcript of Eric Holder’s 2002 CNN interview with Paula Zahn in which he grandly denies that the Gitmo detainees have any recourse to the Geneva Convention accords and can be held there for as long as we think the war lasts). What separates the U.S. from Mexico, Cuba, or Haiti is the rule of law, the protection of capital and property, the evenhanded treatment of investment, and the faith in a fair media to uncover abuse. I think that is now all in question, as the Utopian ends justify the tawdry means.
2) Energy. We are finding more natural gas than ever. There are billions of barrels of U.S. oil in Alaska, offshore, and in shale. Yet rigs sit idle and government leases are constricting rather than expanding — and for reasons other than the economy. Logic dictated a simple course: expand exploration, increase production, use the revenue to pay down the deficit, and, along with conservation, ready ourselves for the next round of inflationary energy hikes, petro politics, and Middle East petro-bribery by transitioning to alternate energies. In other words, the rare carbon bounty of the U.S. was vital in providing a window of survival, until technology solves wind, solar, and bio-fuel by making them more competitive and plentiful.
No to all that common sense. Instead, Obama is ignoring the potential of coal, nuclear, gas, and oil, intent on cap-and-trade, and pie-in-the-sky present-day Gore-ish wind and solar. The result will be that our energy bills will skyrocket. Our vulnerability will increase. Our overt enemies will gain leverage, and covert ones will keep using coal and nuclear for economic advantage. This is a disastrous energy policy and apparently has been outsourced to the Al Gore cadres. We have a rendezvous with real trouble when the global economy rebounds and demands more oil and gas. Al Gore will keep his yacht, jet on private planes, and tinker with his various contraptions at his estate; the rest of us will be in gas lines.
3) Debt. Obama has somehow already used the tax last resort. That is, his figures assume taking off FICA caps, watching the states increase their own tax rates, upping the federal rate to 40%, curbing deductions, and effectively increasing the total state and federal bite to above 65% on top incomes.
Fine. But the deficits still go up, adding an aggregate $8-9 more trillion to the debt. The magnitude of borrowing is so staggering that there is almost no conceivable way that we can ever balance the budget without simply confiscating incomes in toto, or taxing our very sneezes. This will blow up in the administration’s face as well. The taxes will discourage and dishearten entrepreneurship as the spending increases unproductive sectors of the now federalized economy, as in turn a larger fossilized constituency demands ever more entitlement and more taxes for “them.”
I do not know what is worse, the mega-interest to come on the debt; the stifling of economic initiative and the rise of barter, off the books income, tax avoidance, or simple slowdowns; or the creation of vast new dependent classes who vote in exchange for entitlement.
Nevertheless, I think we are beginning — after less than four months — to see fissures in Obama’s Pentelic statuary. And the cracks will widen, because in about six areas he has taken on human nature itself, age-old logic, and common sense-opponents that even a Harvard Law degree and Chicago organizing are no match for.
1) The Rule of Law. We are on dangerous ground here with the reordering of the bankruptcy statutes with Chrysler and the UAW; with the strong-arming of stimulus money for California predicated on the protection of unions; with the serial disdain for paying taxes on the part of Geithner, Solis, Daschle and others; and with the selective release of CIA memos, to denigrate those out of office as veritable torturers (they should reread the transcript of Eric Holder’s 2002 CNN interview with Paula Zahn in which he grandly denies that the Gitmo detainees have any recourse to the Geneva Convention accords and can be held there for as long as we think the war lasts). What separates the U.S. from Mexico, Cuba, or Haiti is the rule of law, the protection of capital and property, the evenhanded treatment of investment, and the faith in a fair media to uncover abuse. I think that is now all in question, as the Utopian ends justify the tawdry means.
2) Energy. We are finding more natural gas than ever. There are billions of barrels of U.S. oil in Alaska, offshore, and in shale. Yet rigs sit idle and government leases are constricting rather than expanding — and for reasons other than the economy. Logic dictated a simple course: expand exploration, increase production, use the revenue to pay down the deficit, and, along with conservation, ready ourselves for the next round of inflationary energy hikes, petro politics, and Middle East petro-bribery by transitioning to alternate energies. In other words, the rare carbon bounty of the U.S. was vital in providing a window of survival, until technology solves wind, solar, and bio-fuel by making them more competitive and plentiful.
No to all that common sense. Instead, Obama is ignoring the potential of coal, nuclear, gas, and oil, intent on cap-and-trade, and pie-in-the-sky present-day Gore-ish wind and solar. The result will be that our energy bills will skyrocket. Our vulnerability will increase. Our overt enemies will gain leverage, and covert ones will keep using coal and nuclear for economic advantage. This is a disastrous energy policy and apparently has been outsourced to the Al Gore cadres. We have a rendezvous with real trouble when the global economy rebounds and demands more oil and gas. Al Gore will keep his yacht, jet on private planes, and tinker with his various contraptions at his estate; the rest of us will be in gas lines.
3) Debt. Obama has somehow already used the tax last resort. That is, his figures assume taking off FICA caps, watching the states increase their own tax rates, upping the federal rate to 40%, curbing deductions, and effectively increasing the total state and federal bite to above 65% on top incomes.
Fine. But the deficits still go up, adding an aggregate $8-9 more trillion to the debt. The magnitude of borrowing is so staggering that there is almost no conceivable way that we can ever balance the budget without simply confiscating incomes in toto, or taxing our very sneezes. This will blow up in the administration’s face as well. The taxes will discourage and dishearten entrepreneurship as the spending increases unproductive sectors of the now federalized economy, as in turn a larger fossilized constituency demands ever more entitlement and more taxes for “them.”
I do not know what is worse, the mega-interest to come on the debt; the stifling of economic initiative and the rise of barter, off the books income, tax avoidance, or simple slowdowns; or the creation of vast new dependent classes who vote in exchange for entitlement.
U.S. To Repudiate Debt
President Barack Obama today used certain words that ought to make the entire planet shudder. He said "The long-term deficit and debt that we have accumulated is unsustainable."(Here)Do you have any clue at all what that means? It means "prepare yourselves, the USA is going to repudiate its national debt." It is the first hint to the world that the USA has reached a point where we can no longer service our debt. It means our country will announce it cannot repay its debts and therefore, it will not.
Death Of Healthcare
When all of America’s top health insurers and providers met at the White House this week and pledged to save $2 trillion over the next decade in health costs, they were pledging to sabotage our medical care. The blunt truth, which everybody agreed to keep quiet, is that the only way to reduce these costs is to ration healthcare, thereby destroying our system.Here’s why:• Essential to any cost reduction is a cut in doctors’ fees. Congress is trying to cut Medicare fees by 21 percent. But cuts in fees and doctors’ incomes will just discourage people from entering the profession and those already in it from practicing. The limited number of doctors and nurses in the United States is the key constraint on the availability of healthcare. Our national inventory of 800,000 doctors is growing at only about 1 percent a year (18,000 med school graduates annually minus retirements), while the nurse population is stagnant at 1.4 million. To stretch these limited resources so that they can treat 50 million more people is possible only through the most severe kind of rationing.• As in Canada, the best way to cut medical costs is to refrain from using the best drugs to treat cancer and other illnesses, thereby economizing at the expense of patients’ lives. Forty-four percent of the drugs approved by the Canadian health authorities for use in their country are not allowed by the healthcare system due to their high cost. As a result, death rates from cancer are 16 percent higher in Canada than in the United States. We will pay for the attempt to save $2 trillion with our lives. (And remember, one cannot opt out of the Canadian system and pay for the medications out of pocket.)• The only real way to save money on the scale projected is to ration healthcare services. Optimists say that this can be achieved by increased use of preventive care. But the Canadian experience indicates that when government — or its satellite private insurance providers — ration healthcare, they cut preventive care first. In Canada, colonoscopies are so rationed that the colon cancer rate is 25 percent higher than in the U.S. (even though Canada has a much smaller proportion of poor people, whose frequently bad diets make them more prone to the disease).Obama’s pretension that nobody will find changes in his or her current health insurance plans except for a magical reduction in their cost by $2,500 a year is a fool’s proposition. Private health insurers will be no more private than TARP-funded banks or government-subsidized car companies are in Obama’s America. They will be controlled by government healthcare planners who will approve treatments, limit drug use, hold down medical incomes and bring their cost-cutting programs to bear. Inevitably, their ax will fall on the oldest and the sickest among us, those least “deserving” of our newly limited and, under Obama’s program, diminishing healthcare resources.The other radical changes Obama is bringing about in our nation can always be reversed. New taxes can be repealed or lowered. That which was nationalized can be privatized. Government which has grown can be cut. But once the healthcare system is extended to cover everyone, with no commensurate increase in the resources available, the change will be forever. The vicious cycle of cuts in medical resources and in the number of doctors and nurses will doom healthcare in this country. This wanton destruction will not be reversible by any bill or program. A crucial part of our quality of life — the best healthcare in the world — will be gone forever.Politically, voters will feel the impact of these “reforms” very quickly. When they face rejection or limitation at the hands of the bureaucrats, they will quickly understand that the their options have become limited. Just as in the 1990s, when HMOs first became universal, the patient outrage will create a political force all its own and those who foisted this brave new world on the American people will be in their crosshairs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
