Monday, October 10, 2011

Princess Pelosi is just too stupid..

Let’s start out with a little quote, shall we?

“I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late 70s in San Francisco, this king of rhetoric. … It created a climate in which violence took place. … I wish we would all curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements and understand that some of the ears that it is falling on are not a balanced as the person making the statements may assume.”

That was in reference to the recent Occupy Wall Street crowd, right? Wrong. That was Nancy Pelosi talking about the tea party in 2009. What does she have to say about the Occupy Wall Street kids? “God bless them.” Let’s take a look at some of the rhetoric from these “blessed” kids and those who are speaking at their rallies

In New Orleans we have people marching who are apparently shouting to “Kill the cops!”

This occupier in New York has a message for Republicans: “They want a class war? They’ll get one …”

Sometimes actions speak louder than words .. a protestor in New York was photographed defecating on a police car.

Actor Danny Glover spoke at an occupy demonstration in LA where he said, “We need 24/7 warriors.”

This is just a smattering of the incidents being reported around the country. What does Nancy Pelosi have to say about this kind of behavior? She doesn’t. She only has a message for House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who referred to these kids at “mobs.” Pelosi says, "I didn't hear him say anything when the Tea Party was out demonstrating, actually spitting on members of Congress right here in the Capitol and he and his colleagues were putting signs in the windows encouraging them. But let's not get down to that." Perhaps the reason Princess Pelosi doesn’t want to get into that is because there is no documented proof that tea party protestors spit on members of Congress. Meanwhile, we have lots of documented proof of the antics of these Wall Street kids.

While the tea party protestors were calling for Congress to “kill the bill” (ObamaCare), the occupy Wall Street crowd is calling to “kill the wealthy.” Where is Nancy Pelosi’s comment on this type of behavior or rhetoric … the pot calling the kettle black?

Tuesday, October 04, 2011

A Plan to run Haiti

The Libtards occupying Wall Street have come up with a proposed list of their demands. You are going to enjoy these .. are you ready?

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

Let’s let the Occupy Wall Street crowd run Haiti for a few years utilizing these demands and see how well that works out for them. And do any of you think for one minute that Obama is not on board with these Marxists?

A Dick is still a Dick

Check out the cajones on this guy, Dick Durbin.

First he crafts new federal regulations to cap the amount banks can charge retailers for swipe fees for processing debit cards.

Then the banks warn that this regulation will cost them millions, maybe even billions. And because businesses are in business to … make money … they will not just sit back and take it. This will force them to pass on the costs to the consumer.

Dick Durbin includes his amendment in the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill and it passes and becomes the law of the land.

Banks, such as Bank of America, announce that they will now start charging customers a fee for using their debit cards, thanks to Durbin’s financial regulations.
Then Dick Durbin gets up on the floor of the Senate and says, “Bank of America customers, vote with your feet … Get the heck out of that bank. Find yourself a bank or credit union that won’t gouge you for $5 a month and still will give you a debit card that you can use every single day.” He adds, “What Bank of America has done is an outrage.”

An outrage? This is exactly what the industry warned about all along! What’s outrageous is the size of this guy’s gonads .. that he can impose these regulations and then blame the banks when they are forced to comply. Sheesh!

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Here’s a prime example of why this country is suffering from a crisis of confidence. The people --- even the ObamaBots --- are learning that you simply can’t believe a durn thing that comes out of Dear Ruler’s mouth .. or should I say, that a speech writer enters into Dear Ruler’s teleprompter.

Just a few days ago, Barack Obama gave a speech announcing his grand plan to reduce our deficit. He spent much of the time demonizing the wealthy, harping on the millionaires and billionaires and corporations, and telling people to pay their fair share. Throughout it all he insisted, "This is not class warfare.” He said, “I reject the idea that asking a hedge fund manager to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare. I think it’s just the right the thing to do.” Hate to tell you this Obama but even if you think it is right, doesn’t mean that you aren’t waging war against the achievers in our nation. But he insists, “This is not class warfare. It’s math.”

However, just two days later during a speech in New York, Barack “this is not class warfare” Obama declares himself to be a warrior for the middle class.
“Now, you’re already hearing the Republicans in Congress dusting off the old talking points. You can write their press releases. “Class warfare,” they say. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay the same rate as a plumber or a teacher makes me a warrior for the middle class, I wear that charge as a badge of honor.”

Folks, there are only so many ways I can say this. Barack Obama is full of shit. He is a warrior for the middle class because he is championing the idea that the government needs to use its police power of government to take stuff away from wealthy people and give it to people more likely to vote for him. Even if Obama succeeded in doing that, it would hardly make a difference to our spending/debt/deficit crisis … though it would certainly affect (negatively) jobs and investment, seeing as these evil rich people are the ones who invest in companies and create the jobs. The Tax Foundation has some more enlightening statistics for you using IRS statistics:

Taking half of the yearly income from every person making between one and ten million dollars would only decrease the nation's debt by 1%. Even taking every last penny from every individual making more than $10 million per year would only reduce the nation's deficit by 12 percent and the debt by 2 percent.
Not enough? Here’s another way to look at it!

If the highest rate of 35% were raised by a factor of 20% to 42%, then the additional tax revenue would be $43.5 Billion, not much of a dent in our $1.665 trillion deficit. So, let's raise the rate by a factor of 50% to 52.5%; the additional revenue would be $108.9 billion. Still nowhere near enough, so let's just tax it at a rate of 100%, bringing in an additional $404.8 Billion. Unfortunately the country is still $1.26 trillion in the hole for the year.

Despite the conventional wisdom in Libtardia, revenue is not the problem in this country. The problem with our system is not that we are allowing rich people to keep too much of their money … that’s lib logic, by the way … the problem is that we simply are spending too much. How can people forget that Obama increased government spending by more than 25% in his first two and one-half years? Just how does he get away with this? He increases spending by that amount and doubles our debt ... then he says that our problem is that the rich simply are not paying their “fair share” in taxes.

And by the way, the “fair share” term is all you need to understand that this is a class warfare campaign. It’s all he has --- he has no record of accomplishment to run on in next year’s election. Stirring hatred and resentment for high-achievers is his preferred method. Not that Obama cares, but America simply cannot afford a European welfare state without sacrificing our freedoms to pay for it.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Lore Pohlman

It appears that about 40% of the country makes up a core of blue… people who are wedded to their leftist philosophy as if it were a religion… they believe it will succeed despite all evidence to the contrary. From the economic malaise it has inflicted on the United States to the economic meltdown that is playing itself out in Europe to the wholesale abandonment of the leftist policies by governments from Beijing to Delhi to Hanoi. Despite the complete lack of a single demonstrable example of a sustained success of the Marxist / Keynesian / Alinsky philosophy, they still believe and it appears that virtually nothing anyone in the red corner can say can change their minds.

Today the aspirations embodied by their messiah are no longer just theoretical solutions and aspirational promises. This is not 2008 when the press could blame all of America’s woes on a reviled Bush White House. It’s not 2008 when Barack Obama could tell stories about how he plans on putting America back to work by rebuilding our infrastructure and creating green jobs. It’s not 2008 where Barack Obama could promise to make America respected again in the eyes of the world by closing Guantanamo and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s not 2008 where Barack Obama could rail against George Bush’s “years of unprecedented fiscal irresponsibility.” On the contrary, in the summer of 2011 President Obama finds himself in the middle of a perfect storm of failure, yet it seems to have no effect on his followers.

The most recent issue is of course Solyndra. The solar panel company that was the poster child for the green jobs that were the key to fulfilling his campaign pledge to future generations that (his election) “was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” In 2009 the Administration gave the company $535 million in loan guarantees and in March of 2010 the President toured the company, declaring “the promise of clean energy isn’t just an article of faith.” Today the company sits bankrupt and taxpayers are out half a billion dollars. What’s worse for President Obama’s green jobs agenda is the fact that apparently each of those touted green jobs costs $5 million…

On the jobs front the President has just gone back to Congress and requested that they give him an additional $500 billion for a second stimulus program… because his previous $1 Trillion stimulus plan worked so well. The President suggested that his stimulus program (circa 2009) would bring unemployment down to 7.1% by August of 2011. In reality, his stimulus program did pass yet unemployment stands at 9.1% today. Fully two million more Americans are unemployed today than were promised by the President.

On the single most important issue of the day, jobs, President Obama has demonstrated not only that he is out of ideas, but that he wants to double down on the same bad ideas didn’t work in the past… and he wants to pay for the whole thing by raising taxes by $1.5 trillion. Unfortunately for him, things don’t look any better anywhere else. Domestically, inflation is on the rise, the economy is on life support and federal deficits are larger than at any time in history. Internationally, America’s leadership is once again so strong that the Palestinians are heading to the UN to ask for recognition despite US opposition, the Arab spring threatens to put Islamists in charge across the region, Europe is crumbling and Asian allies wonder about America’s commitment to the region as Taiwan is left twisting in the wind by the administration’s decision not to sell the island nation 66 new F-16 fighter jets for fear of offending the Chinese. Politically, the President’s leftist policies have so pummeled the citizens of New York that last week the GOP captured a house seat that had been held by the Democrats since 1923.

While the nirvana that was to be ushered in by Hope and Change has not materialized, it’s not because the administration has demurred from putting its policies in place. On the contrary, they’ve done so in most cases either by legislation or executive action. Despite all of this failure, a solid 40% of the electorate still supports President Obama and the discredited policies of the left. One wonders how is it possible that seeing all of this they could still believe? Then again, maybe it’s not so difficult to understand. A sign of a religion after all, is believing in something despite all empirical data that suggest it might not be true, or perhaps more accurately, the lack of empirical data that suggest it is true. The difference between a religion and the leftist policies of President Obama is that the former typically promises nirvana in the afterlife while the latter is supposed to be focused on this one. Nothing can prove Heaven doesn’t exist and therefore believers continue to believe. It’s called faith. History on the other hand, from FDR right up to Barack Obama, demonstrates clearly that the socialist, redistributive policies of the left simply do not work. Yet, the believers still believe, and vote accordingly. That fits Einstein’s definition of insanity. In this case it might just be called stupidity.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

It's All Bush's fault

As you know --- every problem that Obama has faced – and failed to address successfully – is really Bush’s fault. It is rumored (not really) that Obama has a version of the Presidential Seal on his desk with a new slogan: “It’s Bush’s Fault.” You’re probably aware of the Solyndra scandal. Here’s my best attempt to simplify the scandal into bullet points: Obama decides that he is the one who will decide where the new jobs will be, and he wants green jobs. Green jobs make liberals happy. Since Obama thinks that green jobs are cool, he decides to throw taxpayer money to private businesses who promise him green jobs. Solyndra needs money. So Solyndra gets in line for some ObamaMoney. Obama thinks that Solyndra is the perfect backdrop for his green jobs program, so he designates Joe Biden to go make a speech at the groundbreaking for a new Solyndra facility. But wait! Solyndra has applied for a $500 million plus loan guarantee, and the application hasn’t been approved yet! Obama’s own Office of Management and Budget tells him that the loan isn’t a very good idea. Obama remembers, though, that Solyndra principal George Kaiser is huge contributor to his campaign. Emails fly at the White House. Some suggesting that the loan guarantee isn’t a good idea, some saying we need to move ahead on this project. Somewhere along the line the loan agreement is modified to protect Solyndra investors while putting the American taxpayers on the hook. Obama administration officials actually sat in on some Solyndra board meetings while all of this, and Solyndra finances, were being discussed. (Imagine of Bush administration officials had sat in on Enron board meetings.) The loan guarantee goes through. The administration gets their day in the sun with Joe Biden speaking at Solyndra headquarters. About a year later Solyndra is in the tank. The taxpayers take it on the chin for over $500 milllion. The Democrats blame Bush, saying that the loan application happened during the Bush administration, not Obama’s. The Republicans are rude enough to point out that the Bush administration rejected the Solyndra loan application. It only gained new life when Obama took office and started spouting off about green jobs. The FBI raids Solyndra headquarters. Democrats and the Obama folks go into pure defense mode. Where does this go from here? That is going to depend on whether or not the ObamaMedia is compelled to really cover the story.

Monday, September 12, 2011

Solyndra and Green Jobs

Lest we forget that in 2009, Barack Obama appointed an avowed communist, Van Jones, to be his greens jobs czar. That’s right, a communist was the president’s “special advisor” on one of the pillars of his economic plan: green jobs. Actyually … that was pretty much what you might have expected, since so many communists went running to the environmental movement when the world communist movement collapsed. I just want us to remember this mindset as we approach this story about how the Obama administration then went and “invested” $535 million in the now bankrupt solar company, Solyndra. In September of 2009, the Obama administration heralded a $535 million loan guarantee for Solyndra as a “game changer” for the green energy movement. Vice President Biden emphasized that Solyndra would be creating thousands of permanent jobs: “Jobs you can raise a family on, green jobs, jobs that will serve as a foundation for a stronger American economy.” Biden said, “These are the jobs that are going to define the 21st century and the jobs — going to allow America to compete and to lead like we did in the 20th century.” So much for that. In January of this year, Solyndra was able to refinance its loan. During the time of the loan’s restructuring, the Energy Department kept a close eye on the company, even having DOE officials sit in on board meetings. Then in the summer of 2011, the CEO of Solyndra made several visits to Washington, apparently maintaining that the company was stable. Then just weeks later, Solyndra filed for bankruptcy. Now we have federal agents scouring through documents from homes of Solyndra’s CEO and founders. There will be hearings in Congress this week as to whether the DOE was misled by Solyndra on the stability of their investment. Look, folks. This is what happens when you have government officials picking the winners and losers, all with your tax dollars on the line. Barack Obama wouldn’t know how to create a job if his own job depended on it. The fact that this iconic green jobs investment failed so epically is an extremely bad PR situation for Obama. But more importantly, it is bad for those people who lost their jobs on the false promise of a green jobs future.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

Too cute by half.

The Big Zero caved. Now he'll deliver his usual shopworn leftists cliches on TV opposite the opening game of NFL football. He's also embarked on a desperation campaign to "run against Washington," as if he (or any) president isn't the very epicenter of what IS Washington.

Obama's cave-in is being played in some media as "bowing to Boehner." Well, why not? He's bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia and half the Muslim dictators of the middle-east, so why not the Speaker of the House?'

One wonders what the broader public reaction had been if he'd tried to stick with the date opposite the Republican presidential debate and no Republican House or Senate members even showed up and let him speak to a half-empty chamber. Of course, it would show a "lack of respect". But who's kidding whom? They don't respect this phony, anyway.

Let's see ... I can watch Obama blather liberal -- and failed -- economic cliches, or I can watch the Packers vs. the Saints. It may take me as long as one second to decide ...

This dyspeptic dude is the very antithesis of Churchill's classic description of an old British political hack as "a modest man, with much to be modest about." He flunks the first part, anyway. The second, he fills abundantly.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

We’ve all been waiting with pregnant anticipation for Dear Ruler to return from his vacation and explain to us his grand jobs plan … right? Oh yeah! We’re saved! Barack Obama, the smartest man ever to become president, has a plan! Finally, after more than two and one-half years in office, Our “sort of a God” president who had to “step down” into the office of the presidency is going to step forward and part the unemployment waters so that his people can march across a red-carpeted seabed to the wonderful world of employment!

I feel this strange tingly thing going up and down my leg!

Now since Obama is going to present us with his “plan,” we can imagine that it will be in the form of a comprehensive business plan, right? After all, that’s where we need to create the jobs. So I’m guessing Obama is going to present us with some goals for American Business and a detailed plan on how we will achieve those goals.
This is going to be just swell!

But, alas! Something has happened! After Obama left for his oh-so-well-deserved vacation and his handlers immediately started to downgrade expectations for his jobs plan. Now we are all saddened to learn that it isn’t actually going to be a plan any more. Drat! Not a plan? Now we’ve learned that suddenly it became an outline. Oh, okay .. so screw the specifics on how to achieve our goals. Now we are just going to get an outline. Fantastic. I’m sure it is still going to be a fantastic outline – something worthy of the Great and Powerful Obama.

Uh oh .. hold on. Now we’re hearing that perhaps an outline became too much for us to expect of Dear Ruler. Now, according to deputy spokesman Josh Earnest, we can anticipate “some reasonable ideas that can have a tangible impact,” Left in the lurch again. Now we’ve been downgraded to some “reasonable ideas.” Well, I’m sure that with all of his experience in business and finance, and considering his understanding of the dynamics of private sector business growth and hiring, Obama will come roaring in the game with “reasonable ideas” that are sure to empty the unemployment lines in no time flat.

Who the hell am I kidding here? The American people feel more negatively about our economy than they’ve felt in decades … and that’s because the American people know that we have a man in the White House that has no clue in the world what he is doing. He’s a freaking community organizer and leftist activist, for Gawd’s sake – not a brilliant economic mind. This man doesn’t have the knowledge or experience to run a sandwich shop, yet there he sits on his godly throne telling us that he is going to save our economy with some “reasonable ideas” that will be written on two stone tablets when he comes down from The Mount of Martha’s Vineyard. What a load of purified horse shit.

So at this point, what sort of “reasonable ideas” can we expect from Obama? They damned sure won’t be ideas that will encourage private businessmen to start spending some of their money to expand and hire. Remember … to Obama, the private sector is “the enemy.” His words, not mine. We did, however, have two more have surfaced as of yesterday. These ideas, by the way, would be able to be accomplished without any legislation or need to battle with Republicans in Congress. They would be:
#1: Increase the number of college graduates in engineering and give companies incentives to hire them.

Really? How many small business owners do you know out there who are sitting on their hands right now because they’re concerned that there’s just not enough engineering graduates to go around? And incentives? What kind of incentives? Know what this sounds like to me? Do something to artificially boost the number of engineering students in colleges and then use taxpayer money to entice businesses into hiring them when the graduate. Yeah, that ought to work. I can see the Dow going through the roof right now.

#2: Employ construction workers to retrofit commercial buildings to make them more energy efficient.

Oh yeah. Weatherization II. Oh … and green jobs. Gotta love those green jobs.
Roll the tape: “The Economic Development Department in California reports that $59 million in state, federal and private money dedicated to green jobs training and apprenticeship has led to only 719 job placements — the equivalent of an $82,000 subsidy for each one.”

Then there’s that weatherization program in Seattle. You remember that one, don’t you? And that’s what we’re talking about here in Obama’s “reasonable idea.” Weatherizing commercial buildings. In April of 2010 Bite Me Biden and Mike McGinn, the mayor of Seattle, had a little soiree to announce a $20 million federal grant (borrowed funds your children will have to pay back) for weatherizing Seattle homes. Oh yeah .. what a big deal THIS was going to be. Think about it! It was going to create 2000 jobs! Amazing! So fast forward to now, and what do we have? A total of three homes have been weatherized and 14 jobs have been created; most of them administrative and temporary.

But wait! There’s more! Here’s a peak at how that is working out for California:
Federal and state efforts to stimulate creation of green jobs have largely failed, government records show. Two years after it was awarded $186 million in federal stimulus money to weatherize drafty homes, California has spent only a little over half that sum and has so far created the equivalent of just 538 full-time jobs in the last quarter, according to the State Department of Community Services and Development.

The weatherization program was initially delayed for seven months while the federal Department of Labor determined prevailing wage standards for the industry. Even after that issue was resolved, the program never really caught on.

Look, folks .. these ideas are all well-and-good but they are not based on any semblance of reality. This is nothing more than government picking the economic winners and losers: The government wants green jobs and construction workers to succeed, therefore it will create and fund a program to do something that otherwise would not be done in the private marketplace.

At one point in his presidency, Obama pledged to create five million green jobs over the next ten years. Five million green jobs. Instead, we have 2.5 million fewer people working today than the day he was inaugurated. From the looks of things, pushing green initiatives seems to be a jobs killer, not an economic boost: “A study released in July by the non-partisan Brookings Institution found clean-technology jobs accounted for just 2 percent of employment nationwide and only slightly more — 2.2 percent — in Silicon Valley. Rather than adding jobs, the study found, the sector actually lost 492 positions from 2003 to 2010 in the South Bay, where the unemployment rate in June was 10.5 percent.”

All Obama needs to do is unleash the private sector. Unshackle businesses from the binds of burdensome regulations and stifling taxes. Let the marketplace determine whether or not it needs energy efficient buildings or more engineers in the office place. Trying to create artificial demand will only hinder true demand and therefore true economic growth.

Here's an idea---Stay in Martha's Vineyard, let Joe Biden stay in Mongolia, send Pelosi and Reid to Libya to organize the new government and just stay the hell out of the way.

Monday, August 22, 2011

Fool me 1,238,451 times shame on me

President Obama and all 535 voting members of the Legislature.
It is now official that the majority of you are corrupt morons:

A. The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 236 years to get it right and it is broke.

B. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 76 years to get it right and it is broke.

C. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 73 years to get it right and it is broke.

D. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 47 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.

E. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 46 years to get it right and they are broke.

F. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 41 years to get it right and it is broke.

G. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 34 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.

You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.


Tuesday, August 09, 2011

Real World DC

Imagine that Barack Obama was voted to become CEO of a large corporation. At the time he assumed leadership, the company was headed downhill. Fast. The first thing he did was fire anyone who actually had any business experience, either with that company or another in a similar field. After three years at the helm, all that Obama managed to do as CEO of that company was increase its spending by 25%, lose 2.5 million workers and grow the company by less than 2%. Do you think that he would still be the CEO of that company or do think that the board of directors would have yanked him out of there?

Monday, August 08, 2011

It's not Obozo's fault.

Libs, Progs, Dems .. all of them are upset that their guy Barack Obama is a tragic failure, so they are going to try and blame these failures on something else. I cited two main sources of blame for Obama’s failures: The Tea Party and George Bush.

The downgrade of our credit rating has validated this theory. Unable to cope with the idea that their guy, Barack Obama, royally screwed up and is now responsible for the first credit downgrade in U.S. history … they are pointing fingers. Big time.
So the #1 scapegoat over the weekend was … the Tea Party! Let’s take a look at some of the highlights:

Obama’s 2012 campaign strategist/chief dogwasher David Axelrod says that this “a tea party downgrade.” He says that we would never have been in this position if the tea party hadn’t put up a fight in debate over raising our debt ceiling. Axelrod said, “It was the wrong thing to do to push the country to that point. It was something that should never have happened that clearly is on the backs of those who were willing the see the country default: those very strident voices in the tea party.”

John Kerry echoed Axelrod’s comments about this being “a tea party downgrade.” He said on “Meet the Press”: “This is the Tea Party downgrade because a minority of people in the House of Representatives countered even the will of many Republicans in the United States Senate who were prepared to do a bigger deal.” Remember that this is the same man who said that the tea party should not be given equal air time. On Friday’s “Morning Joe” he said, “The media has got to begin to not give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because somebody asserts it or simply because somebody says something which everybody knows is not factual … It doesn't deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea about what you do.”

Howard Dean also chimed in to blame the tea party’s influence on the debt ceiling debate for the recent U.S. credit downgrade. He said on CBS's "Face the Nation”: "This is a tea party problem … They are totally unreasonable and doctrinaire and not founded in reality. I think they've been smoking some of that tea, not just drinking it."

The progs at are upset with Dear Ruler for being too soft on the Tea Party, which is ultimately to blame for this mess. The executive director Justin Ruben said over the weekend, “It’s hard to see how we avoid a Tea-Party recession if the president who has the biggest megaphone in the country is not willing to speak clearly on the issue.”

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman blogged over the weekend: “On one hand, there is a case to be made that the madness of the right has made America a fundamentally unsound nation. And yes, it is the madness of the right: if not for the extremism of anti-tax Republicans, we would have no trouble reaching an agreement that would ensure long-run solvency.”

The next victim of the Lib, Prog, Dem blame game was the Bush tax cuts or our failure to increase taxes on the evil, filthy, disgusting rich.
Daniel Gross is the Yahoo Finance economics editor. He wrote over the weekend that it was our failure to increase taxes that led to this downgrade, which was intentional sabotage by the GOP: “Recent events have sapped the agency's confidence that the government can and will do what is necessary to align revenues with spending commitments. And it's difficult to escape the conclusion that America's credit rating was intentionally sabotaged by Congressional Republicans … It has long been obvious to all observers -- to economists, to politicians, to anti-deficit groups, to the ratings agencies -- that closing fiscal gaps will require tax increases, or the closure of big tax loopholes, or significant tax reform that will raise significantly larger sums of tax revenue than the system does now.”

Former Obama administration car czar Steven Rattner recently called Tea Partiers economic terrorists. In light of the credit downgrade, he took to the airwaves to blame our deficit crisis to begin with on … the Bush tax cuts! He said on Sunday’s “This Week”: “But you do have one group of people who are saying no tax increases, never, no how, when in fact the tax decreases under President Bush partly got us in this problem. If you take today’s one and a half trillion dollar deficit, a trillion of it is from excess spending. 400 billion of it is from the Bush tax cuts.”

The Obama administration itself is seizing on one portion of the S&P’s report to try and convince the American people that if we had agreed to Obama’s plan, which included tax increases, that our credit rating would never have been downgraded. But as I pointed out above, tax increases are not what forced the S&P’s hand … it was our massive spending and the inability of the S&P to feel confident in our future ability to cut spending that ultimately led to this downgrade. Increasing taxes on the evil rich will have no bearing on that.

Perhaps the most asinine of all these excuses over the weekend was this one from ABC's Cokie Roberts. She manages to blame this all on … our Constitution!
In a discussion on “This Week,” Cokie Roberts said the following: 'The problem that we have here is the Constitution of the United States of America which actually does require people to come together from different perspectives.”
The Constitution is the problem?

What sort of yak squeeze is this woman sniffing?

Prog Speak

A little lesson in ProgSpeak. This is where liberals take common words or phrases that have become tainted in public discourse, and assign new words that will pass public scrutiny but which, to the left, means exactly the same thing.

One of the first things the left had to do was to get rid of the word “liberal.” People instinctively (and with good reason) don’t like the word “liberal.” So … now the word among the enlightened is “progressive.” I just shorten it to “Prog.” Sounds nicer, and reminds me of the frog in the frying pan routine. Then you remember “spending” of course. Well the people aren’t all that comfortable with government spending right now, so the new word for the left is “investing.” Yup! The government does “spend” on projects anymore; it “invests” in them.

Here’s the latest. Liberals have figured out that the term “tax increase” doesn’t exactly send a tingle down our collective legs. So … now “tax increases” have become “revenues.” Who, after all, can object to the government increasing revenues in the middle of a debt crisis? Don’t we need revenues to pay off our debts and to cover the costs of government’s essential services? Well of course! But there are at least two ways the government can increase revenues. One, the method preferred by Progs, is to raise taxes. The other, favored by the right, is to grow the private sector economy.

You might remember the last time we even came close to a balanced budget. The Republicans were in control of the House and Clinton was president. There was also something happening in the private sector called the “Dot-com revolution.” Sure, that later became the Dot-com bust and erased projections of budget surpluses – but the point is that it was growth in the private sector that brought the revenues that almost led to a balanced budget.

I did a lot of reading over the weekend about this credit rating downgrade. A common theme in these articles and opinion pieces was that the United States needed to cut spending AND increase revenues. But … when you read these pieces you will see that the only type of revenue increase they recognize is raising taxes! Where is the discussion about growing our economy? A growing economy means increased government revenues --- but you would never know that listening to the Obamatrons and the ObamaMedia! It’s all about tax increases.

Bottom line --- these people think that dollars spent by the private sector carry not near the economic impact that a dollar spent by government does. It’s all about government – and political power.


How about that credit downgrade to round out an immense week for Obama and our political elite in Washington?

Let me give you a brief look at how it all went …

April 2011: There is “no risk” of a downgrade to our AAA credit rating – Treasury Secretary tax cheat Timothy Geithner.

August 2, 2011: After months of debate, Obama signs a debt ceiling increase, which potentially includes $2 trillion in spending cuts.

August 5, 2011: Standard & Poor downgrades the U.S. credit rating to AA+ from AAA for the first time in our history.

August 7, 2011: A Standard & Poor's official says there is a 1 in 3 chance that the U.S. credit rating could be downgraded another notch if conditions erode over the next six to 24 months.

August 8, 2011: We waiting for the Treasury Secretary/tax cheat to tell us that there is “no risk” of a downgrade to our AA+ credit rating.

After all that, how did we get here? According to the S&P, they were dissatisfied with how politicians in Washington handled the haggling over budget cuts.

Additionally, S&P is not at all confident that we will be able to follow through on the proposed cuts. The head of sovereign ratings at S&P is a guy by the name of David Beers. He says that the S&P was worried about the "degree of uncertainty around the political policy process. The nature of the debate and the difficulty in framing a political consensus ... that was the key consideration." The key to maintaining our current rating, not slipping further, and hopefully bumping back up to our AAA rating will be spending cuts. Period. End of story.

While the S&P says that tax increases would be nice, that is not the key for any future downgrade. The key will be spending cuts.

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

I own guns--Do you?

"I've decided to have guns in the house."

Those were the simple words of Iowa Congressman Leonard Boswell, after fending off an armed intruder in his house.

His wife, daughter and grandson were about to hit the sack late Saturday, when the thug broke in, attacking his daughter.

The wily 77 year old tried to stop him, but it was Boswell's grandson's loaded shotgun that caused the punk to flee in the opposite direction.

Yep, if there's one thing you can learn from a shotgun: you never run at one.

Now, publicizing tales like these do nothing but good, for they remind the common thug of a key life or death question: what house would you rob, if you could?

One in which the owner is armed, or not?

And it poses a question to everyone else: if you're the victim, would you rather be armed - or not?

Me - I don't want to depend on the kindness of strangers, I prefer to depend on the accuracy of my shot.

Of course, the biggest gun control advocates will disagree, but they all work in well-protected media networks, surrounded by well-trained, well-armed security.

You don't.

Guns are a conservative, libertarian way of privatizing safety.

It's also the best way to keep good people free.

And bad people scared.

Monday, July 18, 2011

Obama is completely in over his head.

At the end of last week, Goldman Sachs dropped a bomb that does not bode well for reelection chances of The Chosen One. It goes a little something like this …
Following another week of weak economic data, we have cut our estimates for real GDP growth in the second and third quarter of 2011 to 1.5% and 2.5%, respectively, from 2% and 3.25%.

Our forecasts for Q4 and 2012 are under review, but even excluding any further changes we now expect the unemployment rate to come down only modestly to 8.75% at the end of 2012 …

But the slowdown of recent months goes well beyond what can be explained with these temporary effects. … final demand growth has slowed to a pace that is typically only seen in recessions. .. Moreover, if the economy returns to recession—not our forecast, but clearly a possibility given the recent numbers …

So much for keeping our unemployment rate under 8% if we passed his grand stimulus plan. This is also coupled with news of the worst consumer confidence since March 2009. A Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan index of consumer confidence fell to 63.8, which is the lowest level since the early months of Obama’s presidency. Of course, Bloomberg News reported this fall in confidence as “unexpected.”

I know you’ve heard this before .. but this is the worst recovery from a recession since World War II. In the past we’ve relied on growth in the private sector to bring us out of recessions. Government stimulus programs have NEVER done the job. So what’s the big difference this time? The difference is an anti-capitalist named Barack Obama in the White House and a Democrat Party that has become even more radicalized.

Since being sworn in Obama has done absolutely NOTHING that would cause a small businessman – the ones we depend on for new jobs – to say “Now THAT’S more like it! Now let’s get this business going!”

At this point we’re not going to see business become energized until after the 2012 presidential election – and the defeat of Barack Obama.

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Let's make a Deal---(No Thanks)

Could we see a deal today? This is apparently what Barack Obama has told Congressional leaders .. that we need a deal by today or we must start to make contingency plans. This must be because these talks are really starting to crimp the Democrats’ style up there in Washington. Democrat leaders like Nancy Pelosi “are almost too busy” to continue listening to what is going on in the debt limit meetings. Yup, you heard the woman! We need to get this situation resolved because we can’t be bothered to keep up with the debate .. it is taking up too much precious time. Princess Nancy was particularly perturbed at the thought of having to drive all the way to Camp David for meetings. God forbid our rulers in Washington have to actually put themselves out to do the job they were hired to do.

But Barack Obama says that he is willing to risk his job over this battle for a long-term deficit deal. Dear Ruler says, “This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this.” This is a crock. You can bet the farm that to Obama his presidency comes first and the fiscal health of this country comes second … or third … or wherever. Any attention he is paying to this situation is centered on preserving his reelection chances. The polls say the voters are concerned – so suddenly Obama is concerned.

But consider his recent history …..

Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he ignored the recommendations for his own deficit commission for months.

Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he proposed a budget earlier this year that would produce 10 years of deficits totaling $9.5 trillion.

Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he signed ObamaCare into law, which will likely add $4 to $6 trillion to the deficit over its first 20 years.

Barack Obama wasn’t insistent on a long-term deficit deal when he increased discretionary spending by nearly 25% his first two years in office.

You can’t help but feel, though, that it will be the Republicans who will probably get the blame for any repercussion from this debt ceiling battle. A new Quinnipiac poll released yesterday shows that most voters (48%) would blame congressional Republicans if the debt ceiling isn’t raised. These results were fueled, I believe, by Mitch McConnell’s hair-brain idea to give the president the power to raise the debt ceiling on his own; Republicans are so worried about being blamed and how this will affect the election in 2012.

The Republicans need to remember that they are in charge in the House because of the energized voters on three basic issues in 2010. It was really very simple:

Smaller government.
Lower government spending.
Lower taxes.

Mitch McConnell needs to remember that the voters did not turn out to the polls and put Republicans into office so that they could make phony spending cuts, increase taxes or come up with hare-brained ideas on giving Obama the power to increase our debt ceiling on his own.

Friday, June 24, 2011

For the last six weeks, Joe Biden has been hosting “talks” on our budget crisis. As of yesterday, the shit hit the fan. GOP representatives in the talks Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl pulled out of the talks. The reason? The inability to come to an agreement on taxes. We’ll get to more on that in a minute, but the Democrats insist on raising taxes in order to come up with a deficit-reduction package of $4 trillion, which would be tied to an increase in the federal debt limit. The Republicans do not want to raise taxes. And after six weeks of this song and dance, Cantor and Kyl realized that they weren’t getting anywhere. So now the task rests in the hands of Barack Obama, John Boehner and Harry Reid. Meanwhile, Eric Cantor says that he will propose a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution.

Barack Obama … it’s time to take a stand. Will you fight to increase taxes as your fellow Democrats insist, or will you recognize the effect of lower tax rates on economic behavior? I assume that wealth envy will ultimately prevail.
So what if Democrats manage to convince the Republicans (not like with a Republican-led House) that we need to end the Bush tax cuts and return to the tax rates we had under Bill Clinton. That’s no longer good enough. Why? Because our government spending has grown tremendously since the days of Clinton! Don’t they get it? This isn’t a revenue problem.

It’s a spending problem. Here are some specifics from the Washington Examiner:

In 2000, the last full-year of President Clinton’s administration, tax revenues were 20.6 percent of GDP, according to the CBO. (The White House Office of Management and Budget puts it slightly higher, at 20.9 percent, which places it in a tie with 1944 for the highest ever level in U.S. history). But the CBO’s long-term fiscal outlook released yesterday predicts that by 2035, total spending will reach a stunning 33.9 percent of GDP if lawmakers pursue their predictable course. That means even if revenues returned to the coveted pre-Bush tax cut levels, there would be a 13 percent difference.

Yet President Obama’s former OMB director Peter Orszag has written that, “a sustainable level is more like 3 percent (of GDP) or lower.” So that would put the deficits, even with Clinton-era revenues, at more than four times their sustainable levels.

Increasing taxes is a Democrat strategy to pander to wealthy envy voters. This has nothing to do with our debt or deficit and everything to do with re-election.

Thursday, June 23, 2011

Off the cliff

Yesterday the CBO rocked the news cycle by releasing new estimates on our future fiscal situation. It wasn’t pretty, though that shouldn’t come as a shock to you. The CBO released what is being referred to as a more “politically-realistic alternative scenario.” So these numbers are based on what the CBO expects to happen in the future: the Bush tax cuts will be extended and Medicare spending will not be cut.

So what was the result of these new numbers?

Federal debt as a share of our GDP will be 109% by 2021. By the year 2035, it will be closer to 190% of GDP.

Wow. How in the world did we get to this point? Well Barack Obama surely didn’t help. His own stimulus plan managed to nearly DOUBLE our debt. The Washington Examiner reports:

The 2011 Long-Term Budget Outlook, released Wednesday morning, reports that the “the combination of automatic budgetary responses” and Obama’s stimulus “had a profound impact on the federal budget.” According to CBO projections, before Obama’s stimulus became law, federal debt equaled 36 percent of GDP and was projected to decline slightly over the next few years. Instead, thanks in large part to the stimulus, debt reached 62 percent of GDP by 2010.

So in the wake of this news about our debt, what are the Democrats planning to do? They have two ideas.

#1: Spend more money. No, this is not a joke. A headline from Reuters, not from the Onion, reads: Democrats call for new spending in US debt deal. Yesterday, Democrats in the Senate called on Joe Biden to include “new economic stimulus spending” in his deficit reduction talks. You just read the information above … Barack Obama’s grand stimulus plan nearly DOUBLED our debt, and what do we have to show for it?

#2: Increase taxes. Because the CBO numbers assume that the Bush tax cuts will be extended, the Democrats immediately claim that if it wasn’t for the Bush tax cuts, these CBO estimates wouldn’t be nearly as dire. Guess what, they would be. According to the CBO’s own alternative scenario, even if the Bush tax cuts are extended along with the Alternative Minimum Tax, “federal revenues as a share of GDP will still exceed the post-war average by the decade’s end.” Even if the Democrats managed to repeal the Bush tax cuts, therefore increasing taxes on millions of Americans … would that solve our debt crisis? Of course not! I’ve shared the following information with you before, but considering this latest push to repeal the Bush tax cuts, it is worth sharing again …

In a static world repealing these tax cuts would get you about $3 trillion over ten years. Our federal deficit is almost one half of that every year. Static world? That’s the wonderful world of liberalism where you operate on the assumption that nobody ever changes their economic behavior when tax rates go up or down. History shows that when tax rates go some people reduce their economic activity, and other simply shift their earnings around to avoid the higher taxes … and they do it legally.

But don’t believe me; believe the experts at the Heritage Foundation. I’d highly recommend that you read this column in the Wall Street Journal by Brian Riedl:

The Bush Tax Cuts and the Deficit Myth. I’ll give you just a few of the highlights:

… the much-maligned Bush tax cuts .. caused just 14% of the swing from projected surpluses to actual deficits (and that is according to a "static" analysis, excluding any revenues recovered from faster economic growth induced by the cuts). The bulk of the swing resulted from economic and technical revisions (33%), other new spending (32%), net interest on the debt (12%), the 2009 stimulus (6%) and other tax cuts (3%). Specifically, the tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 are responsible for just 4% of the swing. If there were no Bush tax cuts, runaway spending and economic factors would have guaranteed more than $4 trillion in deficits over the decade and kept the budget in deficit every year except 2007.

Why are Democrats pushing the repeal of the Bush tax cuts? Because they can’t stand the idea that you can spend your money better and more efficiently than they can. And by “better” I mean that you have the power of choice to spend your money wherever you see fit, without the point of a gun. It takes politicians out of the equation, thereby diminishing their power over you.

Friday, June 10, 2011

The Obama Economy

The ObamaMedia is beside itself right now .. it can’t seem to understand why or how Barack Obama’s economic policies aren’t translating into jobs and growth. This must be the case because they seem to be caught quite off-guard with all of these “unexpected” jobs figures. Unwilling to blame their savior, Barack Obama, they are now trying to come up with other ways to justify this lousy economy.

I know … let’s blame the Republicans!

Take a look at this headline: Are Republicans Intentionally Sabotaging Economy For Political Gain? Can you believe that? The headline doesn’t ask if Democrats are scaring the diapers off old ladies for political gain. Not, it’s the Republicans sabotaging the economy.

Even though the Democrats held the presidency and the Senate since 2009 (the Democrats have held both houses from 2007 until last year), somehow it is all the Republicans’ fault. The Democrats haven’t presented a budget in how many years now? And it’s the Republicans who are sabotaging the economy? I’ve said it since the day Barack Obama was inaugurated .. I hoped that he would become the greatest president this nation has ever seen and that our economy would flourish over the next years. This is because I care about this country that I love more than I care about a Democrat getting credit for ‘saving’ it. Unfortunately that has not turned out to be the case. I now believe based on the decisions that Obama has made as president, that he has a fundamentally different idea of what makes this nation and our economy great. He is a man who believes in a centrally planned economy and bigger government. How is that working out for us?

If the rate of labor force participation in June 2011 were the same as it was in June 2009 (65.7%), the reported unemployment rate would be 11.2% rather than 9.1%. If June 2011 labor force participation were 66.2%, which is where it was when Obama promised that his “stimulus” program would prevent unemployment from exceeding 8.0%, the June 2011 unemployment rate would come in at 11.9%.

Being a leader means taking ownership of your triumphs and your failures, but with the ObamaMedia in tow, Obama isn’t really forced to do that.

Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Tony "Bada Bing" Weiner

That Anthony .. what a weiner!

OK …I’ll leave the weiner jokes to the experts, and to my Twitter followers. Someone did suggest that Barney Frank and Anthony Weiner could open a snack bar in Manhattan … Weiners and Franks. But I digress ….

OK, so Anthony Weiner lied. Big surprise, right? Now we have everyone and their hamster demanding that Weiner resign immediately. Others are saying that Weiner should pull out of contention in the next NYC mayoral election.

Look … he’s a liar. Not the first in Congress, won’t be the last. He’s a symbol of Washington power. These people – and I’m talking on both sides of the aisle – start to believe that they’re so powerful that they can get away with almost anything. Weiner got caught in the zipper of prevarication. That’s gotta hurt … look! He’s crying!

But should he resign? Frankly, I would rather he didn’t. Right now he’s a disgraced leftist House member. If he resigns he will just be replaced with a non-disgraced leftist House member. The disgraced variety of this particular vermin is much less dangerous than the non-disgraced.

As for the possibility of a Weiner being mayor of New York? Sure – that’s going to happen.

Rather than sitting around demanding his resignation, let’s take not of how Weiner handled this debacle when the news first broke. Not only did he lie (par for this hole) but he blamed it all on right-wingers. It was that evil Andrew Breitbart behind this terrible plot to disgrace a very important and effective member of congress. Yeah! That’s it! This is a right-wing plot and the result of all that right-wing hatred out there.

I want Weiner to remain right where he is. First – he’s weakened. Second – we don’t need him hosting a show on CNN (The Weiner Factor?), and third; he stands as a constant reminder of the knee-jerk “blame the right wing” yak squeeze liberals love to float when they’re caught with their pants bulging.

Monday, June 06, 2011

Some folks in ObamaLand are talking about a new stimulus bill.

Obama’s first stimulus plan cost around $800 billion and change. You are hard pressed to find an economist who will tell you that this $800 billion played any meaningful role in an economic recovery. Remember Dear Ruler telling us that if we didn’t have the stimulus bill unemployment would remain above 9%. Were you paying attention on Friday? Unemployment is still above 9%.

Let me tell you how this stimulus plan was developed. It’s just this simple: Obama comes into office with a mandate to do something to bring us out of the recession and to get people working again. There was a problem though. Obama had no clue what to do. He had no experience he could draw upon to develop a recovery plan. He did have a mindset though, and that mindset was that government is good and the private sector is bad, so whatever was to be done had to strengthen government and involve the private sector only to the degree absolutely necessary. So Obama went to Nancy Pelosi and simply told her to get the Democrat caucus together and instruct them to dust off any and all spending plans they’ve been proposing or considering over the past few years and put them into a giant spending bill. Keep it under one trillion dollars, and we’ll present it to the people as a stimulus bill. Whether or not it really contributes to an economic recovery will be beside the point. The plan will give Democrat members of congress the ability to go to the voters in their home districts with “Look at the money I brought back to our district” newsletters and speeches.

And so it goes--the unions benefited, the public service workers held on for another year, but in the end it did nothing.

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

They bought his act and now they have to defend him

It’s no wonder that the ObamaMedia isn’t all that enthused in covering the 2012 presidential election … because it means that somebody is challenging Their Guy … Their almost-a-God … Their Messiah … Barack Obama – the man who had to “step down” to the Oval Office (Now the Offal Office).

The ObamaMedia is my name for the mainstream Washington and New York press corps. Right now, with very rare exception, those in the mainstream media are suffering from a severe case of Obama-awe, or “ObamaAwe.” This awe-inspiring leader of ours has turned the mainstream media into a roaming hoard of zombies who have no desire to report the news in an objective manner. Their job gets in the way of wiping up the drool from their ObamaZombie state of existence. Sufferers of ObamaAwe experience a myriad of symptoms including tingles up their legs, delusional cases of mistaken identity – mistaking Obama for God – or even a lost sense of reality.

For example, the ObamaZombies can’t seem to understand why spending close to $1 trillion of money that we don’t have isn’t working out so well for our economy. Most students who just graduated from a government high school could tell you why our current economic state isn’t all that “shocking” … though the ObamaMedia seems to think it is.

This ObamaAwe is starting to affect their work, as reporters are being forced to cover potential Republican challengers to Obama’s throne. As Politico points out, by this time in 2007, major newspapers and newswires already had assigned reporters to leading candidates in the race for the 2008 presidential bid. Such is not the case with the current crop of Republican candidates. Why would the ObamaMedia want to “go behind enemy lines” and cover the camp that could potentially unseat their Dear Ruler? Would Obama think less of any ObamaMedia member who dared to write a fair news report on a Republican, much less a glowing report? And let’s not forget what happened to the Boston Herald. Its reporters were shut out completely from a local Obama Boston fundraiser after the paper ran a Mitt Romney op-ed on the front page and didn’t give the president’s visit the same “fair” treatment.

What it really comes down to is that the next presidential race is going to force the ObamaMedia to defend “their guy.” They are finally going to have to come to grips with the complete and utter failure of his presidency. When asked to present facts, they will be left with drool stains and quip about racist Americans who don’t support Obama because he is black.

Barack Obama won one election based on nothing but his charisma. Even with four failing years as President of the United States to add to his credentials column, looks like he will have yet another campaign with nothing but his charisma to hang his hat on.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Debbie Does DNC

The Democrats don’t seem too warm and fuzzy over the proposed Republican plan for Medicare reform. So you may be asking yourself … what is the Democrat plan for Medicare? Let’s let DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Shultz take a crack at that one:

Like I said, the Republicans have a plan to end Medicare as we know it. What they would do is they would take the people who are younger than 55 years old today and tell them, ‘You know what? You’re on your own. Go and find private health insurance in the healthcare insurance market, we’re going to throw you to the wolves and allow insurance companies to deny you coverage and drop you for pre-existing conditions. We’re going to give you X amount of dollars and you figure it out.’

Oh, that didn’t really answer the question … did it? After that response, can you tell me any more information about what the Democrats plan to do about our Medicare system? The answer is not only no but hell no. All they have is the fact that people are ignorant and don’t like the idea of changing how their Medicare is handled. So the Democrats’ brilliant plan is to have no plan, but simply demagogue the only reform that actually exists.

How’s that for leadership?

This wasn’t the only piece of brilliance from Debbie Wasserman Shultz over the weekend. According to her the evil Republicans think that illegal immigration is some sort of crime … the horror! Wait, what? Illegal immigration IS a crime, you twit. She says, “the Republican solution that I've seen in the last three years is that we should just pack them all up and ship them back to their own countries, and that in fact it should be a crime and we should arrest them all.”

Yep--she said it---I rest my case.

Monday, May 23, 2011

The Rapture was Awesome! : A Report from Heaven

Hey everyone! It’s me, St.Jeffrey
That’s right, I’m a saint now as I got Raptured up to Heaven last Saturday night.
One of the cool upsides to being a saint is that I get to be the Patron Saint of something. You know, like St Jude is the Patron Saint of Lost Causes or St Ambrose the Patron Saint of Beekeepers.
The downside to that is all the really cool stuff has already been patron-sainted…well, actually almost everything has been patron-sainted. Even the obscure stuff.
About the only things left are waffles, hula hoops, and fire ants.
I’m leaning towards waffles but I have to admit I really like the sound of “St Jeffrey the Patron Saint of Fire Ants”.
Anywho, as you’ve probably figured out by now- you weren’t Raptured. Actually, only a couple hundred of us were Raptured worldwide. So, you probably don’t even know someone who got Raptured.
Let me tell you-
One moment you’re out taking the dog for a walk, carrying your little pooper-scooper thingy cause it’s the law and the next moment-BAM!
You are floating naked toward a far point of bright pure light in the sky.
And you’d think you’d be scared, but you’re not. Or at least embarrassed cause, you know, your junk’s hanging out and all, but you’re not.
What you are is joyful beyond anything you’ve experienced before because you’re filled with the knowledge of God’s total love and acceptance of you.
Which is cool.
And you’re filled with knowledge of the world, the universe, and everything; how it all fits together. And how everything, even the bad and horrible stuff, all fits together and makes sense.
But that also means there’s a deep sense of melancholy too, because you’re suddenly aware of everything in your life. The good, of course, but also all the wrong steps, the paths you might have taken, the missed opportunities. So, melancholy is definitely there. Almost overwhelming for a time. And you wish for just one more day, one more minute, one more second to do all the things you’d left undone, to set things right.
As an example:
As I was rising, Air Force One flew by and President Obama returning from some fundraiser or other, was staring out the window, looking right at me.
And since I’d been Raptured, I was suddenly aware of the totality of the man. The good, the bad. His plans. His place in the scheme of things…
And I was moved…I felt compelled to-waggle my junk at him and shoot him the bird. Cause really, when would I have the chance to do that again?
You left behind guys really might want to keep an eye on that Obama guy. That’s all I’m allowed to say.
I have to admit, it is extremely cool to know so much. Just about everything.
I know the all the answers to mankind’s most vexing questions. For instance-
Does Lindsay Lohan’s carpet match the drapes?
I can definitely tell you, no.
The drapes don’t have genital warts and crabs.
I “m Kidding
That’s one of the first things you learn when you arrive here in Heaven. It is absolutely hilarious. The funniest joke ever! I’m laughing right now just thinking about it.
The story of Creation is absolutely the best way to start off your eternity in Heaven. It all started when……Huh?
Oh…okay…..well, St Michael the Archangel informs me I can’t say anything more about Creation and all.
But, believe me, you will LOL!
But, Jeff, Jeff, I hear you say, that’s all great you’re in Heaven and such but what about me?
Sorry, I almost forgot. I mean, Heaven is just so great. Time means nothing here.
Okay, so you probably don’t know this but you get a second chance for Rapture next year. God the Almighty is nothing if not fair. And a bit of a softy. But He has His limits. That’s it.
I can’t really tell you the date. But, did you know God’s favorite movie is “Groundhog Day”?
True story.
Add it’s pretty easy to catch the next Rapture Express. Just follow the Ten Commandments. That’s just about it.
The whole not taking God’s name in vain thing is what trips most people up.
Saying “shit” or “fuck” any of that kind of stuff is okay, but no God references in your cursing.
And that includes stuff like “gosh darn it!” or even “ding dang it!” for as God Himself puts it:
“Dost thou believe that He, Who created both Heaven and Earth, the Stars and the Oceans, the Fish in the Sea and the Birds of the Air, doth not recognize a euphemism when He hears one?”
So…you’ve been warned.
And I know we like to think that politics has little or nothing to do with getting to Heaven however, if you’re a lefty, a progressive, a liberal, a commie, or a socialist, you’ve spent your whole life breaking the “thou shalt not steal” and “thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods” deal no matter what justifications you tell yourself. That doesn’t make you a good person. Think about it.
And last, but certainly not least, cause there’s like a billion of you guys, Muslims you might want to rethink that whole murdering, raping, stealing, jihad for God thing as that all goes directly against the Ten Commandments.
You see, Mohammed was one of God’s little jokes. Really. Your prophet was a murdering, raping, child-molesting, neurologically-damaged, epileptic thief. And that didn’t tip you off?
God still shakes his head over that one.
Anyway, you’ve got a year to convert- Buddhist, Christian, Shinto, Hindu, Jainist, whatever- they all follow the Ten Commandments or their version. Lots of each of those in Heaven. You guys, not so much…. anyway think about it.
Well, I’m off to go sing the Praises of God, which you think would get old, but it never does! He is just so awesome!
If you have any questions about life, the universe, etc, just write them in to me in an email. If I’m allowed to answer, I will.
But, hurry, otherwise the only way you’ll be able to communicate with me is to ask for my intercession when cooking crispy, delicious, golden-brown waffles- or help with your fire ant infestation…
Not sure which…

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Don't taze me Bro

You have to admit, this has been fun. I’m talking about the efforts of the Obamajahadeen to try to have it both ways on the issues of “enhanced interrogation” (let’s just call it torture) and capping Osama bin Laden. It’s laughable, really. Here we have doing a victory lap around the country telling everyone what a gutsy call Obama made sending the Seals after bin Laden … all the while denying that any of the intelligence information which led to bin Laden came from enhanced interrogation techniques. We know that’s how much of the information was gathered, and they know that’s how much of the information was gathered; and we know that they know that we know that’s how the information was gathered … yet they continue with their vapid denials. One of the problems, of course, is that to admit that the enhanced interrogations techniques led to the end of OBL would be to admit that Obama’s greatest whipping boy, George W. Bush, actually had it right.

Thursday, May 05, 2011

Are you one of the Filthy Rich?

It’s now official. We’ve been heading to this for quite a while … and now we’re there. Critical mass. More than half of households in America do not pay federal income taxes. For 2009, the latest year for which figures are available, 51% of U.S. households owed no federal income tax.

From the Wall Street Journal:
A 2008 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, for example, found that the highest-earning 10% of the U.S. population paid the largest share among 24 countries examined, even after adjusting for their relatively higher incomes. "Taxation is most progressively distributed in the United States," the OECD study concluded.

Meanwhile, the percentage of U.S. households paying no federal income tax has been climbing, and reached 51% for 2009, according to a new analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation. That was the first time since at least 1992 that more than half of households owed no federal income tax, according to JCT estimates.; earlier data were unavailable on Monday.

Are you following this? The OECD says that our tax system is the most progressive among 24 large economies studied ---- yet our re-distributor in chief says that the rich really aren’t paying their fair share. They just need to pay more.

And when you have over one-half of the people in this country not paying any income taxes – and from that you can suppose that over one-half of eligible voters don’t pay income taxes – how easy is it for a politician to talk about raising taxes on the evil rich?

And while these pitiful people just don’t make enough money to shoulder one single dollar of the cost of operating our government, almost 90% of U.S. households have cable or satellite TV service. As for the 49% of suckers who are sharing the burden, my guess is that that number will only continue to shrink as more and more Americans become dependent on government and there is less incentive to produce.

No Body Armor - No Playgrounds

The ObamaMedia is starting to fret … about the children. NBC’s Today Show is upset [video]over the images of Americans celebrating Osama bin Laden’s death, and they believe that these images may be disturbing for the children.

Well of course! Everything we do in this country – every action and every breath – is judged solely by the impact it will have on our precious and vastly over-coddled children. Give Washington a few more years and regulations will require that our precious children sit in booster seats right up until the time they get their driver’s license. I have it on good authority that by the end of August the feds will have issued regulations requiring all children to wear motorcycle style body armor when riding bicycles and forbidding children from climbing anything over three feet tall without adult supervision and helmets.

So NBC is upset that we’re showing our happiness that OBL is dead. Children might be disturbed. Awwwwww. I’ll tell you what would be even more disturbing for the children … losing their parents in a terrorist attack on this country.

Where do we file this story? In that file folder marked “Wussification.”

Wednesday, May 04, 2011

Screw the UN

Uh oh .. here comes the United Nations, a worthless excuse for an international organization whose primary goal is to redistribute wealth around the world. But the United Nations top human rights official called on the United States yesterday to provide the U.N. with full details of Osama’s killing to ensure that we complied with international law.

Does Obama have the guts to tell the UN to go screw itself? No … I mean that; literally. The United Nations has no standing whatsoever to demand any details of this raid from the United States.

The insipid United Nations can take its international law and shove it up their collective anti-American Anti-Semitic ass..

The United Nations is not one to talk when it comes to human rights abuses .. we are talking about an organization that put Sudan and Libya on its human rights council – and Syria will probably soon be added. Osama bin Laden is responsible for the murder of thousands of Americans and was the most wanted terrorist throughout the world. We found him and we took care of it. We even gave him a proper burial. Now what exactly is the problem here?

Tuesday, May 03, 2011

Those God-Damned Oil Company Pigs.

OK ... let’s get started with those hideous oil companies and all of that money they’re making off the backs of poor Americans just trying to fill their gas tanks. Obama, as you know, has really been pressing in the last week or so to end all of those subsidies and tax breaks for “big oil.” Most of us know that it’s just a play to America’s uneducated myrmidons who wallow in wealth envy every day of their lives.

Have you ever put any thought at all into just who owns these companies? It’s one thing for Obama and his leftist, anti-capitalist friends to talk about “Big Oil,” but someone owns those companies, right? Someone is getting rich off of all those profits, right? Those are the people we should be going after!

Well .. let’s look at the ownership of these companies. They’re all corporations, so that means they’re owned by their stockholders. So who owns the stock? I’m pretty sure that you and most Americans think that the majority of the stock in these oil companies is owned by the corporate titans ... the presidents of the companies, their high-ranking officers and, of course, the members of the boards of directors. Well, if you think that 1.5% constitutes a majority of the stock, you would be correct. That’s right ... just 1.5% of the stock in the major oil companies is owned by the corporate management of those companies. Looks like we have about 98.5% of the stock left!

Let’s cut to the chase. The biggest share of the stock in these oil companies, 29.5%, is owned by mutual funds. Now do you happen to have any of your money invested in mutual funds? Why don’t you check with the managers of those funds to see if they have any holdings in Chevron or ExonMobile? Maybe you are one of the people you’ve been slamming as gas prices go up.

Here’s another 27% share of oil company stocks for you .... pension funds. That’s right, pension funds! And we’re not talking about pension funds for rich capitalists. We’re talking pension funds for teachers, firemen, policemen, miners ... what you might call “working class” people. Let’s tax those pension funds a bit more to help us through these tough economic times, right? That’s right – tax pension funds. Are you such an ObamaBot that you don’t realize that when the government seizes oil company profits through higher taxes, that is money that will not be paid to pension funds and other stockholders through dividends? I know most Americans are just that ignorant --- but you are, after all, listening to talk radio, so you really should know better.

The next largest group of owners in oil company stocks? That would be individual investors. Individual investors – like your next door neighbor – own 23% of big oil. These are the people who are working with stock brokers looking for places to invest their hard-earned money. They really should be punished for investing in evil big oil, don’t you think?

The next largest group is IRAs. IRAs account for 14% of all outstanding shares in big oil. Again --- maybe you think it would be a better idea if the money being earned by these IRAs would be better off being spent by Obama and his pals on some grand new entitlement program.

The last 5%? They’re listed as “other institutional investors.” Maybe some of these are foreign investors. Who knows? One thing for sure --- this 5% needs to be punished as well, right?

Actually … what Obama may really be after here is looking for an excuse to nationalize big oil. After all, any business so thoroughly evil yet so essential to our economy really should be put under complete government control, right? After all, 15 out of the 16 largest oil and gas companies in the world are owned by governments, the largest being Saudi Arabian Oil Co. with 19.19% of all proven worldwide reserves. ExxonMobil controls less than one percent of worldwide reserves … clearly a behemoth that must be brought to its knees.

That’s enough numbers on evil big oil for today …. Obama will continue his demagoguery against the oil companies as the price of gasoline continues to rise

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Here is the winner of head up the ass for today

Princess Pelosi's quote couldn't top this braindead quote, which illustrates the brilliance of the liberal mentality. Here's the context. Twitter is currently headquartered in San Francisco. But it is thinking of moving its headquarters to a city where its taxes would be lower. As of right now, Twitter has to pay a 1.5% payroll tax in San Francisco. It is considering moving to where it does not have to pay the payroll tax .. unless San Francisco approves a six-year tax break. The vote on that tax break is today.

So this brings us to John Avalos, a member of the Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance Committee. He says that the proposal doesn't seem fair, considering the financial struggles of residents in his district. He says, "Who are the [Twitter] investors? Probably some of the wealthiest people in this country. And we are giving them more wealth."

"We are giving them more wealth." This is a typical theme of liberals. When you allow people to keep more of the money they have earned by lowering taxes, liberals can be depended on to make mindless comments about "giving" to the rich. The liberal philosophy just does not want to recognize the concept of earned income. Why not? You need to remember that liberals are all about redistributing wealth. To support the concept of government mandated wealth redistribution you have to create a false reality where all wealth is owned by government. After all, how are you going to distribute or redistribute something that belongs to someone else? So by operating on the premise that all wealth belongs to the government ... or to "the people," as liberals might prefer phrasing it ... you can make asinine statements about "giving" money to people or companies through tax breaks.

Remember folks, government creates NO wealth. Government SEIZES wealth. The government cannot "give" anything to anyone that it does not first take from someone else. But according to this moonbat in San Francisco, a tax break means that we are "giving them more wealth." Unbelievable. Where do we find these people? Oh that's right .. in San Francisco.


Princess Pelosi came close to winning the award for rectal-cranial inversion moment of the day with this comment ..

"Democrats have long fought for fiscal responsibility as a top priority of this Congress."

It doesn't take a government educated union goon to figure out that she is full of moosesqueeze. Under Nancy Pelosi's 111th Congress, federal spending increased by 21%. That's just in two years! In 2010, Congress spent $3.45 trillion, which was the second largest spending spree on record ... second only to the spending spree of the 111th Congress in 2009. Are you calling this fiscal responsibility? But wait, there's more!

When the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007, the debt held by the public was 36.2% of GDP. It rose to 40.2% the next year. This year it will be about 63.6%, next year 68.6%, then 77% of GDP in 2020. And the Obama administration's budget estimates 218% in 2050.
The deficit in 2007 was $160 billion. In the next year the Pelosi-Reid Congress took it up to $458 billion, and when President Obama came into office in 2009 it hit $1.4 trillion. The current 2010 projected deficit is $1.6 trillion, which will lead to a tripling of our national debt from 2008 to 2020.
Also consider the fact that a Democrat-led Washington has been operating this last year without a budget! As Republican Rep. Mike Simpson says, this is a bunch of horsesqueeze .. or as he calls it, a "pile of crap": "They left the American people in this country with this pile of crap. They should not complain about how we tried to clean this up."

Friday, March 11, 2011

The real reason the unions are suicidal--$$$$$$$$$

It's not necessarily the collective bargaining rights that have union officials so frightened. It's the dues check-off. Dues check-off? What's that? That's a system whereby the employer - in this case the government - deducts union dues from paychecks and pass them directly on to the unions. Unions love this because sometimes union members actually get the idea that perhaps they have better things to spend their money on than union dues ... dues that can reach over $1000 a year in some cases. These dues are a tremendous source of power for union officials. It is the union officials who decide where this money goes ... not the rank-and-file members ... and union officials generally decide that when it comes to campaign contributions that money goes to Democrats. The follow-the-money scenario here is really very simple. Union members pay dues, and union leaders get paid massive salaries from those dues. Usuallly in the six-figure range. The union leaders then arrange for huge union campaign contributions to Democrats. About 95% of union donations go to Democrats. The Democrats then do all that they can to make sure that the dues keep flowing to the unions and the union leaders so that those campaign contributions don't stop. The Democrats do this by promoting forced unionization and other union-friendly policies. In Wisconsin, they failed - and you can imagine the panic. The Democrats and union leaders must do everything in their power to prevent any further erosion of union power. Calling Scott Walker Hitler, destroying taxpayer property and assaulting non-union advocates is just a beginning.

Bad news for unions? The earthquake and tsunami in Japan has sucked all of the air out of the Wisconsin union story ... for now, anyway. Funny how that happens.

Saturday, March 05, 2011

P.J.= Dickwad

So, when I hear of an act of terror, an internal clock starts clicking.

I wonder, how long before we find out the suspect is a radical Islamist.

And then, how long before that affiliation is rejected as vital to the crime.

Witness the murderous acts against our military in Frankfurt: it was only a matter of hours before the killer's links to radical Islam were exposed.

And it was only a few hours later, that we saw an Administration official dismiss that notion.

Here we have P. J. Crowley, bringing back memories - not only of Tucson, but of Ft. Hood, too.

Reporter-Even if somebody is acting alone, it's not a terrorist attack?
Crowley: For example, was the shooting of congresswoman Gabby Giffords a terrorist attack. I mean, you have to look at the evidence, you have to look at the evidence and look at the motivation then you make a judgment and that is a process as far as I know that is ongoing.

Yeah. He went there.

P.J., which must stand for "poor judgment," actually compared a horrible crime linked to radical Islam, to whatever was bubbling in Jared Loughner's damaged head.

So does P.J. actually believe these crimes are alike? Is he that dim?

I mean, with that hypothetical yammer, Crowley not only minimized the nature of the terrorist threat, but also implied he still may believe the attack on Giffords was part of a greater movement.

And so a killer can shout Allahu Akbar - just like at Ft. Hood - and the Administration still won't "commit." They only see a man with no affiliation– because decades of ingrained political correctness have taught them to be fearful of pointing out that affiliation. It's bigotry, after all.

Look, making no mention of terror, won't make terror go away.

All it does is expose the biggest weakness our country has: leaders with spines like spaghetti.

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

FOX News bring Enlightenment

So in a blog post at FrumForum (it's like Penthouse Forum, minus the sex), a writer details a phenomenon called "Fox Geezer Syndrome."

It's when your elderly parents become politically energized, thanks to watching so much Fox News.

Richmond Ramsey, a pseudonym for "wussface," slams his mom, thusly:

I don't know when it happened, exactly, but she began peppering our conversation with red-hot remarks about President Obama. I would try to engage her, but unless I shared her particular judgment, and her outrage, she apparently thought that I was a dupe or a RINO. Even though we're all conservatives, I found myself having to steer our phone conversations away from politics and current events.
...It wasn't that I disagreed with their opinions - though I often did - but rather that I found the vehemence with which they expressed those opinions to be so off-putting.

And so your parents are embarrassing reactionaries, cuz they chose Beck over Oprah.

Look, Ramsey has a point - for many people Beck has been an energizing influence. But he hasn't turned the elderly into pitchfork-waving neanderthals. Some, thanks to Beck, are reading more, and buying more books. And some are investing in food storage. I bought an underground trampoline made of gold.

The gist in this condescending piece: your parents are stupid because they are easily swayed by tv. And because they never had strong opinions before, their current emotional state must be manufactured. Unlike, of course, their more sophisticated offspring - who are young, pragmatic and smart. Pop's just cranky, old and reactionary.

And of course, the blogger must bring up the Tuscon shooting. Yep, maybe you should worry about mom and dad, since, "passion is the enemy of clear thought and...the prerequisite for mob rule."

Man, what a dumb thing to say about the folks who gave you life and raised you.

And who might also drop you from the will.

As an aside---I'm one of those geezers, however my children have been avoiding me their entire lives. It's not that I'm opinionated--I'm just opinionated.

Monday, February 28, 2011

The Fight Is On

Barack Obama is under increased pressure lately from his fellow Democrats. The issue, of course, is Wisconsin. While Obama has come out in support of the collectivist union mentality -- calling the Governor's bill "an assault on the unions" -- many leftists are saying that this is no longer good enough. He needs to do more. The Community Organizer needs to do what community organizers do best! Head to Wisconsin and promote a little mob rule! Stand with the government workers against the taxpayers! In fact back in 2007, this is exactly what Obama said he would do ... that he'd be walking the picket lines in solidarity with workers if unions were ever threatened. So now that time has come. The precious unions are being "threatened." They're being threatened with the idea that they should pay part of their own retirement and health care. They're being beaten over the head with the idea that they should not be able to use collective bargaining tactics to loot the public treasury by negotiating with the very politicians they hired through their campaign donations and election volunteering! So now, will Obama have the Bidens to really take a stand? Come on, Barack ole buddy! Head to Madison and march with your union brothers and sisters! March for the idea that the most important workers in America work for government! March for the idea that private businesses and private-sector workers exist for no purpose other than to support the government sector and government workers!

Thus far what we've been getting from the Obama cadre is pretty much rhetoric - though it has been amping up a bit.

In the meantime, his administration is upping its rhetoric on the issue as well. Obama's Labor Secretary Hilda Solis says, "The fight is on." She says, "We work together. We help those embattled states right now where public employees are under assault." Now wait a minute ... "the fight is on?" Isn't that rhetoric just a little bit violent for the peaceful left in this country? Maybe Hilda has been talking to Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Michael Capuano. Just last week at a Boston "solidarity" rally the peaceful Mr. Capuano said "I'm proud to be here with people who understand that it's more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary." Hmmm .... The Marxist in the White House is telling the unions that they're "under assault, the Secretary of Labor saying "the fight is on," and a Massachusetts Democrat talking about getting "a little bloody when necessary" ... more proof of all of that dangerous Tea Party rhetoric that is endangering our politicians out there, right? Only these were Democrats. Dang ... I'm so confused. Here I thought that the violent rhetoric was supposed to come from the right .. and then Solis and Capuano come along and futz things up like this. I mean ...couldn't those words perhaps encourage some violence-prone union types to get a bit physical there in Wisconsin? Well ... if that does happen, you can count on the ObamaMedia to ignore the violent rhetoric from the left and try to blame it either on Sarah Palin, talk radio or the Tea Parties.

Some things just never change.

Friday, February 25, 2011

Senator Bill Nelson is a Schmuck!

Democrat (of course) Senator Bill Nelson from Florida is slamming Governor Rick Scott for turning down a few billion dollars that we don't have for a rapid rail project between Tampa and Orlando that we don't need. Consider, if you will, Senator Nelson's reasoning. He says that turning down the money will cost thousands of jobs in Florida.

So ... there you have it, straight from the Democrat's mouth. You don't build the high-speed rail project because it is actually needed, or because it will actually be financially viable. You build it so that thousands of Floridians will be employed in the project.

Gator squeeze. (That's Gator shit--for those of you who live in Miami)

Using Nelson's logic - that you spend the money to create jobs - wouldn't it make more sense just to taken the billions and dole it out to unemployed Floridians? That way you could put ALL of the money into the hands of the poor, poor pitiful jobless Floridians without wasting any of it on such things as purchasing right-of-way, concrete cross-ties, steel rails, electric locomotives, passenger cars and other expensive stuff. By just handing the billions to unemployed Floridians you would not be creating future liabilities for Florida taxpayers.

Are we this stupid on Human Rights?

The United Nations is such a joke. Always has been ... still is. We are talking about an organization that exists for two principal purposes, weakening America and redistribution of wealth ... particularly America's wealth.

For 60 years we had an essentially useless body called the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. It eventually became so corrupt and lacking in credibility that it was dissolved in 2006. Do you remember when Sudan engaged in a program of ethnic cleansing in its Darfur region? That happened right after Sudan was placed on the Human Rights Council. That should give you an idea of why nobody took this commission seriously. One of the final anchors that sunk the U.N. Commission on Human Rights was nominating ... Libya! ... as the commission's president. So this defunct commission decided to regroup and "tighten" its criteria for membership to create the current Human Rights Council. I'm not entirely sure what criteria they used to elect members, but we have countries like Libya, Cuba, China and others that don't have the greatest track records when it comes to human rights sitting on this council to decide on human rights violations.

But then who are we kidding? This isn't really about human rights, is it? Now up until 2009, the United States refused to be a part of any of this Human Rights Council (we were kicked off of the last commission). But the great Community Organizer thought it would be a wise idea to reserve the Bush boycott and join the new Human Rights Council in 2009, saying the U.S. could most effectively push it to improve by being a member. Yeah ... right. So now we have a chance to test that theory.

So what is the Human Rights Council doing about the fact that one of its member nations, at the direction of a crazy dictator, is killing its citizens in cold blood? They've sent word to Quadaffi that "Killing your people is bad. Stop it. Stern letter to follow." Yup ... the Human Rights Council is going to call a special session to draft a letter. Wow, sounds pretty ruthless, eh? And fear not, my friends! Libya will get to keep its seat on the United Nations Human Right Council as there hasn't been one call for it to be kicked off the council.

Keep in mind that this is the same Human Rights Commission that Barack Obama submitted a report to about Arizona and its efforts to secure the border and enforce federal immigration policy on the state level.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Columbia and a Hero

So Anthony Maschek is a student at Columbia University - where he's studying economics.

But he's also a veteran of the Iraq War.

He was recently awarded a Purple Heart, after being shot 11 times in Iraq. He spent two years at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and still has to get around in a wheelchair.

He sounds like a pretty amazing guy - someone you'd want to buy a beer or two, given the chance.

Unless, of course, you might be a student at Columbia.

See, Maschek was speaking during a meeting last week at the school, on the topic of getting the ROTC program back on campus. While trying to explain the need for a strong military, he was shouted at, laughed at and called a racist.

It was like he was facing a poltergeist made up of Huffington Post bloggers.

Yeah, some Columbia students suck.

But, look - the fact that they disrespected the soldier only underlines how silly they are. And more important, their behavior serves to remind us that this crap still goes on.

Fact is, we live in a culture where reality TV trumps reality, patriotism seems quaint, and no-talent teeny boppers gain more respect and adulation than our boys at war. We got kids who think Justin Bieber is hipper than soldiers.

That bugs me.

Anyway, I hope their stupidity, heard by many, prevents them from ever getting a job or having sex with people who bathe.

That'll only leave them with one option - working at Columbia.