Elk County Forum

                    LOWLY LIBERAL EVOLUTION CHART
                    (http://www.insideout-designs.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Evolution_Chart.jpg)


I have heard that the creature most likely to survive nuclear wars, a new ice age or even, Lord forbid, a world dominated by Muslims, is the lowly cockroach.  If that's true, I think the cockroach's human equivalent, the lowly liberal can draw some comfort from that fact.

Those of you who think I am being unfair to socialists, communists, progressives or whatever else leftists are calling themselves this week, will have to point out where I'm going wrong.  After all, like cockroaches, liberals spread disease, believe they're entitled to food and shelter that they've neither produced nor paid for and, rather than try to debate issues, prefer, when confronted, to scurry off and hide in dark and scary places, such as MSNBC, faculty lounges and the editorial offices at the New York Times and the Washington Post.

One only has to look at their leaders to know them for what they are.  Consider that Joe Biden, in announcing his support of same-sex marriages, paid tribute to the sitcom, Will and Grace, for the role it played in making homosexuality palatable for millions of Americans.  At the same time, Obuma is promoting his presidency by showing how much a fictional character named Julia depends on him.  And yet when Dan Quayle... remember him?... referred to the influence that unwed mother Murphy Brown would have on impressionable teenage girls, the liberal establishment lampooned him as a buffoon who couldn't tell the difference between a real person and a TV character portrayed by Candice Bergen.

But, as we all know, liberals are always insisting that their politicians are brilliant.  They inevitably concoct surrealistic IQ numbers for people like Obuma, Clinton and Jimmy Carter, that suggest that they would have cured cancer, converted water into gasoline and disproved the Theory of Relativity, if only they hadn't had bigger fish to fry.  Proof that liberals are ignoramuses is that they ballyhoo socialism, a system that not only rewards sloth and mediocrity, but generally results in bloody regimes that enslave their citizens, while demeaning capitalism, a system that rewards intelligence and initiative, and promotes freedom and liberty.

Also, like Muslims, liberals lie and encourage other liberals to lie on their behalf.  For instance, Barack Hussein Obuma, while pontificating about same-sex marriages, recently said, "When I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy and foreign policy, but they believe in sex equality."  LIE! LIE! LIE!  The truth is, Obuma never speaks to college Republicans, and he makes damn sure they don't get to speak to him by banishing them from his staged events.  Hell, this phony populist doesn't even talk to congressional Republicans.

Speaking of the man destined to be a one-termer, how is it that he has enough energy to bound up and down steps, proving time and again just how light in the loafers he really is, but he can't quite make it through an entire sentence without pausing two or three times?

After looking at coverage of the recent event, "Correspondence Dinner" which was emceed by Jimmy Kimmel, I understood what he meant.  I saw photo after photo that made my skin crawl.  There was Wolf Blitzer posing with Eva Longoria, Leon Panetta huddled with Al Sharpton, Piers Morgan and Goldie Hawn, Valerie Jarrett and MSNBC president Phil Griffin.  Also in attendance were the likes of Arianna Huffington, Barbara Walters, Woody Harrelson, George Clooney, Eliot Spitzer and, for good measure, behind the bar, pouring shots, Rachel Maddow.  Having also seen some of the show on TV, I'd say it was a lot like watching the Academy Awards, except for the absence of good-looking women.



Speaking of which, Massachusetts Senate candidate and Harvard law professor, Elizabeth Warren, has insisted for years that she is entitled to profit from affirmative action because she is 1/32nd Cherokee.  This has led to several good-natured japes, generally consisting of guessing her Indian name.  I have ventured it might be "Lies Like a Blanket," "Dances With Liberals" or possibly "Speaks Heap Big Hokum."

But who can really blame her when places like Harvard reward diversity of race and color, while eliminating diversity of thought and opinion.  Let a conservative be invited to speak on 95% of the colleges and universities in America, and you can count on the professors joining with their young charges in drowning them out.  The very places that pride themselves on being the sanctuary of free speech and unpopular ideas are as intolerant as Cotton Mather and as vicious as Brown Shirts.  Let a conservative appear in their hallowed presence, and judging by the cackling, you'd think a coop of hens had suddenly been confronted by Br'er Fox.

Finally, in the spirit of bi-partisanship, I'd like to suggest that we stop spending millions of tax dollars providing ex-presidents (at present we have two from each party) with offices, free phone service and Secret Service protection.  Without arguing over whether Carter, Clinton and the two Bushes, actually deserve such largesse, they simply don't need it.  Thanks to multi-million dollar book deals and six-figure speaking fees, being an ex-president is the equivalent of winning the Mega Millions lottery without even having to buy a ticket.[/font][/size]

How do you feel about becoming a cockroach? Could you stand being yourself?

The Dalai Lama in his press conference this morning on MS/NBC, set out to warn that each of us may have to adjust in a post nuclear world, to becoming cockroaches.

"That may be the only possible reincarnation that will live, although it will be difficult for many as our diets will consist of crumbs and we must live in the dark and walk using both hands and feet."

The Dalai Lama then told his audience to go and study the lives of Bernie Madoff and Roman Polanski.

"They are today's best example."

Although the Chinese leadership also qualify according to the Lama, they stay in hiding. "You see how good they are at this already. They stay in the dark ages and scurry about during the night."

Other possible examples mentioned were Bill Maher, Rosie O'Donnell and Geraldo Rivera.

Why is it Republicans in general insist on bringing a water pistol to a gun fight?  Why do we stand by while the Left demonizes decent rich people like Frank Vandersloot, the Koch brothers and Mitt Romney?  Why aren't we ridiculing wealthy left-wing hypocrites like Rosie O'Donnell, George Clooney, Jeffrey Immelt, Oprah Winfrey, Jay Rockefeller, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Hussein Obuma?  And let us not forget George Soros, the man who's so easy to demonize because his face, his voice and his personal history, are exactly what I have in mind when I try to visualize Satan.

When those on the Left strong arm sponsors into deserting people like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, why aren't we doing the same to those companies sponsoring the likes of Bill Maher, Chris Matthews, Al Sharpton and the rest of that creepy crew at MSNBC?  For one thing, a lot of those lefties are college kids, the unemployed and folks on welfare.  Who do you think sponsors are more likely to take seriously, millions of Republican adults with money to spend OR the young, grungy hooligans who make up the Occupy Wall Street movement?

For that matter, when union thugs and Team Obuma force a recall election on Wisconsin's Scott Walker, why aren't we doing the same to California's Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown or North Carolina's "Teflon" Governor Bev Perdue?  Governor "Moonbeam" first told us we had a six billion dollar deficit, but, recently, while demanding a billion dollar tax hike, he has now decided the deficit is twice as large as he had first thought.

Governor Perdue recently said that, thanks to the 61% of North Carolinians who voted to ensure that marriage be limited to one man and one women, not only was she personally embarrassed, but that the entire country was so traumatized that we had begun to confuse North Carolina with Mississippi.  That's a patent lie.  Mississippi, after all, was wise enough to elect a Republican governor, Phil Bryant, whereas North Carolinians decided a few years earlier to elect its first female governor, a boneheaded botox clown named Perdue....

(http://blackpoliticalbuzz.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/bev-perdue-is-a-liar2.jpg)  (http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=I4770918970818631&pid=1.1)

.....who made it one of her first orders of business to veto a law making it mandatory to show a photo I.D. when voting.  She has been married to Bob Eaves since 1997 and has two grown sons, from her previous marriage to Gary Perdue, which lasted from 1970 to 1994.  She continues to use "Perdue" as her last name, using her current married name as her middle name.  Bob probably prefers it that way... can't blame him.

That leads me to wonder if perhaps it's high time that we stopped using elections as a way in which to conduct social engineering.  North Carolinians decided they would feel good about themselves if they elected their first female governor.  At about the same time, Americans decided they would feel good about themselves if they elected their first half-black president.  All I can say is that not since Dr. Frankenstein pulled that unfortunate switch in his cellar have experiments gone this haywire.

IT'S LIKE A DISEASE OR SOMETHING...

What do you talk about when you;re handing out Medals of Freedom?

If you're Obuma, you talk about the same thing that you always talk about.  Your own greatness, your own pervasive specialness and the amazing historicity that someone whose middle name is that of a Muslim warlord and mass murderer is sitting in the White House.

"No one ever picks up a guitar, or fights a disease, or starts a movement, thinking: 'You know what? If I keep this up, in 2012 I could get a medal in the White House from a guy named Barack Hussein Obama.  That wasn't in the plan.  But that's exactly what makes this award so special," Obuma said.

Is this some kind of mental illness?  I'm asking this as a serious question.  Does Obuma walk into pizza shops and give his order as:
"You probably never thought that in the year 2012 you would be getting an order for a deep dish pizza with extra boiled arugula and squid on top from a guy named Barack Hussein Obama, a happening dude who happens to live in the White House, and who is influencing your life and mine in many special ways."

At this point if I ever met Obuma, I would just have to ask him, "What the hell is wrong with you?  Did you not get enough attention as a child?"

If Barack Hussein Obuma were a fictional character, he'd be funny in the way that the vain and stupid anchorman, Ted Baxter, was funny on the old Mary Tyler Moore Show or Major Frank Burns was on MASH.  But when the schmuck is sitting in the Oval Office, his arrogance and general ineptitude are not nearly so amusing.

It's one thing for conservatives to accuse this clown of being the biggest narcissist this side of a Hollywood diva, but quite another when he constantly reinforces the notion that he sincerely believes the world revolves not around the sun, but around himself.  No sooner did our own socialist president create a firestorm by suggesting that he, not the Navy Seals, was singularly responsible for killing Osama bin Laden by delivering an address that, as usual, was filled with "I" and "me," but, in announcing his decision to come out in favor of homosexual marriages, he referred to gay members of the military who are "fighting on my behalf."  Funny, but I thought, and I'm willing to bet they thought, they were fighting on America's behalf.

And I think my favorite moment of this election year so far occurred in the West Virginia Democratic primary when Obuma garnered 58% of the vote and Keith Judd, otherwise known as inmate 11593-051, who's serving a 17-year term in a Texas prison for extortion, received a whopping 42% without spending a dime on his campaign.  In related news, it's rumored that Barack Hussein Obuma is considering dumping "The Mouth" as his running mate in favor of political phenom, Keith Judd.

Frankly, I wish I could devote all my time to ridiculing Obuma, but America's other liberals keep diverting my attention.

Frankly, I don't know how it is that so many people are willing to let people know that they intend to vote for Barack Hussein Obuma, let alone send him money.  I mean, even if you're a Democrat, why aren't you embarrassed to encourage someone this bigoted, incompetent, thin-skinned, vain and arrogant, to run for re-election?  As a Republican, it figures that I don't think that any of the male or female Democrats in the House and Senate belong in the Oval Office.  But why would any Democrat want to go to the mat for the only one of them who has consistently shown a strong DISLIKE for this country and for everyone who doesn't happen to be black, and who regularly displays rancor against America's history, traditions and religious orientation?

Also, it confounds me that liberals, who proclaim a concern for women and gays, never seem to have an angry word to say about Muslims or any of the Middle East nations where being homosexual is a capital crime and where women are kept barefoot and pregnant, not to mention disenfranchised, illiterate and the sole victims of so-called honor killings.  Liberals, including Michael Moore, Oliver Stone, sean Penn, Steven Spielberg and several members of the Congressional Black Caucus, also seem to be infatuated with Fidel Castro.  What makes that so odd is that Castro's Cuba resembles Fulgencio Batista's Cuba in many ways, except that Batista was far more humane when it came to Cuba's homosexual population.

Liberals are also very tolerant of women who wish to be sexually active so long as the government provides the means to either avoid or abort their pregnancies.  Towards that end, they invented a ghoulish organization called Planned Parenthood, which sounds like the sort of intentional misnomer for which Big Brother was so well known in Orwell's 1984.

     (http://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/The-Cure-590.jpg)

It shouldn't be too long now before we hear the conclusion (by SCOTUS) on ObumaCare.  What Obama and his corrupt cronies are trying to do to health care should not only anger every American, it should have them reading up on guerrilla warfare.  Ever since the presidential campaign, when Obuma told the guy with the ailing elderly mother that instead of an operation, he should consider pain pills as the more sensible option, I knew this cold-blooded good-for-nothing was a piss-poor man born, not to govern a nation, but to run a gulag.

But what makes it even worse is that the people in Washington who'd like to put old folks on ice floes and stick the rest of us in under-staffed medical clinics have no intention of sharing our sorry fates.  Do you think Charley Rangel is going to take a number and twiddle his thumbs if he needs to have his 79-year-old gall bladder removed?  Do you think that Marian Robinson, Obama's 72-year-old mother-in-law, is going to be given a pain pill if she ever needs a liver transplant?  As George Orwell put it in "Animal Farm," which could well have served as a training manual for Obama's administration, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

                    (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oJw9dyPF8pw/T9JUUjqhOuI/AAAAAAAAXZ0/WE0D8SCIzNE/s1600/4.bmp)

If I had to explain Americans to a Martian, I would be hard-pressed.  It would be especially difficult when it came to liberals.  But, there are even conservatives who confound me.  For instance, why would any Republican belong to AARP?  They might just as well skip the middleman and send their money directly to Obuma and the DNC.   Judging by the organization's enthusiastic support of ObumaCare in the past... which should really be called ObumaDoesn'tCare.... it's obvious that the only old people AARP gives a hoot about are Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Rangel and Harry Reid.

Quite honestly, I don't even understand why Democrats are supporting Obuma's health plan.  Assuming they're aware that even during the presidential campaign, Obuma suggested that a reasonable option for old folks in dire need of operations was to rely on pain pills, I can't help wondering if liberals are so busy worrying about the health and comfort of terrorists down in Gitmo that they simply don't have the time or inclination to fret over the plight of their own parents and grandparents.  Or perhaps they're simply eager to collect their inheritances.

Obuma, who quite naturally refuses to run on his record, is, instead, insisting that he needs another four years to finish the job.  But because of the near-universal disapproval of ObumaCare, the trillion dollar stimulus, the additional six trillion dollars of debt and his anti-Israel position, he's in the weird position of not being able to tell us exactly what the hell this job is that he wishes to keep doing.

                               (http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/645/obamacaddyjob.jpg)

Although Obuma and his flunkies keep referring to the economy he inherited as the worst since the Great Depression, the fact is that the economy that Reagan inherited from Jimmy Carter was pretty awful.  In 1980, the rate of inflation was 13.58% and unemployment was 7.48%, which translated to 20.96 on the misery index.  In 2012, inflation is around 2.7% and although, according to the feds, unemployment is hovering around 8.3%, we all know that underemployment combined with the people who have simply stopped looking for work would raise the actual number to about 15%, making for a miserable, Carter-like, 18% on the misery index.  If Romney poses the question Reagan posed in 1980, "Are you better off now than you were four years ago," just about everyone who's not on Obuma's payroll would have to answer with a resounding "No!"

And what's the deal with Juan Williams... nearly every time I tune in to Bret Baier's "Special Report," Bill O'Reilly's "The Factor" and Chris Wallace's "Fox News Sunday,"... Here'ssssss JUAN!!!  I can only assume that he possesses very incriminating photos of Roger Ailes.  His singular role on Fox seems to be to spin like a top for the Obuma administration and parrot excuses for the man's endless string of failures.  The fact is, Juan Williams expends so much effort carrying Barack Hussein Obuma's water, I just hope for his sake that he never leaves home without his truss!

Michigan's former goofball governor, Canadian-born Jennifer Granholm, recently came out four-square against photo IDs for voters.  With the logic that left-wingers are so well known for, she said that having to show the same proof of identity that's required for the purchase of airline tickets, cigarettes and beer, amounts to voter suppression laws.  Moreover, she went on, those who support these laws are guilty of nothing less than treason.  Wow, treason, no less!... (now you know why she's earned the name "Goofball.")  The last time I looked, that's still a capital crime.  Even David Axelrod hasn't called for executing people who think that voting in our elections is a more sacred right than buying a six-pack.  Granholm, who has apparently memorized portions of the Democratic playbook, insisted that photo IDs are a Republican plot to disenfranchise five million potential voters.  She said that most of them are Hispanics, blacks and young people, which, ironically, are the very groups that seem to buy most of the cigarettes and beer in this country.

                        (http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6651/clintonobamachances.jpg)

Because I am not running for Dictator, I will confess that I wish photo IDs really would prevent Granholm's five million from voting.   That's because those three groups, hispanics, blacks and young people, gave Obuma roughly 67, 95 and 66%, of their respective votes in 2008, and will probably do so again.  But I am still wagering that Obuma will lose the election.  And no matter that the polls are calling the election a toss-up, I don't think Obuma is getting a lot of sleep these days.  After all, in the West Virginia Democratic primary, Keith Judd, a guy doing time in a Texas prison, managed to get 41% of the vote.

As if that wasn't discouraging enough, in the Arkansas primary, running against a lawyer named John Wolfe, Jr., Obuma once again only received 59% of the vote.  While it's true that Mr. Wolfe is not serving a prison sentence and has had earlier experience running for office, he only garnered 34, 33 and 28%, the three times he ran for Congress, and a pathetic 2.8% when he ran for mayor of Chattanooga, Tennessee.  Quite obviously, he had far stronger competition on those occasions.

Finally, in the Kentucky primary, where his only opposition on the ballot was "Uncommitted," Obuma squeaked by with 57.9% of the vote.  In other words, a switch of just eight percent would have sent "Uncommitted" to the Democratic convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, with Kentucky's delegates in his hip pocket, if only good old "Uncommitted" had hips or a pocket.

                   (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LFS1HOi7qd8/T9qZGlqf9QI/AAAAAAAAXo8/NliJKY2aSpk/s1600/Obamacare%2BWaiver%2BCard.png)

Depending on how you look at it, I am either blessed or cursed with one of those brains that attempts to make sense of whatever data is available.  So, for instance, I ask myself why those goofy liberals in Congress who aren't wealthy enough to just pack up and live la dolce vita in Switzerland or Australia when their fiscal policies inevitably turn the U.S. into Greece don't start facing up to reality.  Why is it that they refuse to acknowledge that a nation can no more continue to spend twice as much as it takes in than an individual can?

I realize that even in the midst of the Great Depression, the very rich... people comparable to the Kerrys, the Pelosis, the Kennedys, Dianne Feinstein and the Obumas.... could live very well, so long as they weren't unduly perturbed by apple stands on the corner, soup kitchens on every other block and former middle class wage earners riding the rails as hoboes.  But even if the IRS confiscated the accumulated wealth of the top 1%, it would hardly make a dent in the $16 trillion hole Oblame-O and Congress have dug for us, so why do these clowns keep pretending that if only rich people were taxed at a higher rate, everything would be just super hunky dory?

Speaking of Oblame-O, how much longer is the mainstream media going to try to convince us that he's a genius?  It has become so obvious that he is simply a very corrupted fellow, short on brain matter, who has benefitted from affirmative action in every facet of his life, from getting into Ivy League schools to being elected president, that even many on the Left are finally seeing the light.... sort of.

For instance, when Obama decided the best way to destroy Romney's claim to having financial expertise was to attack his connection to Bain Capital, it wasn't just conservatives who took him to task.  It was also Democrats, people such as Newark's Mayor Cory Booker, Rep. Harold Ford and the former governor of Pennsylvania, Ed Rendell, who rapped his knuckles.  What's more, Jo Ann Nardelli, the president and founder of the Blair County Federation of Democratic Women, has defected to the GOP as a result of Obuma's endorsement of same-sex marriages.

Artur Davis, a former member of Congress from Alabama, and the man who seconded Obuma's nomination for president in 2008, has also taken leave of the Democratic Party.  Once described as the Alabama Obuma, Davis has become so critical of this administration in general and ObumaCare in particular, that he is considering running for Congress, this time as a Republican.

Things could hardly look bleaker for Obuma, short of Michelle's deciding to change her party affiliation.

               (http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001933961/534355731_obama_muslim_brotherhood_1_xlarge.jpeg)


When Obuma said he found it offensive that anyone would suspect his White House of leaking national security information, I had no option but to laugh so hard I nearly did myself bodily injury.

The gall of this traitorous creep.  

He has meetings with three or four close advisors, and the next thing you know, New York Times paperboys are on the sidewalk, shouting, "Extry! Extry! Read all about it!  A Pakistani doctor told the CIA where Osama bin Laden was hiding!" or "Read all about how the United States and Israel successfully hacked into Iran's nuclear computers!" or "Read all about how Barack Obuma personally directs drone attacks from the 16th tee!"

Everyone, including those on Obama's side of the aisle, knows exactly how the NY Times was fed those various items intended to make Obaua look like a combination of Alexander, the philosopher king, and Gen. George "Old Blood and Guts" Patton.  As I see it, he either placed a phone call, had Eric Holder run an errand or hand-delivered the self-aggrandizing information himself.  Its more like the latter.

I'd like to know why this goofy administration is still playing footsies with Pakistan.  Even if we forget about the general corruption that pervades that country; even if we don't hold them accountable for providing a safe haven for Osama bin Laden and the Taliban; and even if we don't make a big deal about their soldiers murdering our soldiers, why on earth would we want to be aligned with them instead of with India, which is bigger, stronger, richer, democratic and, in addition, hates Pakistan as much as I do?

In the grand scheme of things, India is our natural ally, while Pakistan is our natural enemy.

It would be like watching a movie in which the dashing hero is married to his loyal and beautiful high school sweetheart, but decides to throw her over for the snag-toothed, scab-encrusted, disease-riddled, hag who lives in the alley.

Or to put it another way, it would be like someone comparing Mitt Romney's record, his character and his associates, to Barack Hussein Obuma's... and then deciding to vote for Obuma!

            (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fY2CFtRB8QU/T9uOhMWY1GI/AAAAAAAAXpc/ecsZITbWKIM/s1600/6-14-12%2B10.jpg)

Even though Barack Insane Obuma promised to be a post-racial president, we all knew that to be a lie as soon as he appointed Eric Holder to be his Attorney General.  Knowing what I did about Holder, it was my assumption that the only reason he got the job was because Al Sharpton had already turned it down.  That being said, I was recently taken aback when I saw a video that Obuma has produced for his re-election campaign.  In it, he launched what he called "African Americans for Obama," essentially beseeching blacks to keep in mind he shares their pigmentation... well, half of it anyway.

Does anyone doubt that the media would have a field day if his challenger made a video called "Caucasians for Romney," reminding white voters that he shared the same pigmentation as Washington, Jefferson and, say, war hero Audie Murphy?

This clown is super-scared he's going to lose the election in November.  Guess what, clown?

THE OBAMA WAY OF  GOVERNMENT


          (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Wb_xJdaQG88/T-THbZ4OeiI/AAAAAAAAG1s/P3aFeAuEejA/s1600/theobamaprocess3.jpg)



There are four stages to the Obama way of government.

Stage 1: Ignore the problem - "We're in a recovery."

Stage 2: Deny the problem - "The public sector is just fine"

Stage 3: Blame Bush - "I inherited a bad economy."

Stage 4: Cry Racism - "It's because he's black."


We are now finally reaching the third and fourth stages with Fast and Furious.  There is the Blame Bush claim and the racism claims are creeping forth.

But what exactly is more racist, killing hundreds of Mexicans or criticizing a black Attorney General?

You know, the most mystifying aspect of this current presidential campaign is the amount of support that Barack Insane Obuma can still call on.  Even after nixing the Keystone pipeline, a 14.2 unemployment rate in the construction industry, and tiptoeing around the Wisconsin recall election, unions are still behind this weasel.  In spite of renewing the Patriot Act, keeping Gitmo open and using drones to kill American citizens, his liberal base still thinks the schmuck walks on water.  In spite of raising the deficit by six trillion dollars, costing the country its triple-A credit rating and watching the unemployment rate remain over 8% for his entire term, democrats insist he is doing a hell of a job and has earned the right to have a second term, even though he, himself, in 2009, said the opposite.  My G-d, I would think it must feel terrible to be a democrat after the way this schmuck has run America into the ground these past three plus years. 

                    (http://djwonder.com/wp-content/funny-obama-cartoons.jpg)

Something that continues to confound me is that Walt Disney, Inc., which over the years has proven to be one of the most litigious companies in the world, never files infringement of copyright lawsuits against this administration.  I mean, wouldn't you think that a company that sees red if anyone even refers to an second-rate outfit as a Mickey Mouse operation would be speed-dialing their lawyers when we're constantly seeing a Disneyland parade that includes Pinocchio (Barack Insane Obuma), Dumbo (Joe Biden), Goofy (Debbie Wasserman-Schultz), the Seven Dwarves (Waxman, Schumer, Geithner, Sebelius, Holder, Conyers, Reid), and that evil queen who was constantly asking her mirror who was the fairest one of all (Pelosi)?

     (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Fn9i7cfb_6g/T-ZXAwquDkI/AAAAAAAAG9w/pxZTWWnI34M/s640/comparison-bush-obama-politics-1340456927.jpg)


97 year old ms/nbc anchor Andrea Mitchell:     
      (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Jw-UPn5nn70/T-ZHREAo9QI/AAAAAAAAG7s/OYhdvcuktmk/s640/RAMFNclr-062112-andrea-IBD-.jpg.cms)

       (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0Nwf4nEHM_U/T96mRO7c2aI/AAAAAAAAXsw/tRD-WcbsaDE/s1600/1.bmp)

As you may have noticed, Barack Insane Obuma's latest attack on his opponent consists of claiming that while Romney
was governor, Massachusetts had the fourth worst record in the country when it came to job creation.  Or, in other words, they ranked 54th among all 57 states.  What Obuma doesn't mention is that Massachusetts had an unemployment rate of 4.2%.  When your jobless rate is that low, it figures that job creation is not going to be a major priority.  In fact, when you realize that in spite of a trillion dollar stimulus steamrollered by Reid and Pelosi, Obuma has never been able to get the national unemployment rate under 8%, Obuma would be better off comparing golf scores.

One good thing about Obuma's coloring is that you can't see if he's blushing when he says some of the idiotic, asinine, batty, slow-witted, birdbrained things for which he's become so notorious.  For instance, while whining recently about the economy he inherited from the previous administration, he compared his situation to a guy who goes into a restaurant, has a steak dinner and a martini, and then skips out, leaving the next guy to pick up the check.  What he neglected to point out to his audience of drooling halfwits is that the second guy never bothered settling up the tab.  Instead, he, too, ordered a steak dinner, and a martini, along with the lobster thermidor, the bouillabaisse, an order of lamb chops, a Waldorf salad, a baked potato, a cheese platter, a bottle of champagne and the baked Alaska, for himself, Michelle and a dozen freeloading pals who had flown in from Chicago.  When it came time to pay up, he borrowed a credit card from the Chinese guy at the next table, and told him to present the bill to the American people.

I hadn't given much thought to the fact that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords took a very long time to resign.  Had yoy?  But the fact is she entered Congress in January, 2007, was shot in January, 2011, and didn't get around to officially resigning until January, 2012.  The reason the timing was so important was that she had only served four years in the House when she was shot by a crazy man, but it takes five years for a congressional pension to become vested.  So, not only did she continue drawing a full salary and receiving far superior medical attention than most of her constituents would have during that year, but by 2012, she was finally in a position to resign from the House, knowing she would collect $139,200-a-year for the rest of what I'm sure we all hope will be a long and happy life.

I'm dead certain that some people on here will think I'm calling attention to what I regard as a financial scam because Rep. Giffords is a liberal.  Hillary Clinton would probably say it's because the congresswoman is not only a liberal, but a female, and not necessarily in that order.  After all, in a recent address, the screwball Secretary of State said, "All over the world extremists constrain and control women."  Having heard her and these dingbats, Nancy Pelosi, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Barbara Boxer and other rich and influential women, whine about the hardships facing American women, I know she includes the United States in her diatribe.

What's really odd about all this is that these ladies never seem to mention Arab and Muslim nations, where women are regularly constrained and controlled, not to mention abused, mutilated and stoned to death.  So far as these fatheads are concerned, the only thing holding back the women of the world are white male Republicans. Show them a conservative and they'll show you a wife beater.

Although I can easily see where being married to Bill Clinton could turn anyone into a bitter old harpy....

(http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=I5062663245596091&pid=1.7&w=175&h=155&c=7&rs=1)

....it still shows a certain lack of gratitude that a woman who rode a marriage license into the White House, the U.S. Senate, a major cabinet position and $100 million, should be so down on men.

Speaking of Bill, her husband...

(http://www.funnythreat.com/funny_animals/images/clinton_moustache.jpg)

Hmmm... not bad, Beefy Nacho Burrito style... good work, Lil' Pancho.

Anyway, still, when all is said and done, Hillary is merely a prime example of a certain type and class. 

(http://politicaldemotivation.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/the_internet.jpg)

Like millions of other left-wing women who populate organizations such as NOW, the ACLU and Planned Parenthood; who attended schools like Bard, Sarah Lawrence, Harvard and Yale, where they majored in political science, drama or sociology; and later married their male equivalents; they bitch incessantly about glass ceilings when, in fact, the greatest calamities in their lives occur when their children's nannies don't show up on time, when a manicured nail breaks and when the batteries in their vibrators suddenly conk out.

Quote from Warph:
when the batteries in their vibrators suddenly conk out.


You crack me up Warph and if this is true I bet that sour puss Debbie Wasserman Shultz's looks like a giant dill pickle.
Uh, is that Lil' Pancho or is that R.A.M.B.O.?

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-toon4.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-1.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-stupid.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-toon5.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-toon1.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-toon2.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-26-humor-toon3.jpg)

President Scum-of-the-Earth Obuma & His Gay Freaks Trash White House

Last week, Obama ORDERED  military service branches to celebrate "Gay Pride" month. What we now know is that the same day he issued that order, Obama hosted the first ever "gay activist" reception at the White House.

Obama welcomed his guests promising to make good on their agenda: "We'll get there because of every man and woman and activist and ally who is moving us forward by the force of their moral arguments, but more importantly, by the force of their example."

Now, photos are emerging that were representative of the "moral example" set by his guests after some of the activists posted a few photos in public forums.

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-23-perspective-2.jpg)

(http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-06-23-perspective-1.jpg)

Dining on crab cakes and canapés chased with the best wines, while being entertained by the USMC Band -- all at taxpayer expense -- some guests took time out to pose kissing under the official portrait of Ronald Reagan, while others offered gestures reflecting their opinion of the greatest president of the 20th century.

There was even a homosexual/transgendered marriage proposal, as recorded by an attendee and proudly posted on You Tube

     

White House spokesman Shin Inouye dodged criticism, saying, "The White House does not control the conduct of guests at receptions." However, Obama certainly did have control of the guest list.
This wanton defilement of our White House now ranks alone with the sexual assaults and abuses committed by Bill Clinton when his regime occupied this hallowed home.


Patriot Post: A Marine Comments on this:
Ron in Memphis, TN
Tuesday, June 26, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I am not afraid to comment. Why should we be shocked by the antics of immoral deviants while attending an official function at the White House? Why should we be shocked by the administration's reply "that the administration does not have any control over the guests in the White House"? Most people with any type of manners or decency would conduct themselves with some decorum. The reply by former Sen Inoyoe that they don't control guests is as far from the truth as anyone outright lying could get. One of the most guarded and protected buildings in America and they "can't control their guests"? C'mon people. I am an old Marine and that dog don't hunt. This just another example of why we need good leadership to get our Country back to God before it is destroyed. The Second Coming seems to be the only way we will see any redemption. I will accept that glady but I will not accept what has been done to my beloved Country and the sacrifices that were made so these implacable deviants can do what they want in the White House. God Bless the USA, AGAIN. Thank you.[/font][/size]

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-i1ad1HSbgp8/T-s0qCL0X_I/AAAAAAAAYZ4/JTMurNI0svo/s1600/6-27-12%2B2.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5Q1v8rT-8iQ/T-s2HIpZTCI/AAAAAAAAYaE/bwbk4d1-2J0/s1600/6-26-12%2B7.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-S1vEpMY1VnY/T-sxOdOMsGI/AAAAAAAAYZc/KJlY152s-xc/s1600/6-25-12%2B6.jpg)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-34XIVWHnbDw/T-oIhzyVjNI/AAAAAAAAYXw/g80VLzFbJnA/s1600/6-25-12%2B4.jpg)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wnU8amb23M0/T-iwJcHpiFI/AAAAAAAAYTQ/nAHXSC4_NFk/s1600/6-22-12%2B6.jpg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-djlGhyi53KA/T-i5yBY9STI/AAAAAAAAYUI/IEnS_3X1Ttk/s1600/6-22-12%2B1.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Xi6lM_p62CQ/T-it94xYMcI/AAAAAAAAYTE/N8WYVJlI0cM/s1600/6-21-12%2B3.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hqTIB91VSnk/T-ip1XWbkaI/AAAAAAAAYSo/ExgikijoyH8/s1600/6-22-12%2B7.jpg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gPMcgP8Ba8I/T-ioByFuiDI/AAAAAAAAYSc/jMbz63vRMf4/s1600/6-25-12%2B1.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JuQz_ML5UoU/T-ilp8AAPSI/AAAAAAAAYSQ/tlyFv8kqvEI/s1600/Illinois.bmp)

There is a rumor floating around that Hillary "Broom Hilda" Clinton might replace Joe "The Mouth" Biden on the ticket.  I don't think that's likely. 

...First of all, I am not convinced that she would add to his vote total, whereas it would definitely cost Obuma "The Mouth's"
vote.  After all, the folks who adore "The Broom" already adore Barack Insane Obuma.

...Two, I am convinced that Michelle "BroadHips" Obuma despises "The Broom", regarding her as a white hussy, and will never forgive her for giving rise to the "birther" movement during the 2008 primaries.

Even psychologically, it doesn't make sense.  By dumping "The Mouth", Obuma would be acknowledging that he might have made a mistake in naming him in the first place.  He would also be sending an obvious signal that he actually needed "The Broom's" help in order to win re-election.  That doesn't sound like the narcissist-in-chief so many of us have come to know and hate.

Finally, "The Mouth" has spent nearly four years proving his devotion to "Insane."  At times, when Obuma gazes at his vice-president's wagging tail, he's probably reminded of the Cocker Spaniel he noshed on back in Indonesia.

"The Mouth" locked his lips on Obuma's derriere in 2008 and he hasn't let loose since.  The only display of public affection that even comes close is the one that Bill O'Reilly shows towards himself when he insists that at least half the letters he posts at the end of The Factor are from readers gushing about "Killing Lincoln."

       (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1105/liberal-intelligence-biden-quote-ignorance-political-poster-1306215322.jpg)
"A reporter in Arizona was forced into a closet by Joe Biden's staff to keep him from talking to guests at a fund-raiser.  The guy said it wouldn't have been so bad if Biden wasn't already in there for the same reason."

" 'The Donald' Trump is out, and Ron Paul is out.  At this point, the only person that could derail Obuma's reelection is Joe Biden."

"There was a private screening of 'The Help' at the White House over the weekend. And Clown Obuma said he really liked the film.... 'reminded me of home.  The best thing about private screenings, because we get to do them.... it's not like seeing it with the public, you know, where there might be some moron talking through the whole movie.  In fact, that's why we didn't tell Joe Biden.' "

"The White House may have to lay off all nonessential workers if the government shuts down. You know: interns, pages, Biden..."

"Joe Biden accidentally revealed the location of the Vice President's top secret bunker.  The guy can't help it.  But he did apologize.  He said, 'I am so sorry for the mistake.  The launch code is 85374.  It will never happen again.  It will never happen again.  My Gmail password is robot23.  What am I doing?  The house key is under the plant near the doorstep.'"

Hee Hee... that's ol' Joe Biden, alright.  Somewhat of a likeable guy... a funny guy.  But.. if butt-kissing Obuma's black a$$ were an Olympic event, that's the sort of thing that could earn Joe Biden a gold medal in London this summer.  Unfortunately, Biden doesn't come cheap.  According to Newsmax columnist Ron Kessler, Joe Biden costs the American taxpayer over a million dollars a year just in weekend travel expenses.  It seems that the man Obuma appointed to root out wasteful government spending takes a helicopter, designated as Marine Two, every weekend to Maryland, where he then gets on Air Force Two to fly him home to Delaware.  When the weather is warm and Obuma isn't out of town stealing campaign funds, Biden will return to Washington on Saturday so that he can play a round of golf with his boss before heading back to Delaware.  The cost of the one-hour round trip on Air Force Two is $22,000.  The cost of two such trips in a weekend is therefore $44,000, not counting the helicopter rides and the lost golf balls.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Biden-weekend-travel-Air-Force-Two/2012/06/04/id/441168

All of this is in addition to his $230,700 salary and the rent-free vice-presidential mansion, where five Navy stewards cook, clean, shop for food and do the laundry, at no cost to the Bidens.  Lest you think that's the end of it, the taxpayers are also stuck with the cost of renting 20 condominiums in the Wilmington area for the Secret Service agents who have to accompany him on his weekend jaunts to... ah.. Delaware.  

In case you were wondering, I think this is what the Vice-President has in mind when he refers to himself as just a regular Joe.

And... what the hey... it could be worse.  Look at Pelosi!

Racial Politics Thicker Than Justice
(http://www.friendsofcpc.org/images/Star_Parker.jpg)
By Star Parker
7/2/2012


When the House voted last Thursday to find Attorney General Eric Holder in criminal contempt of Congress, members of the Congressional Black Caucus walked out.

Why is the Black Caucus trying to make this about race?

It's about Holder's refusal to turn over Justice Department documents requested by the House Oversight and Government Committee in its investigation of the "Fast and Furious" operation.

"Fast and Furious" was a "gun-walking" operation conducted by the Justice Department's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF). ATF would allow known smugglers to purchase arms from dealers in Arizona with the idea that they would trace them to their destination to operatives in drug cartels in Mexico.

           (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uPnAxJ1OhOQ/T_H7IC2D63I/AAAAAAAAYsI/KMXER4B2KmA/s1600/6-28-12%2B2.jpg)

Before the vote, Black Caucus chairman Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) appeared on CNN calling the House contempt vote "....silly and detrimental to one human being." On MSNBC he told Al Sharpton, "This is partisanship at its most base level."

Sure, it's an election year. And if you had to stretch to appreciate the complaint against Holder being made by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif), chairman of the House committee doing the investigation, you might buy Cleaver's claim that this is just Republican political grandstanding.

But you don't have to stretch to appreciate the case against Holder.

It seems pretty clear that "Fast and Furious" was a botched operation. The ATF lost track of some two thousand weapons that disappeared into the hands of criminals in Mexico. In December 2010, weapons traced to this operation were found on smugglers who murdered U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry. Others were tied to the murder of at least 200 Mexican citizens.

The investigation into these ATF activities began with inquiries by ranking Senate Judiciary Committee member Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) after Agent Terry's murder.

The Justice Department, in a letter to Senator Grassley, initially denied the existence of gun-walking operations. But this picture changed when ATF whistleblowers brought facts to the contrary to light. Subsequently, Justice withdrew its letter, saying its denial of the existence of these operations was mistaken.

Inconsistencies in Holder's testimony before the House committee produced further reasons for suspicion. And then Holder's stonewalling for months, refusing to produce the documentation that the House committee requested.

Whether there is a fire here remains to be seen. But there is plenty of smoke.

Yet Cleaver calls the House vote holding Holder in contempt "silly?" The chairman of the Black Caucus should have the opposite reaction if only for concern for his own community. Illegal drugs smuggled into the US from Mexico cause havoc among black youth. According to the Center for American Progress, there have been more than 25.4 million drug convictions in the US since 1980, and one third of them were black.

To grasp what's really motivating Cleaver, I apply what I call the "A Time to Kill" test.

In the 1996 film "A Time to Kill", a black man in a town in Mississippi hires a white lawyer to defend him after he kills two white racists who raped and mutilated his daughter. When the lawyer makes his closing argument to the jury, he asks them to close their eyes. He describes the atrocities that were done to the girl and concludes by saying "now imagine she's white." His black defendant is acquitted.

So close your eyes. Consider the details about "Fast and Furious" and then picture that the Attorney General is not Eric Holder but John Ashcroft (first Attorney General of President G.W. Bush) and that the murdered border agent, Brian Terry, is black.

Would Emanuel Cleaver now call this contempt vote "silly?" Would the Black Caucus have walked out?

For the Black Caucus this is about racial politics.

Fortunately for us, for Darrell Issa (who happens to represent my home district in California) this is about shedding light on what might be broken in ATF operations.

Henry Wolf, a guy out in California, has sued BMW North America, claiming that a 4-hour ride on a ridge-like motorcycle seat has given him an erection lasting 20 months.  Wolf is seeking compensation for lost wages, medical expenses, emotional distress and general damage. 

http://4unews.com/42543/henry-wolf-20-month-erection-sues-bmw/world/americas/

In related news, Pfizer, the company that produces Viagra, is considering suing BMW North America for patent infringement, and Bill Clinton, 66, has indicated an interest in taking up motorcycle riding.

                              (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510NEo65BVL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)

With the news that yet another electric car company, Fisker, is going to stop production of its electric cars, it occurs to me that green energy is a lot like the game of soccer.  No matter how hard some interested parties push it, America's not buying it.  In just the same way that we prefer football, baseball, basketball, hockey, golf and, at least during Olympic Game years, even gymnastics and synchronized swimming, we dislike soccer.  I'm not saying that nobody likes the silly game in which people pretend not to have arms and hands, and a 2-1 outcome has fans shaking their heads over the obvious lack of defense.  I know that immigrants from Third World countries who grew up kicking a casaba melon around think it's the cat's pajamas.  But most Americans prefer sports that don't require using one's own head as a bat.

As I was saying, it's much the same with green energy.  Although some people, especially those who have finagled a government loan to start a company, pretend to believe that wind and solar energy are an adequate substitute for fossil fuel, nobody else is buying the big Obuma lie. 

Something else they're not buying, just in case you hadn't noticed the scarcity of Volts on the open road, are electric cars.

                              (http://www.tobytoons.com/redstate/20100816_volt.jpg)

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/print-friendly/47805

"It is not enough to just remove Obama from office, because unless we understand the corruption that made his rise possible, he, or someone like him, will rise again"

Lies We Can Believe In
By Daniel Greenfield  Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Civil disobedience is the act of breaking the law and defying the authorities to do anything about it. So is tyranny. The difference between the two lies in which side of the power equation the breaker is on. When the law is broken, two things happen. Either the law is upheld or the authorities back away from a confrontation and find some way to save face.

The ObamaCare process involved breaking a long list of rules and laws and then defying the ragged remnants of the system to do anything about it. At every turn the United States was unable to stop a rogue chief executive and his ruling party from trampling the law. When the case finally reached the Supreme Court, the leading judicial body in the land sidestepped a confrontation by redefining what the action was, rather than rule on the law. It was a classic case of the authorities saving face.

Civil disobedience balances moral absolutes against legal principles. The Supreme Court exists to serve as the final bastion of the law against runaway moral absolutes. But just as in its showdown with FDR, the Court blinked, and our court, unlike that court, didn't even at least put up a good fight for the law before backing down. Obama didn't even have to threaten to pack the court with justices. All he had to do was make it clear that he wasn't going to follow the law, which forced the law to save face by following him instead.

The American chief executive has a great deal of power and a chief executive who dons imperial robes is a danger with few precedents. There have been conflicts between the branches, but even FDR made a pretense of bowing to some outside authority. Obama never has, with the exception of the King of Saudi Arabia.

If he were to be impeached tomorrow, as some urge, he simply wouldn't leave. I don't know what he will do if he loses the election, simply because I don't think he knows what he will do—I don't think the prospect of losing has seriously entered his mind. If he loses it will be a pitched battle between Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama on one shoulder telling him to stay and Joe Biden and whatever unfortunate soul is Chief-of-Staff at that point acting as the voices of reason telling him that it's over.

Even absolute monarchs make concessions to something outside themselves, to religion or tradition, but Obama never has. History, religion and tradition are nothing but lines that he drops into speeches in praise of himself. The American flag and the Constitution are trophies that he uses as backdrops, the same way that he uses Greek columns—these aren't things that mean anything to him. They're decorations for the sets playing the eternal movie of him.

Obama is not a politician. Politicians learn to compromise. They learn that they can't always get their way. Obama has never learned that lesson. He always gets his way. Or he did until 2010. No one has ever told him "No" and made it stick. There is no weight of life experience that tells him what to do when this happens.

Unlike many of his predecessors, Obama was never in the military. Unlike all of them, he never held anything resembling a real job that required him to do anything but show up and make speeches. Children are natural tyrants. Take a child throwing a tantrum off the playground, give him every privilege in life, leave out any real challenges, keep telling him that he's special for 50 years and he will be an actual tyrant.  

No one ever thought that a man with the emotional maturity of a child, with no life experience and no principles, would occupy the White House, surrounded by sycophants and worshiped by a press that acts as an extension of the White House Press Office. It took an extensive breakdown among multiple institutions and the national culture for that to happen, and the inability to assert the rule of law is a further symptom of that breakdown.

No one is fooled, unless to some degree they want to be fooled. To believe a lie, you have to want to believe it, and that means that at some level, you know that it is a lie.

Obama was elected because we, Democrats and quite a few Republicans, wanted to be saved from ourselves. We wanted to be saved from our policies, our debates and our guilt. In a time of crisis, we weren't looking for a reliable experienced professional to do the job, if we had been, McCain, for all his flaws, would have won by a landslide.

The man we picked had no experience and no skills beyond his surface charm. He was irresponsible and that was why the country chose him. His irresponsibility made our irresponsibility look good..Even his racist associations were a plus, they made voters feel better about their own prejudices. Every wrong, ugly, stupid and irresponsible thing that he did only made him more appealing to the people who voted for him.

Every now and then people like to get drunk. When things are a complete mess, that's when the temptation to open the bottle and pour it down the hatch comes. Things were a complete mess in 2008 and the country got stinking drunk. It decided to be completely irresponsible and feeling sorry for itself, it elected someone who wouldn't have been qualified for any position in his own Cabinet.

Since then, the country has sobered up. It thinks that Obama is doing a bad job, but it doesn't know how to tell him that he was only a one-night stand. He seems like such a nice guy and it would hurt his feelings to tell him why he was really elected. It wasn't because anyone, besides zombie liberals, thought that he knew what he was doing. It was because he seemed like a cheerful bright spot in a dour time and everyone felt sorry about slavery and segregation.

The problem is that Obama won't leave. 2010 was a sharp hint. Any halfway competent politician would have caught it and changed direction. But Obama refuses to understand hints. He refuses to understand the unspoken message because that gives him power. The power of the rude is in their rudeness. The rudeness is a challenge to anyone with manners to match him equally or shut up and take it. Some Republicans, like Joe Wilson, have matched him rudeness for rudeness, many more, like Justice Roberts, have chosen to take it instead.

A Head of Stare who refuses to follow the law is engaging in rudeness squared, but Obama is doing what the left has always done. The left refused manners and mores, it trashed the culture, threw out its morals, defied the law with acts of civil disobedience and once in office refused to accept any limitations on their power. And most of the time it won. It stared down the society, the police and the politicians, defied their rules and took their rulemaking powers for its own.

The power of the left lies in challenging the lies that society tells itself and creating the illusion of credibility and sincerity through that challenge. It succeeds when its enemies lack faith in their own ideas, their own policies and their own values. The more abrasively it challenges norms, the more it refuses to follow any rules but its own, the more credibility it gains as a liberation movement.

Obama is the apotheosis of the left's project, a brat nurtured on self-esteem, weaned on white guilt, educated to play with words and rewarded for staged confrontations with equally staged surrenders. All these qualities have shaped him into the entitled monster that he is, squatting in the Oval Office and grinning from the covers of a hundred magazines, determined to always win the only way he knows how, by ignoring the rules of the game.

If you have ever encountered someone genuinely worthless, yet successful, it was almost certainly a man or woman who refused to take "No" for an answer. That can be a useful quality in some fields, but it's also a perfect way for people with no useful skills to get what they want out of life. These are the people who don't get fired or denied promotions because it would cause too many problems, who get discounts they aren't entitled to, because they keep demanding them, who use determination and confrontation as substitutes for knowledge, ability and competence—who become a success story purely based on their enormous sense of entitlement and complete lack of shame.

Today such a man occupies the highest office in the land and rules accordingly. What the left once practiced as civil disobedience has become tyranny. Under Obama, the country is turning lawless because its chief executive is lawless. But Obama's rise to power is a symptom of deep-rooted problems in the country. They cannot be fixed just by voting him out of office, because there are other Obamas out there.

Obama's rise to power is a mirror of the national problems that got him there. All the things wrong with him are reflected, to some extent, in the men and women who voted for him. It could not be otherwise. His lawlessness is a symptom of an existing lawlessness. His contempt for values and morals, for tradition and history, for the nation itself, is a symptom of the contempt that the left has fed over the years until it has become a poison in the national bloodstream.

To truly defeat Obama, we have to be able to defeat those negative traits as well. To understand what gave someone like him power over so many people. It is not enough to just remove him from office, because unless we understand the corruption that made his rise possible, he, or someone like him, will rise again.

                                                                    (http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/uploads/caruba070412.jpg)

That says it all Warph

I agree Jarhead.. and Warph... just because I don't comment on what you post.. doesn't mean I don't read it all and give you the big hero thumbs up warhoop!!

(http://www.cascity.com/howard/animations/60.gif)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-KH7JVrJXAUI/T_ds3BW2KZI/AAAAAAAAY58/YulWttMMdoA/s1600/Tom%2BDewey.jpg)

Obamacare tax confusion a warning sign: the peril of playing it safe.

Thomas E. Dewey... the president who might have been.

The Romney campaign's stumble over Obamacare (it's a penalty... no... wait... it's a tax!  Yes!  Yes!  We're sure now...it's a tax!) was both unnecessary and avoidable.

If the Romney campaign isn't careful (as our friends at the Wall Street Journal noted here... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577506652734793044.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop ),
...the morning after the 2012 election they may well find themselves linked forever to the famously hapless 1948 campaign of Tom Dewey.  The campaign everyone expected to be a hands-down winner... which turned into the greatest upset in American political history at the hands of underdog President Harry Truman.

Roberts' Double Cross and Obuma's Latest Flurry of LIES.

Whether Left, Right, Independent, or Confused, no one who is not bought and paid for as part of the Obuma political machine is going to like the Obuma Double Cross of the American people on ObumaCare.  Before ObumaCare was passed, Obuma told the American people over and over, even on national TV, that the individual mandate was not a tax.  After ObumaCare was passed, Obuma sent his lawyers into courts all over the country to argue that the individual mandate is constitutional precisely because it is a TAX.

This is the top argument to feature now in discrediting Obuma and ObumaCare.  No one likes a dishonest liar.  Even worse when that dishonest liar is supposed to be our nation's leader Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma. When he sent his own lawyers into courts all over America to argue that the individual mandate is constitutional because it is a tax, he demonstrated that when he told the nation it was not a tax, he knew all along that was not true, and that he was planning all along to double cross the people he was supposed to be leading.  That alone disqualifies him from serving as President. The majority of Americans who are still capable of thinking will recognize that we can't have as our nation's leader a dishonest double crosser.

More Obuma LIES:


Medicare will be protected:

Well, not actually.  Funding cuts of more than $500 billion, in addition to more than 150 new provisions, will affect quality care.  Like any business, physicians cannot remain in practice when their profits don't keep pace with costs to do business. ObumaCare will bleed them dry.  It may not happen overnight, but rest assured, it will happen, and when it does, the government will be right there to fill the gap with government-run facilities.  Ask veterans and their families how that's working out for them.


Medicare's Patient-Doctor relationship will be preserved:

Nope. another LIE!  Much like the U.K.'s National Health Service (NHS), ObumaCare is more about cost control than quality care.  The NHS determines medical needs based upon a calculation created by economists, and uses it to determine who does or does not receive treatment.  We're not there yet, but ObumaCare pushes us in that direction.  Baby steps.  And former Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) had the audacity to suggest the Republican vision for healthcare boils down to letting people die.  Physician heal thyself!  ObumaCare will not add to the deficit: Democrats' pants should be on fire for this promise.  Research done by experts at the Heritage Foundation reveals ObumaCare is "a trillion-dollar budget buster" and claims Demorats rigged their numbers using "budget gimmicks, sleights of hand, accounting tricks, and completely implausible assumptions."

One of the greatest things about America is that we have the opportunity to right our wrongs by way of the ballot box.  What the Supreme's declared as constitutional, voters can declare as history come November.

If I didn't sincerely believe that Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma is a menace to the America I love, I could just sit back and be entertained by his endless buffoonery and Unbelievable LIES.  Unfortunately, even back in 2008, I took him seriously when he promised to radically transform this nation.  I recognized that Obuma wasn't merely a politician making idle promises during the course of an election campaign; instead, he was leveling a curse on America.

I often begin laughing in anticipation as soon as Obuma starts talking.  For instance, when he was asked, in the wake of Governor Scott Walker's managing to hang on to his job, whether he regretted not campaigning for Tom Barrett in Wisconsin, I bet I wasn't the only person who started chortling even before he said, "I was hoping for a different outcome, but, as president, I have a lot of responsibilities."  Perfect. Not even Jay Leno or Woody Allen could have written a funnier punch line for the bozo-in-chief.

Even if you didn't know that Obuma had spent the weekend before the Wisconsin recall election speaking at half a dozen campaign fund-raisers in the Midwest, you knew he was going to come up with one of his typical knee-slappers.

As everyone knows by now, Russia, which Obuma regards as one of his foreign policy success stories, is providing military helicopters to Syria's Bashar al-Assad.  I can't begin to imagine why Obuma, who has double-crossed Poland and the Czech Republic by depriving them of a promised missile defense system and has volunteered to decrease our nuclear arsenal by 80%, has also agreed to buy some of those same Russian helicopters for Afghanistan.  Aside from the fact that you would think that Afghanistan could use some of its drug money to pay for its own necessities, the real question is why Obuma seems to be constantly doing Putin's bidding or spending our taxpayers money foolishly.  Is it simply that Putin reminds him of the white father he never had?

The truth is, it would probably take a team of psychiatrists to figure out the demons that drive this clown.  After being dumped by father, stepfather and mother, all before he even entered puberty, it's no wonder he comes across like a toxic combination of Jeremiah Wright and a fruit loop.

           (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2PBOpQedxgs/T_dGj9BpfjI/AAAAAAAAHC8/zGA7IvZZd4w/s1600/33083a4bd729b0b0a84dcf1110231d38.jpg)

I admit that I have a lower tolerance than most for those things that so many other, more patient people, dismiss as petty annoyances.  What I can't figure out is why they aren't more like me.

For instance, why is it that so many people continue to accept that Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma is brilliant and a spellbinding orator? How is it that anyone, even people so dumb as a post they intend to vote for him, can bear to sit through one of his boring, self-aggrandizing, speeches?  Even Jimmy Stewart, at his folksiest, didn't pause three or four times during a single sentence.

And talk about dumb, this idiot is the schnook who referred to 57 states and the Austrian language, mispronounced "corps" as "corpse," and, lest there be any question about the state of his pea-size brain, recently announced that the private sector economy is doing just fine.   

Obuma strikes me as the personification of every lazy high school student I ever knew.  He smoked pot, tried cocaine, hung around with a sleazy crowd, got other kids to write his book reports and copied his answers off some stooge's test paper.  When people used to say that in America, absolutely anyone could grow up to be president, they clearly had this goofus in mind.

I am also annoyed by emails that tell me not to break the chain and to pass along some simpleminded message to a hundred of my nearest and dearest or suffer the inevitable consequences.  Can you imagine anyone doing such an absurd thing in person?  A word to the not so wise: If you wouldn't ask someone to do something face-to-face or pass along a joke you wouldn't waste the time telling to an actual human being, you might reconsider the urge to forward that email.  Sometimes, it's really better not to remind people that you are still alive.

When I read that Tennessee resident Desmond Hatchett has sired 30 babies with 11 different women, I found myself wondering why he is not regarded as a serial criminal and, at the very least, been sterilized by the state for irresponsibly placing the welfare of 41 people on the backs of Tennessee's taxpayers.

Although I despise the louts who populate the Occupy Wall Street movement, I despise those who pay them lip service even more; I refer to those left-wing politicians who populate the Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue movement.

The United Nations, which should have been banished from our shores long before now, recently appointed Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe, 88, to be its international envoy of tourism.  Although he is guilty of ethnic cleansing (aka murdering his political and tribal rivals), and is, ironically, banned from touring Canada and most of Europe, the U.N. saw no problem with bestowing the honor on him.  That was especially the case once they learned that Idi Amin and Che Guevara were no longer available.

The 8 Most Shameful Moments of Barack Obama's Presidency
By John Hawkins
7/10/2012


8) "The private sector is doing fine:" Know what hasn't been "doing fine" for a single day since Barack Obama came into office? The private sector. So when Barack Obama bizarrely proclaimed that "the private sector is doing fine" earlier this year, Obama was further out of touch than E.T. was when he wanted to phone home.

7) Obama bows to Saudi king: If Barack Obama had spent his formative years in the United States instead of overseas, he'd know that real Americans don't bow. Moreover, no American, especially the President, should be bowing down to a dictatorial king like the one we had to overthrow in the Revolutionary War. Besides the Saudi king, Obama also continued to humiliate himself and his country by bowing to Japanese Emperor Akihito and the Chinese PM. We're lucky that the SEALs killed Osama Bin Laden as opposed to capturing him or we might have seen pictures of Obama bowing to him on MSNBC by now.

6) Son looked like Trayvon: At a time when George Zimmerman was publicly being threatened with death and white people were being beaten "For Trayvon," there was an opportunity for the President to show leadership and encourage people to calm down. Instead, after making some perfunctory remarks towards that end, Obama added fuel to the fire by noting, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." This was a follow-up to Obama's similarly foolish decision to insert himself into another local situation that didn't concern him. After his friend Henry Gates smashed his own door in and made such an ass of himself that he was arrested when the police arrived, Obama noted that he didn't know the facts, but he did know that the "police acted stupidly." He then followed that up by suggesting racism was probably to blame. Fortunately, he managed to patch over that bit of idiocy with a "beer summit" as opposed to the Trayvon Martin case where he increased the chances that someone would get killed because he was thoughtlessly shooting off his mouth.

5) Refusing to pick up illegals from Arizona: After the Obama Administration refused to enforce federal immigration law in Arizona, the state passed a tough new law that allowed local police to do the job ICE wouldn't do. Disgracefully, Barack Obama held a White House press conference where both he and Mexican President Felipe Calderon ganged up against Arizona for doing little more than enforcing the laws on the book. The Obama Administration then sued Arizona and after it didn't emerge completely victorious, simply refused to pick up illegal aliens that aren't felons from Arizona. In other words, not only is Barack refusing to enforce the law of the land, he won't allow anyone else to uphold the laws he falsely swore to uphold when he became President.

4) Persecuting the Catholic Church: Obama spat in the face of the Catholic Church and violated its constitutionally-protected 1st Amendment religious rights by demanding that it provide birth control and abortifacient drugs in its hospitals. Unless this policy is stopped, millions of Americans will pay the price as the Catholic Church closes its hospitals rather than violate its deeply-held religious beliefs in order to cater to Barack Obama's whims.

3) Passing Obamacare: Health care reform was opposed by the Republican Party and the American people despite endless lies the Obama Administration told about what a wonderful program it would be. The Obama Administration lied when it said everyone could keep their health insurance, that it wouldn't increase the deficit, when it said there were no death panels in the bill, when it said it wouldn't increase taxes, and when it said abortion wouldn't be funded with your tax dollars. All of these lies were for a program that took 500 billion dollars out of Medicare to fund a new entitlement program that will cause large numbers of doctors to quit, dramatically reduce the quality of care, and force Americans to deal with the IRS just to get health care. It's one of the single worst bills in America history that delivers an incredibly expensive new entitlement program at the point in American history where we can least afford it.

2) Obama's lawless attempt to pass the Dream Act by Fiat: After the DREAM ACT failed to make it through Congress, Barack Obama illegally decided to implement it anyway. After instructing the Department of Justice to stop following the law in regard to illegals under 30, Obama decided to issue work permits for illegals. That's an illegal act that directly contradicts the existing immigration law. It also makes little sense to give somewhere between 800,000 and 3 million foreigners work permits when every job they take will keep another American out of work in tough economic times.

1) Eric Holder held in contempt of Congress after Obama uses executive privilege: On Barack Obama's watch, the Department of Justice helped put guns into the hands of Mexican cartels and these guns were used to kill hundreds of Mexicans along with American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Did Eric Holder know about this beforehand? Did Barack Obama? We don't know for sure because they've been engaged in a Nixonian cover-up. They've dragged their feet, stonewalled, and when they couldn't hold off any longer, Obama declared executive privilege in an attempt to hide the truth about how deeply his administration is tied to the deaths of 300 plus people. Obama's behavior was so sleazy that 17 House Democrats felt compelled to vote with Republicans to find Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. Say what you want about Watergate, but at least no one was killed during the scandal, which is something that can't be said about Obama's Fast and Furious debacle.

                   Bucket List for 2012

(http://thetroublemakertimes.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/eagle-flag-engle-bob-1.jpg)

HERE IS ALL I WANT:


Obama: Gone!

Borders: Closed!

Congress: Obey its own laws!

Language: English only!

Culture: Constitution, and the Bill of Rights!

Drug Free: Mandatory Drug Screening before Welfare!

NO freebies to: Non-Citizens!

Drill our own oil, refine it and distribute it!


We the people are coming!

Mitt Romney's Background

Personal Information:

His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney
He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old.

His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan.

He was raised in Bloomfield Hills , Michigan.

He is Married to Ann Romney since 1969; they have five children.

Education:

B.A. from Brigham Young University,

J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University


Religion:

Mormon - The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints


Working Background:

After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.

After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney.

In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States .

In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.

He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.

In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit.


Some Interesting Facts about Romney:

Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people.

Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.

He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year.

He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years.

He was an unpaid bishop and state president of his church for ten years.

He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.

He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.

He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity.

Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.

And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income.... Just for comparison purposes, Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%.


Mitt Romney is Trustworthy: (Compared tp Barack Obama, who is not...)

He will show us his birth certificate

He will show us his high school and college transcripts.

He will show us his social security card.

He will show us his law degree.

He will show us his draft notice.

He will show us his medical records.

He will show us his income tax records.

He will show us he has nothing to hide.
Obuma won't.

Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States.

You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least I know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or practice fiscal irresponsibility. I know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into. We won't like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it. But, on the minus side, He never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US.

Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma:  The Real OUT-SOURCER President


"And I will invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy to create five million new energy jobs over the next decade - jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced; jobs building solar panels and wind turbines and a new electricity grid; jobs that will help us eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East in ten years and help save the planet in the bargain. That's how America can lead again."
...President Barack Obama, October 30, 2008 ."

     

http://www.obamanomicsoutsourced.com/

Billions of Tax-Payer dollars spent Overseas by Obuma in Out-Sourcing Jobs.

It's ( obamanomicsoutsourced.com ) actually a pretty handy-dandy tool for tracing the many cases in which our "stimulus" dollars went overseas and the Obama administration's many instances of cronyism — take Switzerland and South Korea, for example:

Swiss-Based Landis+Gyr Received Over $50 Million In Stimulus Contracts For Their Smart Grid Meters. Cathy Zoi, A Former Obama Energy Department Official, Held Over $250,000 Worth Of Stock In The Company As They Profited From Her Department's Policies. Zoi Had Previously Served As An Executive Director At Landis+Gyr Before Joining The Obama Administration. ...

Two Korean Manufacturers Of Electric Vehicle Batteries Were Given $300 Million To Build Plants In Michigan. Union Workers Are Now Claiming That Foreign Nationals Are Being Brought In To Fill Jobs That They Could Take. The Department Of Energy Has Admitted That 11 Of The 18 Contractors On Site Are Asian Firms.

"I don't know how useful it will actually be in flipping the script, but there's a whole lotta' truth in President Obama 'record of failure spanning the globe.'"  RNC Chair Reince Priebus appeared on Fox this morning to announce this latest campaign's debut:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/10/republicans-fight-back-on-outsourcing-charges/[/font][/size]

"Just like he did against Hillary Clinton, President Obama now continues to spread dishonest attacks about Mitt Romney to distract from his failed record. Even though fact check after fact check have found his claims to be false, he continues to not tell the truth to the American people. It is no wonder why our country has lost confidence in his leadership."



I just heard that in his preparation for the presidential debates, Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma, the-liar-in-chief, has decided to have John Kerry represent Mitt Romney.  It is Kerry's contention that being from Massachusetts, the state that Romney governed for four years, nobody is in a better position to know what he is likely to say.  Offhand, I would have thought that Kerry was better suited to run in a stakes race than to stand in for Romney.  After all, when it comes to politics, he is strictly a horse's a$$, while, if you judged him solely by his looks, you would guess that he eats his meals out of a feed bag.

At this point, Romney hasn't yet announced whom he will use as a stand-in for Obuma.  Judging by the stiff and stilted delivery that has become Obuma's signature over the past few years, as he's attempted to combine gravitas with an imperiousness unseen since the salad days of Benito Mussolini, I would advise Romney to practice with something like the Audio-Animatronic Abe Lincoln that delivers platitudes hour after hour at Disneyland.[/font][/size]

     (http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/infowars-shop_2044_1673993)

http://infowars-shop.stores.yahoo.net/obdedvd.html
The Obama Deception is a hard-hitting film that completely destroys the myth that Barack Obama is working for the best interests of the American people.

     The Video- FREE:
     

The Obama phenomenon is a hoax carefully crafted by the captains of the New World Order. He is being pushed as savior in an attempt to con the American people into accepting global slavery.

We have reached a critical juncture in the New World Order's plans. It's not about Left or Right: it's about a One World Government. The international banks plan to loot the people of the United States and turn them into slaves on a Global Plantation.

Covered in this film: who Obama works for, what lies he has told, and his real agenda. If you want to know the facts and cut through all the hype, this is the film for you.

Watch the Obama Deception and learn how:

- Obama is continuing the process of transforming America into something that resembles Nazi Germany, with forced National Service, domestic civilian spies, warrantless wiretaps, the destruction of the Second Amendment, FEMA camps and Martial Law.

- Obama's handlers are openly announcing the creation of a new Bank of the World that will dominate every nation on earth through carbon taxes and military force.

- International bankers purposefully engineered the worldwide financial meltdown to bankrupt the nations of the planet and bring in World Government.

- Obama plans to loot the middle class, destroy pensions and federalize the states so that the population is completely dependent on the Central Government.

- The Elite are using Obama to pacify the public so they can usher in the North American Union by stealth, launch a new Cold War and continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/07/11/video_romney_surrogate_destroys_stammering_andrea_mitchell_on_outsourcing
Former Govenor of New Hampshire Kills Andrea Mitchell On MS/NBC: 

Republicans were gearing up to hit back hard against Obama's baseless "outsourcing" meme, and that Romney surrogates were preparing to step up their aggression level.  That reporting was quickly confirmed in one irresistibly tasty television appearance.  Behold, former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu taking a shell-shocked Andrea Mitchell to school and back in just over three minutes:
The obvious highlight here is Sununu openly laughing at Mitchell as she hopelessly gropes for something -- anything -- to come to The One's defense.  "You're struggling, Andrea.  You're struggling."  Priceless.

See the short video of this:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/07/11/video_romney_surrogate_destroys_stammering_andrea_mitchell_on_outsourcing




And then we have the black bit*h of CNN, Soledad O'Brien wanting to give Barack Insane-Hussein Obutthead the credit of reduction in their unemployment levels instead of the Republican Govenors:  http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/07/13/video_soledad_obrien_thinks_obama_should_get_credit_for_states_with_low_unemployment_not_governors

Great news came out recently that all 17 states that elected a Republican governor in 2010 have seen reductions in their unemployment levels.  http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katehicks/2012/07/08/excellent_all_gop_governors_elected_in_2010_reduced_unemployment[/b]

"Some awesome news: all 17 states that elected a Republican governor in 2010 has seen a reduction in their unemployment levels. In just over a year and a half since those new executives took office, these states have seen some serious improvement:

Kansas - 6.9% to 6.1% = a decline of 0.8%

Maine - 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Michigan - 10.9% to 8.5% = a decline of 2.4%

New Mexico - 7.7% to 6.7% = a decline of 1.0%

Oklahoma - 6.2% to 4.8% = a decline of 1.4%

Pennsylvania - 8.0% to 7.4% = a decline of 0.6%

Tennessee - 9.5% to 7.9% = a decline of 1.6%

Wisconsin - 7.7% to 6.8% = a decline of 0.9%

Wyoming - 6.3% to 5.2% = a decline of 1.1%

Alabama - 9.3% to 7.4% = a decline of 1.9%

Georgia - 10.1% to 8.9% = a decline of 1.2%

Tony Lee at Breitbart adds:
Furthermore, the average drop in the unemployment rate in these states was 1.35%, compared to the national decline of .9%, which means, according to the analysis, that the job market in these Republican states is improving 50% faster than the national rate.

Meanwhile, our president touts stagnation at 8.2% as "a step in the right direction." Clearly, the solutions put forth in these 17 states are working, and the ones offered by the White House aren't. If this is a sign of what Mitt Romney could offer in the first year and a half of his presidency, it seems like an opportunity Americans can't afford to miss."

Warph,
Looks like Big Nose Kate---I mean Andrea, could use one of her hero's teleprompters. Funny.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GnsOvXTEjuk/UAJQUSi0qsI/AAAAAAAAZd0/UEaIHUiusnY/s1600/1-3-12%2B19.jpg)

Our Disgraceful President
By Derek Hunter
7/15/2012

Warren G. Harding was corrupt, as was Richard M. Nixon. Bill Clinton and John F. Kennedy were like blind golfers, looking for a hole, any hole, every hole. Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt were power-mad narcissists convinced they knew best how everyone else should live. Jimmy Carter was clueless. But as we approach the 100-year anniversary of the first of these men to serve as president, all have been lapped in debasing their office by its current occupant: Barack Obama.

It is understandable President Obama would not want to run on his record. Who would? "Give me four more years so I can make up for the first four" is not the stuff of campaign slogan greatness.

But even that wouldn't work because, as he told CBS News this week, "The mistake of my first term - couple of years - was thinking this job was just about getting the policy right. And that's important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times." In other words, his only flaw is he's too damn close to perfect.

It's like someone bragging about being the most humble person on the planet.

The president of the United States thinks he needs to tell us stories to give us "a sense of unity, purpose and optimism..."

This struck me as odd because a.) he's already told us stories, the story of his life, in – count 'em – two autobiographies written before he accomplished anything, and b.) he's made zero effort to bring people together at any point in his presidency.

Putting aside his autobiographies, which should be moved to the fiction section of the bookstore considering the 38 provable falsehoods uncovered in them – remember the uproar when James Frey's A Million Tiny Pieces turned out to have exaggerations and lies? Obama does it; crickets – the fact this man would feel comfortable enough to speak the word "unity" without laughing is a testament to just how far we've fallen as a nation.

Barack Obama has done nothing but try to turn American against American based on income and accomplishment. He's done nothing but sit silently by, smirking, while his defenders, allies, surrogates and staff have called Americans who disagree with him racists, homophobes, sexists, xenophobes, rednecks, idiots, Uncle Toms and anything else you can call someone when you can't rebut what they say with facts or accomplishments.

Silence while disgraceful words are spoken on your behalf is just as disgraceful as uttering them yourself, which, of course, makes Barack Obama a disgraceful president.

When his attorney general isn't dodging subpoenas and being held in contempt by Congress, he's calling anyone who thinks we should have to present a photo ID to vote a klansman. MSNBC, a network that seems to exist only to parrot the president's line, unsurprisingly gets praised by the White House. This is unity?

The White House has to use and condone this because the alternative is reality, and reality is not Barack Obama's friend.

The president decided, against the express language in the law itself, he could unilaterally remove the work requirement from President Clinton's welfare reform law. There is no precedent or legal justification for this action, but to question it is to be anti-poor.

Putting aside the unconstitutional nature of all this, it remains a mystery how it could be anti-poor to support a law that provably improves the lives of poor Americans, gives them their best shot at autonomy and helps move them get out and stay out of poverty. But the charge gets made, the grenade gets thrown, and the person doing it gets an invite to the next Georgetown cocktail party or White House concert.

The administration of Barack Obama embodies the worst characteristics of the worst Presidents in our history – the abuse of power, the incompetence, the laziness, the bigotry, the disinterest, the dishonesty, the arrogance. The reason he's still personally popular is the same reason we know the names Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie, Perez Hilton or that TMZ exists – A large portion of our culture now celebrates what it used to shun, cheers that which used to drive people into hiding and rewards existence over accomplishment.

That's why the media parrots and trumpets attacks on Mitt Romney's incredibly successful private-sector record but ignores President Obama's public-sector failures. How people can question what Romney does with his own money but ignore Obama wasting literally trillions of ours is disgraceful. That President Obama would sanction the charge is worse.

Rush Limbaugh is correct when he calls President Obama "President Kardashian." Only we're on the receiving end of what Kim Kardashian became famous for. To paraphrase Andy Warhol, in the future we'll all have our own reality show for 15 minutes. Unfortunately the ratings will suck and it will serve only as a perch from which to watch the economy collapse. We can call it "Disgraceful."

November could not be more important, and it cannot come quickly enough.

One of the nice things about getting old is that you stop worrying about impressing people.  If I think of another thing, I'll let you know.  And speaking of age, I read that some guy in his 70s named Tarnae Watanabe just scaled Mt. Everest after having climbed it 10 years earlier.  When asked why he did it, instead of the usual "Because it was there," I'd like to think he said, "You mean I already climbed it?!  Why didn't anyone tell me?"

Although I have long been aware that, aside from Germany, Europe is an example of what happens when you let spoiled brats control the economy, until I heard it from Charles Krauthammer, I did not know that in Greece, hairdressers are allowed to retire at the age of 50 because theirs is regarded as a hazardous occupation.  I guess that means "The Donald"  isn't the only person in the world who takes his haircuts a damn sight too seriously.

The more I hear Washington, D.C., referred to as the nation's capital, the more I wonder just which nation they have in mind.  It's hard to recognize it as our own when a bill to criminalize gender-based abortions falls short of the two-thirds majority required, 246-168.  Although 20 Democrats joined 226 Republicans in voting for what one would assume is a no-brainer, inasmuch as the only other place on earth where such abominations take place is the cesspool known as China, seven Republicans voted along with the liberals.  The unholy seven included Rep. Ron Paul. You kids still think he'd make a great president?

Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma came into office saying the U.S. should be much more like Europe and now, thanks to his disastrous economic policies and his constant groveling to Russia, WE ARE!

Criticizing this administration isn't merely taking advantage of a freedom guaranteed us by the First Amendment, it's a patriotic obligation.

Warph,
Ron Paul voted how ? Could you repeat that one more time just in case the Ron Paul lovers didn't catch it the first time ? ;D

It's a State issue, not Federal.

Ron Paul is for liberty and he's definitely not like most Republicans who seem like to line up with tyranny very often.

Obama and the Republicans - just a bunch of nationalists.

  Romney's Hammer

John Sununu destroys Andrea Mitchell




Sununu scolds Chris Matthews and crew on-air




John Sununu smacks down Ms/nbc's Larry O'Donnell  




John Sununu Hammers CNNs Soledad O'Brien Over Birther Fixation  

Quote from: jarhead on July 15, 2012, 03:12:00 PM
Warph,
Ron Paul voted how ? Could you repeat that one more time just in case the Ron Paul lovers didn't catch it the first time ? ;D

http://facethepolitics.com/2012/06/ron-paul-votes-against-gender-based-abortion-bill-explained/

Ron Paul Votes Against Gender Based Abortion Bill? Explained:

There has been a lot of talk over the way a few republicans voted in a recent "pro-life" bill that made it to the floor in congress. Dubbed H.R. 3541, a bill to "prohibit discrimination against the unborn on the basis of sex or race, and for other purposes", failed to pass with 2/3′s majority vote, prompting a firestorm of criticism from many conservatives and pundits.

The republicans taking heat for voting against this bill include Justin Amash (R-MI), Charles Bass (R-NH), Mary Bono Mack (R-CA), Robert Dold (R-IL), Richard Hanna (R-NY), Nan Hayworth (R-NY) and presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX). Ron Paul, the most prominent of the names on the list, has taken the most heat from people like FOX New's Bill O'Reilly. So why exactly would Mr. Paul, self proclaimed pro-life Christian and former OBGYN who delivered over 4,000 babies, vote against this legislation?

On the outside, this bill seems like a "cut and dry" vote. You either want to make abortions illegal for people who do not want their child to be a certain sex or you don't, right? Wrong. Like many things politicians try to ram through congress, there are many unintended consequences created by legislation. Furthermore, there are often times when the legislation being passed in actuality will be another law that ultimately proves to do nothing (See Obama's Dodd-Frank).

What many people also don't know is that Ron Paul expressed his concern to the speaker of the house vocally, before voting against the legislation. In his speech to the speaker, Dr. Paul made a few valid points about the constitutionality of the bill, among other things.

Dr. Paul: "Mr. Speaker, as an OB-GYN who has delivered over 4,000 babies, I certainly abhor abortion. And I certainly share my colleagues' revulsion at the idea that someone would take an innocent unborn life because they prefer to have a child of a different gender. However, I cannot support H.R. 3541, the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, because this bill is unconstitutional.

Congress's jurisdiction is limited to those areas specified in the Constitution. Nowhere in that document is Congress given any authority to address abortion in any manner. Until 1973, when the Supreme Court usurped the authority of the States in the Roe v. Wade decision, no one believed or argued abortion was a Federal issue.

I also cannot support H.R. 3541 because it creates yet another set of Federal criminal laws, even though the Constitution lists only three Federal crimes: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting. All other criminal matters are expressly left to States under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and criminal laws relating to abortion certainly should be legislated by States rather than Congress.

I have long believed that abortion opponents make a mistake by spending their energies on a futile quest to make abortion a Federal crime. Instead, pro-life Americans should work to undo Roe v. Wade and give the power to restrict abortion back to the States and the people. It is particularly disappointing to see members supporting this bill who rightfully oppose ludicrous interpretations of the Commerce Clause when it comes to the national health care law, which also abuses the Commerce Clause to create new Federal crimes.

Pro-life Americans believe all unborn life is precious and should be protected. Therefore we should be troubled by legislation that singles out abortions motivated by a "politically incorrect" reason for special Federal punishment. To my conservative colleagues who support this bill: what is the difference in principle between a Federal law prohibiting "sex selection" abortions and Federal hate crimes laws? After all, hate crime laws also criminalize thoughts by imposing additional stronger penalties when a crime is motivated by the perpetrator's animus toward a particular race or gender.
I also question whether this bill would reduce the number of abortions. I fear instead that every abortion provider in the Nation would simply place a sign in their waiting room saying "It is a violation of Federal law to perform an abortion because of the fetus' gender. Here is a list of reasons for which abortion is permissible under Federal law."

Mr. Speaker, instead of spending time on this unconstitutionally, ineffective, and philosophically flawed bill, Congress should use its valid authority to limit the jurisdiction of activist Federal courts and (thereby) protect state laws restoring abortion. This is the constitutional approach to effectively repealing Roe v. Wade. Instead of focusing on gimmicks and piecemeal approaches, true conservatives should address the horror of abortion via the most immediate, practical, and effective manner possible: returning jurisdiction over abortion to the States. "

OK Warph, I retract the body slam I did on Ron Paul---but I would still never vote for him because of statements he has said about Israel

I'm thinking that Israel can handle their matters better than we can can handle their matters.

Isn't it past time that we vote out Obama and the Republicans and the Democrats?  Or shall we just go along with their kind one more time?

 

Quote from redcliffsw:
Isn't it past time that we vote out Obama and the Republicans and the Democrats? Or shall we just go along with their kind one more time?

Red,
Vote out Obama for damn sure and yes get rid of the Repubs and Dummycrats too but it's just wishful hoping on our part. It aint gonna happen, at least not in my lifetime, so in the mean time I will vote---again---for who I think is the least evil, not for who I really wanted.

Quote from: jarhead on July 16, 2012, 12:27:57 PM
OK Warph, I retract the body slam I did on Ron Paul---but I would still never vote for him because of statements he has said about Israel

Amen to that, Jar... Israel needs us as much as we need Israel.  I know that for a fact!

Quote from: redcliffsw on July 16, 2012, 06:55:21 PM
I'm thinking that Israel can handle their matters better than we can can handle their matters.

Isn't it past time that we vote out Obama and the Republicans and the Democrats?  Or shall we just go along with their kind one more time?

 

Sorry, Red... We are damn lucky to have a strong militarized country in the midst of terroristic countries who uses violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate others, often for political purposes.  It is a shame that R. Paul  cannot see this.  For this and other reasons, I think he would make a poor president when it came to foreign affairs.  Americas' isolation is not the answer.

In reality we are a two party system and that's the way it is.  I think the repubs are the lesser of the two evils.

For the longest time, I used to receive, on average, three messages a week from people in Nigeria.  Although I had never been to Nigeria and never met any of these people, they were constantly offering to wire me millions of dollars.  Sometimes they told me that someone had died and left it to me.  Other times, they told me I had won grand prize in a lottery.

Sometimes it was a widow who needed my assistance to get the money out of Nigeria, and was willing to share her windfall with me.  Those were the emails that touched me the most because who doesn't want to help out a widow in her time of need?  But I would write back and explain that I didn't want to get involved in anything that smacked of hanky-panky because it might mean jeopardizing my chances of collecting the $35,000,000 I had apparently won in a lottery I hadn't even entered.  But, displaying the empathy for which I'm famous, I'd let her know that I'd send her a little something as soon as my check arrived.

Still, all of that pales in comparison to the latest bit of audacity from Team Obuma.  It seems that David Axelrod or one of his flying clowns has come up with something called the Obuma Event Registry.  Brides-to-be are being told to urge their friends and relatives not to foolishly squander their money on wedding gifts.  Even if she has romantic stars in her eyes, the little gal is supposed to prove she has her feet on the ground by instucting them to donate the money, instead, to Obuma's re-election campaign.

The next thing you know, Obuma will be asking Americans to start growing victory gardens and collecting scrap metal to help him win World War III against Romney.

There is also a rumor going around that Obuma is looking into changing the inscription at the base of the Statue of Liberty from, "Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..." to "Give me your gravy boats, your waffle irons and your toaster ovens, to help me get re-elected."

I have finally reached the point where even I'm beginning to doubt that Obuma comes from Kenya.

My money is now on Nigeria.

"Obama will pay your bills" scam

There's a growing identity theft scam that says Barack Obama will pay your utility bills.

A multistate identity theft scam that claims President Barack Obama will pay your utility bills appears to have widened.

According to MSNBC.com, more than 2,000 customers in Tampa, Fla., fell for the fake offer last week.

The scheme was first reported in May, when Dallas-based Atmos Energy warned its 3 million customers in 12 states that scammers had been asking for Social Security numbers to enroll in the faux federal program. According to the pitch—distributed via email, Facebook, text message, phone and, in some cases, door-to-door sales—the government would pay a month of energy costs through credits offered by the Obama administration.

PSE&G, the New Jersey gas and electric delivery utility, issued a similar warning the same month. According to MSNBC, there were 10,000 reported victims in New Jersey in recent weeks, and thousands more in North Carolina, Indiana and Pennsylvania.

The election will hinge on how many millions fall for a larger version of this scam. The idea that politicians will pay your bills for you -- stealing your liberty, if not your identity, in the process -- is the scam that drives politics.

Quote from: Warph on July 16, 2012, 08:44:16 PM

Sorry, Red... We are damn lucky to have a strong militarized country in the midst of terroristic countries who uses violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate others, often for political purposes.  It is a shame that R. Paul  cannot see this.  For this and other reasons, I think he would make a poor president when it came to foreign affairs.  Americas' isolation is not the answer.

In reality we are a two party system and that's the way it is.  I think the repubs are the lesser of the two evils.

It appears that our huge military is to defend our welfare state.  How better to protect our ever expanding domestic tyranny
and to project our brand of socialist world democracy.

Two party system here - you have to be kidding.  The Democrats and the Republicans are one party - let's call it the Establishment.
If Obama or Romney wins, we lose.  Come on Warph, sooner or later you ought to recognize what's happening here.

Until then, you'll be a Republican making a stand against "isolationism" while the American tyrants defend the new world order and
increase their grip on us here.




 

Quote from: redcliffsw on July 17, 2012, 05:07:43 AM

It appears that our huge military is to defend our welfare state.  How better to protect our ever expanding domestic tyranny
and to project our brand of socialist world democracy.

Two party system here - you have to be kidding.  The Democrats and the Republicans are one party - let's call it the Establishment.
If Obama or Romney wins, we lose.  Come on Warph, sooner or later you ought to recognize what's happening here.

Until then, you'll be a Republican making a stand against "isolationism" while the American tyrants defend the new world order and
increase their grip on us here.

Ohhh Lord... give me strength

Warph, I think we should label this guy as Radcliff (for RADICAL), instead of Redcliff.

Oldtimer, you must have a pipeline to government money since you seem so defensive of the sorts.

Rad, if you only knew how wrong you were , you would look more radical than you do now. I have never taken a dime of Government aid in my life, with the exception of Social Security.

                     Why do People Ignore What Obama Is?

              (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-hADWQwGGhXE/UAW91dASVKI/AAAAAAAAZlU/XtzDqhQmLh4/s1600/7-16-12%2B5.jpg)


The Obama campaign is all about character assassination. But it is to be expected.

He got elected because some people ignore things they should not ignore.

He is supported by a base that contains a lot of  anti-social people who have bitter feelings about supposed wrongs done to them.  Obama plays to that base with divisive, bitter, ugly rhetoric about others.

It is always  someone else's fault for him and his following.

It is never their own fault. They are a bitter bunch with super low esteem.

What  he says about others is all about himself in the end.

If you listen to him talk about others you will hear him talking about himself.

"We not gonna go round doing negative ads" he said.

His list of lies and empty words are legendary.

Every single thing he said he would not do is exactly what he does do.

Every statement he has made about what "they" do is what he does.

In fact,  his group  has slithered over to downright blackmail to get its way.

Does Obama hate America? Yes, he surely does and it was evident long before he got elected. We have been saying this all along. This isn't anything new. It is four years old now. It is business as usual. It was how he got elected to the senate: eliminating the opposition through character assassination.

People ignore who and what Obama is and has done.

They ignore his admitted drug use.

He is a law breaker for using drugs. He is morally corrupt for bragging about it. Kids who may look up to him have that as an example now. How can anyone over look that?

He admitted to bullying girls in high school.  An admitted bully. Very ugly.

It is a well established fact that you are known by the company you keep.

Yet so many ignore the people Obama has chosen for his friends.

His friends are Communists, Maoists actually who would love a cultural revolution complete with liquidation of people if that's what it takes. They have openly stated they would kill people if they did not change their thinking.

He grew up with serious Communist and anti-American brain washing from friends and family.

While he denigrates anyone who has built a business or made a success, Obama himself is not a success.   He  has built nothing. 

He does, however, spend a lot of time dismantling, dividing and tearing down.  Those are known Communist methods. They are Alinsky methods.

His followers are lovers of murderers like Che Guevara and Castro. They hold up Cuba as a model and bastion of greatness. They ignore the truth of the murderous men and regimes.

He didn't even bother to vote while in the senate and, while in college, which is iffy since the records are sealed , he was busy doing drugs and frying his brain.

All Obama can do is attack others. He has nothing to stand on at all. Nothing but drugs and bad company that surround him on every side.

There is no way the guy could establish a business. He is a talking head for an anti-America ideology that many seem to now love.

The number of people who voted for this is staggeringly obscene.  They don't seem to have grown up in the last four years either.

....Lemon-Lime Moon   
http://lemonlimemoon.blogspot.com/

      (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CHFbkhExdm0/UASnu2Sro4I/AAAAAAAAZk8/hLfalSkyQ9w/s1600/7-16-12%2B2.jpg)

When it comes to inevitabilities, people always refer to death and taxes.  But there's a third item that's even more of a sure thing. I'm referring to the goofiness of the Left.  Death is inevitable, but not always predictable.  After all, people die at all ages and under diverse circumstances.  In much the same way, taxes are always going to be around, but not everyone pays the same ones or at the same rate.

However, when it comes to the Obuma clowns who take pride in identifying themselves as liberals, progressives, statists, socialists or just plain Democrats, as surely as the sun will rise in the east, you can bet the farm that before it sets in the west, any number of these boobs will have you shaking your head and wondering if they're being serious or just going for the cheap laugh.

For instance, Obuma's EPA, otherwise known as America's storm troopers, have begun forcing refineries to blend 8.6 million gallons of something called "cellulosic biofuel"... made from wood and non-edible plant life, into their oil.  I'm not sure what good it's supposed to do, but I'm guessing it's the chemical equivalent of hamburger helper.  If you're wondering why, if I don't know its purpose, I object to the EPA's fining companies that don't follow orders like good little Nazis, it's because there is no such product! Nobody is bothering to manufacture it, as the EPA is well aware, but it's just another way for the dictatorial bureaucrats to flex their muscles and another way for the Obuma White House to levy taxes by calling them fines.

New York Times had this on it:
WASHINGTON — When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.
But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/business/energy-environment/companies-face-fines-for-not-using-unavailable-biofuel.html?_r=1

Obuma White House: Chicago crooks out to make a dishonest buck off the taxpayer and big business any way they can.

Once again Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma is putting you and your family at risk to achieve his political agenda!

Showcasing his total disregard for America's national security, Obuma has invited Mohammed Morsi, Egypt's new president, to the White House.  It sounds benign since he's a new head of state, but Morsi is a known terrorist and one of the Muslim Brotherhood's top leaders.

The roots of radical Islam's reign of terror track straight back to the Muslim Brotherhood.  For an American president to open the doors of the White House to one of this organization's highest ranking members, one of its most radical and defiant voices, is unconscionable.

So why is an American president welcoming Mohammed Morsi with opens arms?

Starting with his first foreign tour as president... where he repeatedly apologized for what he called "American arrogance" and endlessly bowed to Islamic dictators.... right up to this very day with his invitation of Morsi to the White House, Obuma has closed his eyes to the history of terror and anarchy the Brotherhood has wrought upon the world.  Now he has invited a man into the White House who, throughout his campaign to become Egypt's president, repeatedly called for jihad, religious war, the end of Israel, and death to Western nations.

       (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YubTr_nsRFk/UAcMGAwj00I/AAAAAAAAZoQ/mQu2QM3Py0U/s1600/7-18-12%2B4.jpg)

Democrats' Ideal Voter: Illegal Alien, Single Mother, Convicted Felon
By Ann Coulter
7/18/2012

Before taking the oath of office, Barack Obama vowed to fundamentally transform the United States. He has certainly done so. For example, Obama has:

-- destroyed the job market;

-- sent billions of taxpayer dollars to Wall Street, companies overseas, his campaign contributors and public sector unions;

-- forced the passage of a wildly unpopular national health care law on a purely partisan vote;

-- come out for gay marriage;

-- refused to enforce laws on illegal immigration;

-- eliminated the work requirement for welfare.

How can a country that elected Ronald Reagan have Obama tied in the polls with Mitt Romney?

The answer is: It's not the same country.

Rest of story:  http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2012/07/18/democrats_ideal_voter_illegal_alien_single_mother_convicted_felon

         (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0bed-JtmidU/UAhXC5tCUNI/AAAAAAAAZsY/9ab1yV40J6g/s1600/7-18-12%2B10.jpg)

Obama's Fake Fairness Fairy
By John Ransom
7/19/2012

Uh-oh. The Fake Fairness Fairy is on the loose again.

And that smell? That's not pixie dust. That, my friend, is the smell of Bull Shit!

Obama wants you to know that your next promotion, the car you own, your house, your kids, you don't deserve any of it. Someone else is mostly responsible for it.

"There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own," Senate candidate and fake Indian, Elizabeth Warren explained to us months ago. "You built a factory out there - good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory."

Warren- and Obama- explain that in return for not worrying about "marauding bands" taking everything we have, we should just allow a marauding government to take what they will, while we lay still and Think-of-England.

Apparently Warren isn't familiar with the 2nd Amendment, which has always been a most effective way of preventing marauders, public, private, quasi-governmental and federally governmental, from plundering our private property.

Her own state, Massachusetts, provided a great example in 1775 at the Battles of Lexington and Concord of the 2nd Amendment in action.

Perhaps as one of the other great Law Givers and Professors in this country, Warren ought to borrow a history book or two from Sarah Palin.

And actually read them.

Oh, and, never mind that the factory owner Warren and Obama take for granted already pays taxes for all those services Warren lists- just like the rest of us do. In fact, the factory owner probably pays more in taxes, plus pays for infrastructure improvements required under local zoning rules, improvements that likely make the locality more attractive economically.

***But, who cares about facts when you can whip out the Fake Fairness Fairy.

***More and more, the Democrats have been turning out the Fake Fairness Fairy.

***War on Women? The Fake Fairness Fairy.

***The War of Catholics? The Fake Fairness Fairy.

***Deporting some illegal immigrants, while allowing others to stay here illegally? The Fake Fairness Fairy.

***Tax hike on the evil millionaires and billionaires? The Fake Fairness Fairy.

***Solyndra, Fast and Furious, voter intimidation, Trayvon Martin, the war on energy- all brought to us by the Fake Fairness Fairy.

***Elizabeth Warren for real? No. The Fake Fairness Fairy

Look, I don't object to Obama turning the novelty of his "blackness" into the one-way mirror into which he never tires of looking. And I don't object when he then writes books about it, lies and makes a fortune.

Good for him.

But let me be clear.

He's done it on the back of the Fake Fairness Fairy that the rest of us pay for.

We paid for it with a great civil war, testing whether our republic or any republic can long endure.

We paid for it by separate, but equal laws that took its toll on white society as well as black.

We paid for it in the great civil rights struggle, which has rewritten our constitution to give equal protection under the law to all, although the Fake Fairness Fairy says that some laws are more equal than others.

So, now the content of character no longer determines our outcome.

Instead the Fake Fairness Fairy cares only about our race, gender, income or religion- as long as it's not Christian.

This, in part, explains our fake president's obsession with taking from some and giving to others in his quest for fake fairness.

After all, it wasn't fair he was born in Indonesia ;-).

It wasn't fair that he's parlayed a resume as thin as his body into fame, riches, a real estate deal with a convicted influence-peddler and notorious slumlord that included, a massively unfair mansion.

Was the Nobel Peace prize he was awarded fair? Was his Harvard degree fair? Was it fair when he unsealed the divorce records of his Republican opponent in the race for the US Senate in Illinois that set Obama up to be president?

I can understand why Obama might have some mixed feeling about whether he has actually earned his way in the game of life.

Because in truth, he hasn't.

Not in the way you and I and everyone else have to.

We don't get to appeal to the Fake Fairness Fairy when the coal mine shuts down. We don't get to appeal to the Fake Fairness Fairy when we miss a mortgage payment so we can make payroll for our employees. We don't get to appeal to the Fake Fairness Fairy, because there is no magic fairy that makes everything fair.

What you do with what God gives you is the only fairness that exists, to paraphrase Forrest Gump.

And come November Obama will discover the painful lesson that the rest of us knew a long time ago.

That Fairness Fairy?

She's fake!

      (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OJuexKaXPsQ/UAhkdXUX7qI/AAAAAAAAZtA/ypdwzv7Jgvc/s1600/7-18-12%2B8.jpg)

President Obuma said during a campaign stop in Roanoke, Va., last Friday: "If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."  He mentioned roads and bridges as examples.  Did he mean we should thank government for the structures because without them we might not be able to travel to a job interview, or to work?  The subplot in the Obuma campaign remarks seems to be that none of us can make it without government.  So what happens to those who do manage to succeed on their own?  Are they to be taxed and regulated to death as a lesson to other upstarts?

Obuma is full of crap on this one.

Government that is too large and controlling stifles ambition and initiative by penalizing success.

As the Obuma campaign attacks Mitt Romney's business success... and by association all who have succeeded or wish to succeed.. Romney should turn the tables and attack seven principles that have made government highly ineffective.

They are:


1. High taxes.  High taxes rob the productive and discourage innovation.

2. Too many regulations.  Overregulation inhibits private industry from performing up to its potential.

3. Overspending.  When an individual is in debt, he or she aims to spend less until the family budget is in balance.  When government spends more than it takes in, it creates an addiction and burdens current and future citizens.  Politicians won't tell anyone "no," so government keeps spending.

4. Foreign adventures.  We cannot afford to go everywhere in hopes of promoting liberty.  We should only send troops where our interests are clearly defined and an achievable outcome is likely.  Countries receiving military assistance must help pay the bill.

5. Bureaucracy.  There are too many people working for government. Many agencies and programs are unnecessary.

6. Health care.  Government can't make you healthy. Obumacare will not only cost more, but will reduce the quality and availability of good health care, as in the UK.  A private-sector solution is preferable.

7. Ignoring the Constitution.  The best habit the American government could practice is a return to the principles of that great document that set boundaries for government and removed them for its citizens.

Inspiration and perspiration are habits that usually lead to success.  Government's bad habits produce unending debt and stifle private-sector job creation.  That's the counterargument to these bad habits.

       (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hk_phR5q8lg/UAbr5yTJleI/AAAAAAAAZmQ/pclQBUjNDUM/s1600/Obama%2527s%2BPast.bmp)

Top Ten Things Obama Has Not Released
by Joel B. Pollak 18 Jul 2012

As the Obama campaign and the media continue to press Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns, and to suggest--without a shred of evidence--that he is a "felon," it is worth noting how much critical information Barack Obama has withheld from view--both as a candidate in 2008, and during his term in office. Here is a Breitbart News top ten list of things that Obama has refused to release (a complete list would fill volumes):

10. State senate papers. In the 2008 primary, Obama criticized Hillary Clinton for not releasing papers from her eight years time as First Lady--but failed to produce any papers from his eight years in Springfield. "They could have been thrown out," he said.

9. Academic transcripts. His supposed academic brilliance was a major selling point, but Obama (by his own admission) was a mediocre student. His GPA at Occidental was a B-plus at best, and his entering class at Columbia was weak. Can he prove his merit?

8. Book proposal. Obama's literary agent claimed he was "born in Kenya"--for sixteen years. His original book proposal exists--biographer David Maraniss refers to it--and seems to have embellished other key details of his life. Yet it has never been released.

7. Medical records. In 2000, and again (briefly) in 2008, GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain released thousands of pages of his medical records. Obama, who had abused drugs and continued smoking, merely provided a one-page doctor's note.

6. Small-dollar donors. In 2008, the McCain campaign released the names of donors who had contributed less than $200, though it was not required to do so. But the Obama campaign refused, amidst accusations it had accepted illegal foreign contributions.

5. The Khalidi tape. In 2003, Obama attended a party for his good friend, the radical Palestinian academic Rashid Khalidi. The event featured incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric. The LA Times broke the story, but has refused to release the tape--and so has Obama.

4. The real White House guest list. Touting its transparency, the Obama White House released its guest logs--but kept many visits secret, and moved meetings with lobbyists off-site. It also refused to confirm the identities of visitors like Bertha Lewis of ACORN.

3. Countless FOIA requests. The Obama administration has been described as "the worst" ever in complying with Freedom of Information Act requests for documents. It has also punished whistleblowers like David Walpin, who exposed cronyism in Americorps.

2. Health reform negotiations. Candidate Obama promised that health care reform negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN. Instead, there were back-room deals woth millions with lobbyists and legislators--the details of which are only beginning to emerge.

1. Fast and Furious documents. After months of stonewalling Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder asked President Obama to use executive privilege to conceal thousands of documents related to the deadly scandal--and Obama did just that.

In addition to the above, Obama and his campaign have lied about many facts about his past--his membership in the New Party; his extensive connections with ACORN; and his continued relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, among other examples. Obama's own memoir is filled with fabrications. And now he is lying about his opponent's honorable record in business. He--and the media--have no shame.

I just heard from a Canadian friend that at an upper middle class public school in Edmonton, a teacher was suspended for giving students who failed to turn in their homework assignments a mark of zero.  Apparently, our own politically correct cowardice when it comes to education has seeped across the 49th parallel, because the official policy is to mark such assignments "incomplete."

In a way it makes sense.  After all, even if their baseball and hockey teams are no match for our own, there's no good reason why the self-esteem of Canada's lazy teenagers should be any lower than that of their American cousins.

Speaking of political cowardice, isn't it high time that judges and legislators stopped coddling homosexuals? While it's true that as a rule, being childless, they have a fair amount of money to contribute to those politicians who bow to their wishes, it's not as if they represent a lot of votes outside of San Francisco, L.A. and New York.

Frankly, I don't know just when it was that sodomites became a protected class, but it's rather obnoxious when politicians curry favor with them by promoting same-sex marriages and pretending that it is the equivalent of uprooting slavery and repealing Jim Crow laws.

One of the sillier things about homosexuals is the way they like to insist that inside every heterosexual is an interior decorator screaming to be let out.  If you buy that, perhaps you also believe that inside every liberal nutcase is a rational conservative begging to be set free.

      "The Background of Obuma, the One"

             (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tWFTPTf9y4M/UAg2WnEAwAI/AAAAAAAAZpk/Y4IH2ckeBbY/s1600/1%2BThe%2BThree%2BStooges.jpg)

This is the influence the current administration has under its belt.

The mentors Obuma had were mostly communists and revolutionaries who hate what the United States stands for.
Ayers, Alinsky, his revolutionary priests and ministers, Frank Davis Marshall, his grandfather.

You will hear Larry Grathwohl say they want to take over the country.

They 'have' taken over the government by using Obuma who is really too young to remember the Weathermen and their violence.

This man has more recent videos.  You need to hear this and tell others because this is the real deal.

Community organizers were once known for what they are: communist agitators.  And Communists are bullies.  They even keep their own on pins and needles with constant threats of "elimination".

That's been lost today as education has become so politically correct that it spurns and dumps the truth and those who fought Communist infiltration of America in the 50s and 60s are mocked today.

The plan of these 'rabble rousers' is to stir up envy, hate and strife both racial and economic.  It is all about hating anyone who you suspect might have something more than you have.

These agitators work on character weakness and exploit it.

During the riots in the 60's they bussed in "rioters" and demonstrators from out of town.  It was all staged.


Definition of RABBLE-ROUSER: One that stirs up (as to hatred or violence) the masses of the people; a demagogue.

       

Warph,
Did you see where the Pentagon gave a thumbs up for gay service members to wear their uniforms in San Diego's Gay Pride March or some shit like that ? I pity the poor SOB that walked in that parade wearing his Dress Blues if my old senior DI was one of the spectators---which he wouldn't be caught dead being at.

Another Obama Bundler Boondoggle Goes Broke
By John Ransom
7/20/2012

Another green company backed by an Obama bundler just bit the dust.

After announcing earlier this year that the company would lay off 200 of its 300 employees, solar manufacturer Amonix Inc. closed its operation in North Las Vegas leaving taxpayers in the red by $20 million.

http://www.lvrj.com/business/amonix-closes-north-las-vegas-solar-plant-after-14-months-heavy-federal-subsidies-162901626.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=et&utm_content=http%3a%2f%2fwww.lvrj.com%2fbusiness%2famonix-closes-north-las-vegas-solar-plant-after-

(http://www.davidgagne.net/images/funny/homer_beer.gif) (http://www.johnlund.com/images/CSM002829.jpg)

Humans existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters and gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in winter. The 2 most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into 2 distinct subgroups: Liberals and Conservatives.

Once beer was discovered it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early human ancestors were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as "the Conservative movement."

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement. Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as 'girliemen.'

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy and group hugs and the concept of democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting revolutionary side note about liberals: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't "fair" to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers,firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, Marines, athletes and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to "govern" the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tame and created a business of trying to get MORE for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in World History.

What Taxmageddon Really Means for Families
Posted By Romina Boccia On July 19, 2012


Taxmageddon is approaching closer by the day. Much of the focus has been on the impact Taxmageddon will have on the economy. But just how will this massive tax hike impact America's most fundamental unit of society?

Families will see their taxes go up by more than $4,100 —just in 2013—because of Taxmageddon. How will families pay for this huge tax hike, on top of all the other taxes they already pay, and still make ends meet?

The chart below illustrates the size of Taxmageddon's burden on families in comparison to what families spend on some of life's basic necessities. This tax hike is nearly as big as a family's annual grocery bill, the amount families pay to maintain a car, or the amount families spend on utilities each year. What will families have to cut in order to feed the gluttonous federal government?

            (http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/familytaxmageddon.jpg)

Taxmageddon will undoubtedly have a devastating impact on the U.S. economy—from destroying jobs [4] and reducing economic growth to bringing on another recession. This is true even if Congress adopts President Obama's plan to raise taxes on job creators by allowing the Bush-era tax policies to expire for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for married filers). Families will suffer directly from these impacts. As Heritage's Curtis Dubay explained:

There are almost 13 million Americans out of work today. President Obama's tax increase would needlessly add almost three-quarters of a million people to that already much too large number. Even those with jobs wouldn't escape the pain of President Obama's tax increase, as they would see their wages suffer.

Congress and the President's political maneuvering is already slowing the economy today and putting families at even greater risk of economic harm. Lawmakers should delay no longer and stop all of Taxmageddon today.

Warph, you ought to give consideration to abandoning the Republican Party.  It won't work and neither will
the like-minded Obama policies. 

The 16th Amendment ought to be abolished.  Furthermore, it does nothing but finance socialism, steal, and
take money from the economy of the USA.  That shouldn't be too hard to understand.

If you really feel so strongly, have you considered renouncing your citizenship?  Why would you want to be a citizen of such a terrible place?

Yes, I can understand you wanting me to leave just like I can understand your leanings to Obama and Republicanism.

Liberalism is a terrible thing and it's pretty much established in this country.

                   (http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/49362.jpg)

If wacko boy had fired off a round in an Arizona theater, or even a Utah one in the not too distant past, the entire audience would have drawn down on him and that boy would have leaked like a sieve.

States were people are allowed to own guns and carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates and lower murder rates.  Any criminal can get a gun any time he wants.  They are 'law breakers'.. this means they do not live by laws that say you cannot own a gun.  DUH!

Don't let the Liberal Clowns in Washington, who drink koolaid with their pinky finger out, decide how the Bill of Rights should work.

Aurora, Colorado already has strict gun laws in place including strict enforcement on no concealed weapons.  It did not stop a criminal... or to be more precised, an insane nut-bag.... from breaking the law.   

Quote from: jarhead on July 20, 2012, 04:09:33 PM
Warph,
Did you see where the Pentagon gave a thumbs up for gay service members to wear their uniforms in San Diego's Gay Pride March or some shit like that ? I pity the poor SOB that walked in that parade wearing his Dress Blues if my old senior DI was one of the spectators---which he wouldn't be caught dead being at.

Kannon Cole, 7, watches his mother Marine Sgt. Bris Holland carry the flag at the beginning of San Diego's annual LGBT Pride parade. Holding his hand is her partner, Jaxs Jacquez. (Don Bartletti, Los Angeles Times / July 21, 2012)
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-500b5eb4/turbine/la-173321-me-0721-gay-military-01-dpb.jpg-20120721/600)

If I was this queer sgt.'s CO, she would be on the frontlines in Afghanistan along with the others marching in this gay parade!  And if I was the POTUS, I'd send Dempsey and the rest of the joint chiefs with them!

Questions To Ask Democrats As They Abandon Barack
by Austin Hill - July 22, 2012


Democrats are abandoning Barack Obama's ship.

Last week Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi instructed Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives to not attend this September's Democratic National Convention. Instead, Ms. Pelosi insisted, their time would be better spent campaigning at home, rather than partying in Charlotte, N.C.   ??? :o ???

Ms. Pelosi's announcement falls in line with the AFL-CIO, which announced the previous week that it won't be spending money to bankroll the convention.  :o  :laugh:

And Pelosi and her Big Labor friends are in lockstep with Democrat U.S. Senators Jon Tester of Montana, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia – all of whom have chosen to avoid Barack Obama's nomination for a second term.

After three and a half years of Barack Obama radicalizing their party, it now appears that some very powerful Democrats have had a startling realization: the Obama agenda is both dysfunctional and destructive, and has become politically lethal – Americans see that it bares little resemblance to America's time-honored history and heritage, and they have begun to reject it outright.

Democrat candidates at all levels of government will go about campaigning over these next few months, making promises based upon their party platform without mentioning President Obama's name. But as they talk about the following agenda items – all of which appear in the "issues" section of Democrats.Org, the national party's web home – consider asking the candidates the accompanying questions:

Rest of story @:  http://townhall.com/columnists/austinhill/2012/07/22/questions_to_ask_democrats_as_they_abandon_barack/page/full/

 Red,  Obama and Republicanism? That's an interesting pairing! ::)  "My" leanings? You are so weird! You know nothing about me, apparently even less that I thought, and you have a very poor selective memory. Very sad.
  I voted McCain the first time and won't vote Obama the second time, not that it's anybody's business. As I've said so many times, I'm a moderate Independent.
  I don't care for all the Mitt flip flopping, on gun control and much else, but I'm just about out of choices. He's a terrible political liar and says what ever the people want to hear at the time. Too much like Leona Helmsley looking down on people.  Is he a leader, or just a boss who delegates everything that might stick to him?
He likes to fire people? What's he gonna do, fire congress? People with money don't bother me. I grew up with the duPonts. Know the Gore family and many others  BUT People who let money drive their decisions and let it affect them and expect to be deferred to because of it, do worry me. Would he run this country by executive order? Would he listen to advisers? How about foreign policy?
  As for you, Red, stay or go, it matters not to me, but you seem so miserable and unhappy when you post. Everything and everybody you post is ultra negative, full of gloom and doom and can't see the rainbow for the storm. It's a real shame.
 Give me a William Raspberry any day. I will really miss him.  
  Bye bye, Mr. Black Soul.  :P If you rode a horse I suspect you'd name him 'Wet Blanket". ;D ;D ;D ;D

Warph, it seems to me Tuscon had their chance and blew it ....or Gabby, or at least the others wouldn't have been shot. This armed to the teeth theory doesn't usually work in spite of the myths. Why wasn't the shooter blown to bits?  I'm not for gun control, but I've been around a LOT of outcomes of gun violence, and know how it really tends to play out. It sounds all big and tough, but getting a clear shot at the right bad guy isn't all that easy. It's not like TV!  People snatch hostages for cover. I'm surprised he didn't. The nut in the movie theater at least wore distinctive clothing.  At first they didn't know if he was alone once they figured out it was real....in the dark. ( How does having a gun if you are shot through the wall going to help you?) But in some cases, other armed people can be easily mistaken for part of the bad guys and possibly harmed by accident. We've had enough "suicide by cop" here to know what it's all about too. We don't need several well meaning people shooting each other by accident either.
  We just had a big swat drill here on the U D Campus. We were involved of course, and one of the big problems they had was proper communications with everyone there. Now, suppose some mental hero happens to sees what he thinks is going on and starts shooting what they think are the bad guys? Oops?  There is much to make things more complicated than we can talk about on here.

Quote from: Warph on July 22, 2012, 02:58:17 PM
                  (http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/49362.jpg)

If wacko boy had fired off a round in an Arizona theater, or even a Utah one in the not too distant past, the entire audience would have drawn down on him and that boy would have leaked like a sieve.

States were people are allowed to own guns and carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates and lower murder rates.  Any criminal can get a gun any time he wants.  They are 'law breakers'.. this means they do not live by laws that say you cannot own a gun.  DUH!

Don't let the Liberal Clowns in Washington, who drink koolaid with their pinky finger out, decide how the Bill of Rights should work.

Aurora, Colorado already has strict gun laws in place including strict enforcement on no concealed weapons.  It did not stop a criminal... or to be more precised, an insane nut-bag.... from breaking the law.  

Take away all guns and crime will disappear!  No more shootings, no more robbery, nothing.

That's Bull Shit... it's False of course.

Bad guys don't buy their guns or register them legally and the bad guys always have weapons, come hell or high water.  They can get them illegally.  Don't people realize that?

Actually, criminals think twice about doing these things when they realize others are armed as well.  Concealed carry has actually lessened crime in areas where it is legal.

Let's use the killings for political advantage.  Use any name that sounds likely and don't vet your stories.

How lovely it is to try to promote your candidate by using deaths.

More falsehood.  The tea party had nothing to do with it at all.  But didn't it make Obama look good?  That is all that counts in the state run media.


                           (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51vvDRHrYoL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)                    
                                        "Just the Facts, Ma'am"

                                      "It's Hollywood, Sgt. Friday!"

Blame this time rests quite heavily on the shoulders of Hollywood itself which continues to provide mind bending, brain warping movies that distort reality and encourage copycat crimes.

Yes, no matter how many denials the movie and record industry put forth, they are guilty of  promoting immorality at every level.

There is no way around that.

Its not just one movie either. It's movie upon movie, television show upon show and song upon song that tear down morality in so many ways. Add to that the Video Games.  The more steeped you are in filth, the more you take it for granted. It becomes part of who you are.

It is the truth and Hollywood has an inordinate influence on our public leaders who are unduly impressed by and paid for by the rich 'stars'.

It's a mess but it is the truth.

So what does one do? If parents let their kids see so much violence on TV, movies, computers, even phones now and books... we still have books?... Teachers sure can't solve it, as much as we'd like to. I used to be horrified at how late kids were up watching TV on school nights! We try so hard not to get used to it, get hardened to it, but at some point you have to or you won't survive.
  This is one area where maybe we have too much freedom! But how do we get ahead of it?  Chances are a movie theater would restrict guns regardless.
  Some of the gun fight activities on the east coast, in the big cities have been at sporting events ,clubs and movie theaters with every hoodlum armed and shooting and lots of people being shot.  Some are in neighborhoods right out in the street. They know they all have guns! It changes nothing! Perhaps it helps the gene pool in some areas, but how do you stop a clean cut kid who goes off the deep end from killing people? Ya can't! One does the best one can and moves on.
  How is it different than one's family member coming home from war in a body bag? It's honorable of course, but it hurts  just as bad. What else can one do? Deal with it and move on.

Quote from Warph:
Kannon Cole, 7, watches his mother Marine Sgt. Bris Holland carry the flag at the beginning of San Diego's annual LGBT Pride parade. Holding his hand is her partner, Jaxs Jacquez. (Don Bartletti, Los Angeles Times / July 21, 2012)

Warph,
I don't want to brag (OK, maybe just a little bit ) and I was probably not the most squared away Marine but did manage to make Sgt in 22 months. I see Sgt Holland has two hash marks so she has been in between 8 and 12 years and is still a Sgt ?? Maybe stunts like this is why ?

Quote from: Diane Amberg on July 22, 2012, 04:35:08 PM
So what does one do? If parents let their kids see so much violence on TV, movies, computers, even phones now and books... we still have books?... Teachers sure can't solve it, as much as we'd like to. I used to be horrified at how late kids were up watching TV on school nights! We try so hard not to get used to it, get hardened to it, but at some point you have to or you won't survive.
   This is one area where maybe we have too much freedom! But how do we get ahead of it?  Chances are a movie theater would restrict guns regardless.

Television can be a powerful entertainment and education tool for children given the right programming... however, studies have shown that television, and media in general, can also have a very negative influence.  Some studies indicate it can shorten attention span, distort body image, work in conjunction with other factors to escalate obesity, create fear, and increase aggressive and anti-social behaviors if exposure is unmonitored and unlimited.  Limiting television viewing time and encouraging physical activity are precautions that parents should consider.

http://www.squidoo.com/television_and_children

               (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-N4h8kSZ3kHk/UA1uXMJ3VBI/AAAAAAAAZ34/ZB3tIJkEH-8/s1600/Obama%2B-%2B2016.bmp)

2016: Obama's America

A Review By Michael Berry

Dinesh D'Souza's 2016: Obama's America: Review by Michael Berry

The Hollywood Reporter notes that Dinesh D'Souza's film had a strong – albeit limited to one theater – opening weekend. Well, I hosted the opening night, and I'll tell you, first hand, what I saw.

As for turnout, literally every seat was filled for our opening. We turned away 100 people, even though the event was invitation only.

The film is not, and should not be reviewed as, some sort of conservative Michael Moore effort. Far from it. Instead, it tells a story with a remarkable balance, and in a restrained, delicate way. It left me not angry at Barack Obama, or – to use a trite and inaccurate term – "hating" him, but rather, pitying the man. Pitying him in the way a victim's family pities the man who murdered their daughter. Pitying him as a confused, sad, somewhat angry, hopeless man, struggling to become a man while fighting demons of a childhood filled with desperation. The theme of abandonment coarses throughout Obama's life in this narrative, told in the soft, polite voice of Dinesh D'Souza. While he's wrought horror on America, the film tries to understand why.


Rest of review @: 
http://michaelberry.iheart.com/pages/2016TheMovie.html

   (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1005/eric-holder-holder-is-a-putz-political-poster-1274023093.jpg)


I read about a Putnam County (Florida) judge who sentences shoplifters to carry signs outside the stores they robbed that read "I Stole from This Store."  What a great idea!  It has always been my theory that embarrassment is a greater deterrent than incarceration.  That's why I always figured that if you arrested and convicted a young gang member, the silliest thing to do was to send him to jail, which would only earn him street creds when he got out.  Instead, I would put him on the back of a flatbed truck, deck him out him in a dress and lipstick and drive him around the neighborhood.  Perhaps you could even fund the plan by selling snapshots of the young thug to friends, neighbors and victims.

I would also extend the judge's notion to include congressmen and senators whose own misbehavior is rotten even by Washington standards.  Can't you just see people like Eric Holder, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Charley Rangel and Anthony Wiener, on the back of a truck riding down Pennsylvania Avenue?  I mean, either do away with censure votes and contempt of congress proceedings altogether or see to it that misdeeds have actual consequences.

Bill Clinton has been ridiculed endlessly over his parsing of the word "is," but liberals manage to get away with using the word "big" as a pejorative only when referring to financial institutions, oil companies and pharmaceutical firms.  They never refer to big unions, big Hollywood and big deficits, although those are the big items that are truly wrecking this country.

Speaking of liberals always puts me in mind of children.  And while there are some tykes who are so adorable, they should be turned into the human equivalent of bonsais, those dwarf trees that the Japanese dote on.  Others should be locked away in cellars until they properly mature, say at the age of 45 or 50.

    (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VirkiDYNxjk/UA76qFZClrI/AAAAAAAAZ8c/CrWrzJgmDnY/s1600/7-24-12%2B1.jpg)

Boycotting Chick-fil-A Solves Nothing
By Susan Brown
7/24/2012

I ate at Chick-fil-A six times last week to do my part to show support for a company currently under attack for upholding wholesome values. Eating at Chick-fil-A last week was my version of offering a one finger salute to the activists who allowed their feathers to ruffle after discovering the privately owned restaurant chain supports the Biblical definition of marriage.

With all the clucking coming from these activists, one would think Chick-fil-A contributed humanitarian meals to Hezbollah or money to a militant anti-gay group like the group of Muslim men on trial in the UK for allegedly handing out leaflets calling for the murder of gay people and purportedly describing methods to eliminate them. According to the UK Guardian, one of the men claimed the brochure simply "expressed what Islam says about homosexuality, adding that it was his duty as a Muslim to condemn it."

Then there is Chick-fil-A. A family owned and led organization committed to strengthening individuals, the family, and the community at large. The company reiterated their values in a recent statement articulating in part: "The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will continue this tradition in the over 1600 restaurants run by independent owner/operators. Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena...."

The end. Curtains. Done. Forgetaboutit.

Oh, if only life were that simple. People are dying in other parts of the world because of their sexual preference, and people are worried about a chicken-serving fast food restaurant? That's ridiculous on so many levels. Why can't we celebrate the diversity we enjoy here in America over a chargrilled chicken sandwich and waffle fries?

The blogosphere is teeming with same-sex marriage activists labeling Chick-fil-A as a "hate group" and encouraging people to join them in a boycott against a company which is the antithesis of hate. Their public statement reflects their position, and the superior customer service I've personally witnessed over the years -- to every customer, regardless of their size, shape, color, religion, sexual preference, or scent (I've eaten breakfast there after a few of my long runs, and I've never been turned away) – speaks volumes as to the character of this company.

Chick-fil-A donates millions of dollars annually to various organizations besides pro-traditional marriage groups. It provides food during times of crisis, similar to what they did last week for the Aurora, Colorado police after the horrendous movie theatre massacre. It provides college scholarships, sponsors the Chick-fil-A Bowl, donating much of the proceeds to a range of charities and universities, and founded the WinShape Foundation which helps, among many other worthy causes, to support 11 foster homes.

We live in a free country, so we have the right to do just about whatever we want -- within the boundaries of the laws of the land and our personal convictions. Despite what we've been led to believe, politics is not everything, so why do so many of us (including the conservative anti-Oreo cookie crowd) feel compelled to politicize everything, including businesses?

Somehow I don't think we'll ever get an answer to that question. Oh well, I need to put my money where my mouth is, so I'm off to the grocery store and drive-through to pick up Oreos and a chicken sandwich. Chop-chop.

  (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ItDFt3hkHuo/SzJcrByeKTI/AAAAAAAAEEE/IzFJmzqph_Y/s1600/12-23-09+4.jpg)

Obama Sings 'You Didn't Build That'



Below are the lyrics:


Who's the one who gave you success?

How can you talk that way?

Who's the one who built your business?

It's not because you're smart and work hard every day...

Baby, I'm the soul of your heart's inspiration...

I'm all you got, to get you by...


I'm the soul of your heart's inspiration

Without me– Barry– what good are you?

You wouldn't have much going

Thank goodness you had me

Somebody else made that happen

You didn't build it alone, nothing's free!

Baby...I'm the soul of your heart's inspiration

[Chorus]

That business– you, you didn't make it, without me

And I'm telling you, sonny, I'm the reason you're growing, and thriving, or shrinking, and dying

Business, you can't ride it, without me...

Yes, I'm threatening your business!

If I go, all the bridges and roads will implode, yes I swear it!

[Chorus]

Bryan Fischer: Get ready: Big Gay is coming after Chick-fil-A


"I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say 'we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about." ~ Dan Cathy, President, Chick-fil-A

Chick-fil-A is a family-owned, family-run business which is guided by explicitly biblical business principles and even closes on Sunday in honor of what the Scriptures call "the Lord's day."

Chick-fil-A started in 1967 and has recorded 44 straight years of sales growth. It now has more than 1,600 restaurants in 39 states and Washington, D.C. and plans to open 77 stand-alone restaurants and 15 licensee locations in 2012.

President Dan Cathy, who to this point has been somewhat reticent in publicly declaring his and his company's opposition to sodomy-based marriage, is now about to experience the full wrath of the homosexual lobby.

There is plenty of hate in the debate over same-sex marriage, but it's not coming from the pro-family community, for the simple reason that disagreement is not hatred. But there is a volcanic level of vitriol and venom that spews like magma from the darkened hearts of homosexual activists. Chick-fil-A is about to find out what it is like to be Pompeii.

They're gonna need to wear their big-boy pants for a long time, because the hatemongers in the homosexual movement will now set out to wipe them off the face of the earth. They are about to go all Ahmadinejad on the Chick-fil-A Chargrilled Chicken Sandwich.

Gay activists are not interested in debate. They have a singular goal: to punish, silence, neutralize, marginalize and destroy anyone who defends the institution of natural marriage against deviant counterfeits. Hell hath no fury like a woman-who-thinks-she's-a-man scorned.

Rest of story @:http://afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147524385

   (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PIkcJQbpoEo/UBAOOB36eyI/AAAAAAAAZ9U/Vxz1-rTfVdU/s1600/7-25-12%2B1.jpg)


State Department Getting Played by the Muslim Brotherhood
By David Bossie
July 25, 2012


The number one goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is to spread Sharia law throughout the world, not just in the Middle East. Since its founding over eighty years ago, the Muslim Brotherhood has been no friend of America's ideals and democratic way of life. That is why it is so disturbing that the Obama Administration's own State Department has given the Muslim Brotherhood's radical Islamic agenda a wink and a nod.

Although the Obama Administration wants Americans to believe that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate organization, nothing could be further from the truth.

A sense of friendship with a radical organization will only jeopardize America's security in the long-run. Americans must realize what the Muslim Brotherhood stands for. Sharia law has spread into Europe and has taken hold in Egypt thanks to the Arab Spring. Many Americans do not understand what Sharia law entails or, for that matter, have even heard of it.

Essentially, Sharia law is a rigid Islamic moral code that commingles religion and government. Sharia law encompasses all facets of Muslim life from religion and finances, right down to personal hygiene. Before the U.S.-led invasion, Afghanistan was the center of Sharia law in the Muslim world, where women had no rights and were treated as second class citizens on a good day.

Andrew McCarthy is the former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York who successfully prosecuted Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, "the blind cleric," for the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. He has written a riveting and smart piece for National Review Online about how the State Department has bowed to the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda.

There are many revelations that McCarthy touches on but the three that stand out are:

1. The State Department announced that the Obama Administration would be 'satisfied' with the election of a Muslim Brotherhood–dominated government in Egypt.

2. The State Department has collaborated with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of governments heavily influenced by the Brotherhood, in seeking to restrict American free-speech rights in deference to Sharia proscriptions against criticism of Islam.

3. The State Department and the Obama administration waived congressional restrictions in order to transfer $1.5 billion dollars in aid to Egypt after the Muslim Brotherhood's victory in the parliamentary elections.

Perhaps the State Department thinks it is following the Godfather adage "keep your friends close but your enemies closer." However, the reality is the State Department is getting played by a nefarious group of Islamic extremists. A strategic plan that was introduced as evidence in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorist financing prosecution in our nation's history, stated that the Muslim Brotherhood has as its goal "destroying Western civilization from within." The way to achieve this goal, according to the Muslim Brotherhood, is to employ a "civilization jihad" by influencing policy makers and government agencies.

Thankfully, Representatives Michele Bachmann, Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Tom Rooney, and Lynn Westmoreland sent letters to the inspectors general of the State, Justice, Defense and Homeland Security Departments and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to question if people within the government are being influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood. These letters ask the inspectors general why policy has dramatically changed towards the Muslim Brotherhood under the Obama Administration.

These Members of Congress came under withering attack from both the Left and some in the Republican Party's establishment for just doing their jobs as legislators. If Americans understand what the Muslim Brotherhood is really about and how repressive their beliefs are, especially towards women, they would have the same questions.

President Obama and his State Department have bent over backwards to appease the Muslim Brotherhood. Americans should be asking, "Why?"

7 Suggested 2012 Campaign Slogans For Barack Insane-Hussein Obama

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan3.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan71.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan2.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan5.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan4.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan6.jpg)

     (http://www.rightwingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obamaslogan1.jpg)

                        (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ItDFt3hkHuo/TR4iezwaQgI/AAAAAAAAJK4/BhlQEwnq4hM/s1600/12-30-10%2B5.jpg)


One of the most annoying things about this election is that people keep asking the candidates what they'll do to create jobs.  The problem is that the only way the federal government can create jobs is by hiring more bureaucrats, which is the last thing any sane person wants to see.  The job of the president is to create an environment in which entrepreneurs and small businesses can flourish.  That means you cut the tax rate and you get rid of stupid, power-grabbing, regulators, like the storm troopers at the EPA, and you take the jackboot of the federal government off the necks of those driven to succeed and get wealthy.  Prosperity is the greatest engine for job creation and it's the only way that a $16 trillion national debt won't sooner, rather than later, turn us into Greece.

Speaking of money, in 2010, during the worst days of our recession, we were sending $4.16 billion in foreign aid to Afghanistan, $1.8 billion to both Pakistan and Haiti, $758 million to Mexico and $615 to Nigeria.  All of that would have been bad enough, but that was money we had to borrow and then pay interest on to the Chinese.  To me, that sounds a lot like the dumb schmuck who borrows money from a shylock and then races down to the corner bar to buy drinks for the house.

Speaking of Mexico, a nation that has seen 50,000 of its citizens murdered by drug dealers in recent years, I, for one, don't believe that the government couldn't wipe out the creeps if it really wanted to.  Those goons may have a lot of automatic weapons, thanks to Eric Holder, but they don't have tanks.  I suspect that the cartels are allowed to run wild for the same reason that Mexico does nothing to shut down its northern border: money, money, money.

If it weren't for millions of illegal aliens in the U.S. wiring billions of dollars back to their relatives, and the drug loot that's floating around south of the border, Mexican politicians would actually have to do something for the people or face a civil war.  It's the same reason that Pakistan lets its farmers continue to grow poppies, the source of most of the world's heroin.

Finally, although several motives have been suggested to explain why John Roberts sided with the loons on the Court, the one I like best is that by doing so, he not only forced Obuma to defend ObumaCare during the campaign, but to defend what is now officially, thanks to Roberts, the largest tax increase in history.  Only time will tell, based on his future decisions, if Roberts suffered a brain cramp or if he is so diabolical that people might start referring to him as Mac, short for Machiavelli.

Although Obuma's immediate reaction to the Court's decision was one of unbridled glee, by the time this all plays out, he may find himself like the fencing master in the cartoon who apparently dodges his opponent's sword, and says, "Aha, you missed!" a second before his severed head drops to the floor.

   (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-f2Oxh53Hx1g/UBF9u4P8a4I/AAAAAAAAaCE/aoRPdmgmZl8/s1600/7-25-12%2B15.jpg)

RNC: These Aren't Gaffes Mr. President
By Katie Pavlich
7/25/2012

The Republican National Committee is out with a new ad. The message?
President Obama's "gaffes" on the economy and business actually aren't
gaffes at all.

Click here to view:



2008 FLASHBACK:

Click here to view:


The bottom line is, President Obama has made it clear he believes business in
America owes him and the government something, despite business in America
being the back bone of a functioning government. This becomes more apparent
every time the words "pay your fair share" come out of Obama's mouth.
Businesses already "pay their fair share" not only in taxes, but more importantly
in providing 120 million jobs for Americans.

Click here to view:


Also, lets not forget President Obama's stated support for Occupy Wall Street,
a movement that has shown no respect for business in America.[/font][/size]

   (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-x2_S3EElG_8/UA7aggilmUI/AAAAAAAAZ7E/kobhPpLV89g/s1600/7-22-12%2B4.jpg)

"Violence And Destruction Are Heard Within Her"
By Michael Brown
7/23/2012

As America reels from yet another devastating tragedy, the message of the ancient Hebrew prophets speaks to us afresh: A nation that is filled with violence is a nation on the verge of collapse. Consider where we stand today.

While grieving families in Aurora, CO come to grips with their agonizing losses, it is sobering to realize that the movie theater massacre was actually the sixth multiple-victim shooting in America so far in July, with a total of 24 killed and almost 100 wounded (again, this represents multiple-victim shootings only).

As we look back over the last five years, the roll-call of horror and pain is overwhelming, especially when we remember that each of these "statistics" represents a precious, irreplaceable, human life (and note that I'm not listing the large number of people who were wounded):


• Jan. 8, 2011, Tuscon, AZ: 6 dead (at a political rally)

• Nov. 5, 2009, Ft. Hood, TX: 13 dead (at an army base)

• Apr. 3, 2009, Binghamton, NY: 13 dead (at an immigration center)

• Mar. 30, 2009, Carthage, NC: 8 dead (at a nursing home)

• Mar. 29, 2009, Santa Clara, CA: 6 dead (family members)

• Mar. 10, 2009, Samson, AL: 10 dead (including the killer's mother and grandparents)

• Dec. 24, 2008, Covina, CA: 9 dead (at a family Christmas party)

• Sept. 2, 2008: Alger, WA: 6 dead (at several locations)

• Feb. 14, 2008: Dekalb, IL: 6 dead (at a college campus)

• Feb. 2, 2008: Chicago, IL: 5 dead (at a store)

• Dec. 24, 2007: Carnation, WA: 6 dead (family members)

• April 16, 2007, Blacksburg, VA: 33 dead (at a college campus)

And can we ever forget April 20, 1999, the Columbine High School massacre, where the teenage murderers were reported to be laughing as they mowed down their fellow-students and teachers at close range and in cold blood?

Added to this – and perhaps related to this – is the ever intensifying culture of violence in TV and movies and video games, with a whole generation becoming increasingly desensitized to blood and gore. According to a report posted by the University of Michigan Health System,


• An average American child will see 200,000 violent acts and 16,000 murders on TV by age 18.

• Two-thirds of all programming contains violence.

• Most violent acts go unpunished on TV and are often accompanied by humor. The consequences of human suffering and loss are rarely depicted.

• Many shows glamorize violence. TV often promotes violent acts as a fun and effective way to get what you want, without consequences

• Children imitate the violence they see on TV. Children under age eight cannot tell the difference between reality and fantasy, making them more vulnerable to learning from and adopting as reality the violence they see on TV.

• Repeated exposure to TV violence makes children less sensitive toward its effects on victims and the human suffering it causes.


Rest of story @: http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2012/07/23/violence_and_destruction_are_heard_within_her

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-789qqJcBCHk/UA7SEMUN3RI/AAAAAAAAZ6M/57cRqEflRXU/s1600/7-24-12%2B5.jpg)

Spoilers: 'Dark Knight Rises' plot shares scary similarities with old Glenn Beck monologues
Monday, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:23 PM EDT
http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/07/23/spoilers-dark-knight-rises-plot-has-share-scary-similarities-with-old-glenn-beck-monologues/

Have you seen the Dark Knight Rises yet? If so, feel free to continue reading. If you've missed it – stop reading this right now, bookmark the page, buy yourself a ticket, go see it, be amazed, and then come back and read this.

Ok, now for those of you who have seen the movie and are big Glenn fans, you may have noticed some scenes that could have been pulled from old 'Glenn Beck' shows where he was warning about the dangers of the 'Occupy' movement. And while Glenn certainly doesn't think the screenwriters were ripping off his ideas, they certainly seemed to understand the dangers of a socialist movement that turns violent (which history shows they usually do).

"I went and I watched Batman and I have to tell you, I would like a royalty check, please. Because if it's not almost every monologue we've done in the last three years. I mean, these guys have ‑‑ whoever wrote this movie has either really ‑‑ really knows what's going on in the world and sees the world a similar way, or they have read The Coming Insurrection. Because everything that I say is coming is happening in this movie except it's, you know, done with a guy with a mask in a bat outfit," Glenn said.

For example, in the movie the villain, Bane, targeted the rich and the wealthy of Gotham City with rhetoric similar to that of the Occupy Wall Street movement. He continuously refers to them as corrupt liars who are oppressing normal citizens, and in several pivotal scenes escalated that rhetoric to violence.

Early in the film, Bane and his band of mercenaries target the Gotham Stock Exchange (with portions filmed on Wall Street), and brutally assault a trader on the floor while accusing the finance workers as being the real criminals.

GPD Special Operative: This is a stock exchange. There's no money for you to steal.

Bane: Then what are you people doing here?

Even Catwoman, who wavers back and forth between hero and villain over the course of the film, delivers lines that could have been lifted from the Occupy talking points. At a fundraiser, she tells Bruce Wayne/Batman: "You think this can last? There's a storm coming, Mr. Wayne. You and your friends better batten down the hatches, because when it hits, you're all gonna wonder how you ever thought you could live so large and leave so little for the rest of us."

But it's when the violence really ramps up halfway through the film that a moviegoer could see scenes literally lifted from Glenn's head. As the movie gets closer to it's final act, Bane traps the police underground, breaks open the cities prisons, and orders the citizens of Gotham to take control of their city. The rich are dragged out of their homes – the exteriors of which appear to be from affluent New York City neighborhoods - and are killed in the street or taken before kangaroo courts where they have already been found guilty. Bodies are hung in the streets as warnings not to oppose the revolution. The police are called corrupt and the prisons are emptied. The top comes down, the bottom rises up, and everything is turned inside out. The system collapses, and something sinister rises in its place. It's as if the Occupy philosophy were violently forced into reality, with the wealthy and influential forced into hiding as Bane and his goons enforce their own version of order.

And there is one man who saw that as a possible violent phase of the "Occupy" movement.

"Capitalists, if you think that you can play footsies with these people, you're wrong. They will come for you and drag you into the streets and kill you. They will do it. They're not messing around," Glenn said back in October. " If you're wealthy, they will kill you for what you have."

"Once you start going for hate ‑‑ and this is what Marxists always do. They always pit people against each other classes," he said.

At the time, Glenn compared the rising Occupy movement, and its philosophy of class warfare, with other movements with Marxist influence such as the French Revolution, the Soviet Union, and Mao.

The filmmakers of Dark Knight Rises have even said that the class warfare themes were heavily influenced by A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens's novel on the French Revolution. And while the ideas started to form before the "Occupy" movement, the impact those themes have today are clearly heightened due to the events of the past year.


Dark Knight screenwriter Jonathan Nolan wrote:
"Chris and David [Goyer] started developing the story in 2008 right after the second film came out," he says. "Before the recession. Before Occupy Wall Street or any of that. Rather than being influenced by that, I was looking to old good books and good movies. Good literature for inspiration... What I always felt like we needed to do in a third film was, for lack of a better term, go there. All of these films have threatened to turn Gotham inside out and to collapse it on itself. None of them have actually achieved that until this film. 'A Tale of Two Cities' was, to me, one of the most harrowing portrait of a relatable, recognizable civilization that completely folded to pieces with the terrors in Paris in France in that period. It's hard to imagine that things can go that badly wrong."

Who was it that wanted to turn things inside out? This guy:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ak9bCQFWCsc/UA7RriPQcXI/AAAAAAAAZ6A/Xg31RFQ6xXQ/s1600/Van%2BJones%2B1.jpg)

Top down. Bottom up. Inside out. That was Van Jones's strategy.

But Glenn predicts that were the events of 'Dark Knight Rises' to actually happen in America, it would be Jones playing the role of Bane.

"But there's a point where (Bane) gives the Van Jones speech that we've talked about a million times. He talks about oppression. And they have taken this land. Bane's not for America. He's not for Gotham. He's saying, 'They've taken this great city and they have ‑‑ and they've turned it into a land of oppression, and I'm going to free you. And this is a symbol of the oppression,' and he points, and behind him is the prison. It's like Guantanamo basically. It's all prisons," Glenn said.

"Van Jones, I'm telling you Van Jones will be the guy that gives the Bane speech. He will. If allowed, he will give the Bane speech in front of a prison, and he'll open up the gates. And he'll say, 'These guys, they were oppressed. Let them be free. You're free. The city is about to be yours again.' And he opens them up," Glenn said.

     (http://www.wcyb.com/image/view/-/4850352/highRes/2/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/10v4wel/-/Billy-Graham-jpg.jpg)

Evangelist Billy Graham defends Chick-fil-A (compares U.S. to Sodom & Gomorrah)
CNN - July 26, 2012

(CNN) - Billy Graham, the dean of American evangelists, has once again broken his usual silence on hot-button issues, defending the president of the Chick-fil-A restaurant chain for his opposition to same-sex marriage days after issuing a letter decrying what he sees as the nation's moral decay.

Earlier this year, the ailing preacher publicly endorsed a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay unions in North Carolina, raising eyebrows among many who'd watched Graham studiously avoid thorny social issues for years.

On Thursday, he issued a statement of support for the popular fast-food chain. Many people have slammed Chick-fil-A President Don Cathy for saying his company backs the traditional family unit and is opposed to same-sex marriage.

Graham praised restaurant founder S. Truett Cathy and son Don Cathy, the company's president, "for their strong stand for the Christian faith."

"I've known their family for many years and have watched them grow Chick-fil-A into one of the best businesses in America while never compromising their values," Graham said.

The Chick-fil-A controversy reflects what many see as America's deep cultural and religious divide. The company's position on same-sex marriage doesn't sit well with Jim Henson Co., whose Jim Henson's Creature Shop toys have been served in Chick-fil-A's meals for children.

Jim Henson Co. is named for the creator of The Muppets. However, the company transferred The Muppets' rights and ownership to the Walt Disney Co. in 2003, according to Jim Henson Co.

"The Jim Henson Company has celebrated and embraced diversity and inclusiveness for over 50 years and we have notified Chick-fil-A that we do not wish to partner with them on any future endeavors," the company said in a posting on its Facebook page.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a 2008 GOP presidential candidate, is backing Chick-fil-A. He urged people to turn out to Chick-fil-A restaurants on Wednesday to show their support for what Cathy had to say about marriage.
Graham says he appreciated Huckabee's leadership and plans to visit a Chick-fil-A on that day, August 1.

"Each generation faces different issues and challenges, but our standard must always be measured by God's word. I appreciate the Cathy family's public support for God's definition of marriage."

On Tuesday, Graham leveled deep criticism at the United States. He compared the country to Sodom and Gomorrah, the Biblical cities synonymous with sin.

"Self-centered indulgence, pride, and a lack of shame over sin are now emblems of the American lifestyle," Graham writes in the open letter released by his organization this week.

He blasts what he sees as efforts to keep references to Jesus out of the public sphere.

"Our society strives to avoid any possibility of offending anyone -- except God. Yet the farther we get from God, the more the world spirals out of control," he writes in the letter released Tuesday.

Graham, 93, has preached to untold millions over six decades, and provided counsel to generations of U.S. presidents.

His open letter also contains a fund-raising appeal and a notice that Graham's son Franklin, himself a major evangelical figure, is launching a new effort to "bring the Gospel into neighborhoods and homes in every corner of America next year."

Randall Balmer, the chair of the religion department at Dartmouth College, suspects the motivation for the letter is at least partly political.

"It's hard for me to believe that this letter does not have political intent," he said.

Its move to decry what he would see as moral decay "would be tied to the Obama administration," he argued, asking rhetorically why Graham would not have issued the statement in response to an event like the Abu Ghraib torture scandal.

Graham's spokesman did not immediately respond to a question about what prompted the letter.

It does not clearly refer to specific recent events.

Balmer said that evangelicals would take note of the letter, though Graham has largely retired from the public eye in recent years.

"There is certainly admiration for Billy Graham, as there should be," Balmer said. "There is lingering respect for Billy Graham and I think that people will take notice."

But he said the comparison to Sodom and Gomorrah -- which Graham attributes to his late wife Ruth in the letter -- was startling.

                (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-WzKljE3k7uY/UAmITCmbhxI/AAAAAAAAZuc/4Pzcje4fTtY/s1600/7-20-12%2B5.jpg)

The 20 Best Quotes From Ayn Rand
By John Hawkins
7/20/2012


20) "Ask yourself why totalitarian dictatorships find it necessary to pour money and effort into propaganda for their own helpless, chained, gagged slaves, who have no means of protest or defense. The answer is that even the humblest peasant or the lowest savage would rise in blind rebellion, were he to realize that he is being immolated, not to some incomprehensible noble purpose, but to plain, naked human evil."

19) "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."

18) "Pity for the guilty is treason to the innocent."

17) "Man's unique reward, however, is that while animals survive by adjusting themselves to their background, man survives by adjusting his background to himself. If a drought strikes them, animals perish — man builds irrigation canals; if a flood strikes them, animals perish — man builds dams; if a carnivorous pack attacks them animals perish — man writes the Constitution of the United States. But one does not obtain food, safety or freedom — by instinct."

16) "And what is the state but a servant and a convenience for a large number of people, just like the electric light and the plumbing system? And wouldn't it be preposterous to claim that men must exist for their plumbing, not the plumbing for the men."

15) "Every movement that seeks to enslave a country, every dictatorship or potential dictatorship, needs some minority group as a scapegoat which it can blame for the nation's troubles and use as a justification of its own demands for dictatorial powers. In Soviet Russia, the scapegoat was the bourgeoisie; in Nazi Germany, it was the Jewish people; in America, it is the businessmen."

14) "I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

13) "Statism survives by looting; a free country survives by production."

12) "Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion — when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing — when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors — when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you — when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice — you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot."

11) "We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality."

10) "Government 'help' to business is just as disastrous as government persecution... the only way a government can be of service to national prosperity is by keeping its hands off."

9) "The right to life is the source of all rights -- and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave."

8 ) "An attempt to achieve the good by force is like an attempt to provide a man with a picture gallery at the price of cutting out his eyes."

7) "Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)."

6) "The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles."

5) "The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me."

4) "The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see."

3) "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

2) "America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to 'the common good,' but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance—and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way."

1) "We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force."

            
The Chicken Inquisition spreads to San Francisco
By: John Hayward
7/27/2012 03:01 PM

The war against Chick-fil-A, in which several politicians of a totalitarian mindset have decided must be punished because of its CEO's unacceptable exercise of his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion, has expanded to San Francisco.

Mayor Edwin Lee issued the following message via Twitter: "Very disappointed Chick-fil-A doesn't share San Francisco's values & strong commitment to equality for everyone."

Well, everyone except practicing Christians, of course. Those people can be discriminated against and treated with the most vicious intolerance imaginable, as the mayor made clear with his thuggish follow-up Tweet: "Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer."

(Emphasis mine.) Or what, Mr. Mayor? Will it be brown shirts and truncheons at the Chick-fil-A construction site?

Lee's fellow inquisitor, Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, apparently had a quick remedial education in the nature of American liberty, because after making some blustery threats to block Chick-fil-A construction in his city, he suddenly reversed himself on Thursday. "I can't do that. That would be interference to his rights to go there," Menino told the Boston Herald, referring to his threat to withhold licenses from Cathy's restaurant on the grounds of ideological impurity.

Menino added, "I make mistakes all the time. That's a Menino-ism." Ha! What a knee-slapper! Totalitarianism is hilarious, provided the correct people suffer.

Does that word "totalitarian" sound ugly? Good. It should. That's exactly what this is. If you don't like it, then stand up and oppose it, even though you may find yourself strongly disagreeing with the views of Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy about same-sex marriage. The height of respect for freedom of speech is the defense of speech you disagree with.

When we discuss Menino, Lee, or Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, we've moved on to a very different topic than argument with Cathy, or even voluntary boycotts of his restaurant. I've never been a big fan of boycotts myself, but people do business where they choose. If they're more, or less, inclined to eat a restaurant because of something its executives have said, then so be it. Their decision can certainly be criticized, and that criticism can in turn be called into question. That's what debate and discussion are all about.

But we're talking about high officials abusing the powers of their office, to punish a cultural perspective and religious beliefs they disagree with. Chick-fil-A stands accused of no discrimination in its hiring or business practices. The free speech they dislike was not profane or offensive in any way. It's worth noting, as the editors of National Review did when they spoke up against "The Chicken Inquisition," that "Mr. Cathy did not even target homosexuals, and his reference to being married to "our first wives" indicates that his criticism of the recent decay of marriage is by no means limited to the question of same-sex marriage."

The treatment of Cathy by these thug mayors amounts to the abuse of official power to criminalize dissent. The "dissent" in question is far from an extreme view held by a tiny minority – although, once again, the principle at stake would be no different if it were.

No one should be eager to sacrifice that principle, whatever their position on the issues of the day. If you support the likes of Menino and Emanuel, but would shriek in outrage if an arrogant city official made a big show of denying permits to a company whose founder enthusiastically supports same-sex marriage, then "hypocrisy" is too mild a word to describe your position. Neither is there any room for cutesy-poo euphemisms like "Menino-ism." The correct term is very unpleasant, and should be welcome beside no American's name.

Update: Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is not inexperienced when it comes to the intersection of politics and food, criticized Lee, Menino, and Emanuel in his weekly radio show. Bloomberg said it's inappropriate for officials "to look at somebody's political views and decide whether or not they can live in the city, or operate a business in the city, or work for somebody in the city."

Bloomberg is a supporter of same-sex marriage himself, but he won't try blocking the construction of Chick-fil-A restaurants. He'll be a significant presence inside the restaurants after they're built, but that's another story.

   (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7OJGNzdmBDc/UA7OFUZSe8I/AAAAAAAAZ5c/PIs_umvc3mM/s1600/7-24-12%2B2.jpg)

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of "On Killing."

http://www.gleamingedge.com/mirrors/onsheepwolvesandsheepdogs.html

"Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always,even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for?" - William J. Bennett - in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:

"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.

But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.

Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.

Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.

There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke

Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.

If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

For example, many officers carry their weapons in church.? They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs.? Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.

I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"

Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.

Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"

It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.

Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling."

Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.

And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...

"Baa."

This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

   (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-f3hX4BQhQRU/UBOp8AZSoUI/AAAAAAAAaOE/YrZHWDbUjvk/s1600/7-27-12%2B3.bmp)


When I hear liberals blame guns for what James Holmes did, I realize they don't appreciate how much worse the carnage could have been.  If, instead of entering the theater with his semi-automatic weapon, he had set off the bombs with which he had booby-trapped his apartment, God only knows how many more people would have been killed and maimed.

Liberals are always eager to ban guns, but even after the Oklahoma City bombing, you didn't hear them talk about banning fertilizer.  That's probably just as well because sane people would have then been forced to point out that manure doesn't kill people; people kill people.

One of the creepy things about liberals is that they only wish to discuss actions and inevitable consequences when the actions can be traced to conservatives.  You never hear them reprimand parole boards, which are nearly always comprised of social workers, psychologists and other college degreed morons, when one of the felons they release murders or rapes another victim.

You never hear liberals blaming people like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Ted Kennedy and Barack Insane Obuma, for bringing on the financial meltdown by insisting that home loans be given to people who couldn't come up with a down payment, all because they knew that the votes of those new homeowners could be so easily bought and paid for with the tax dollars of the solvent.

Have you ever heard a liberal lay the blame for Islamic terrorism at the feet of Jimmy Carter, the man who pulled the carpet out from under the Shah of Iran, thus inviting the Ayatollah Khomeini and his mullahs to embark on their mission of worldwide domination?

Speaking of lunatics such as Jared Loughner and James Holmes, it's been liberal state legislators who have cut funding for insane asylums and the ACLU who have fought the commitment of psychotics.  As a result, these days, there is no way to force the mentally deranged to take their medications and no way to get them off the streets once they decide to forego their meds until the day the voices in their heads send them off on a killing spree.

Also, you may have noticed that all the idiot clowns on the Left need to do is place "phobic" at the end of words in order to cow their opponents into silence. If you don't think that same-sex marriages are a great idea, you're homophobic.  If you don't believe that our country owes its creation to Muslims, you're Islamophobic.

Moreover, nobody is supposed to be judgmental, lest they be accused of bigotry.  So the fact that one of the major reasons that the black community is so dangerous and so dysfunctional is because more than seven out of every 10 black babies is born to an unwed mother is supposed to be ignored in the name of political correctness.  In one of Leona Salazar's columns, I read that the most appropriate name for those unfortunate babies is "souvenirs."   

In conclusion, when you realize there are about 315 million people now living in the United States, and that thousands of them didn't think twice about standing in line in order to see a comic book movie at midnight, and that tens of millions more will, in spite of all the rotten things this administration has done over the past three years, vote for Barack Insane Obama this November, it's rather surprising that such tragic events as took place in Columbine, Tucson and Aurora, are as rare as they are.

America's Sicko's

http://www.infowars.com/james-holmes-is-not-alone-20-more-examples-of-the-sickos-that-are-overrunning-america/

There is much more to the collapse of America than just our economic problems.  The truth is that the United States is like a beautiful house that may still look great on the outside but that has rotted and decayed very badly on the inside.  In fact, the foundations of our country have rotted away so badly that our entire society is starting to collapse.  Just look at James Holmes.  It would be great if we could honestly say that James Holmes is an aberration, but we all know better than that.  James Holmes is not alone.  The cold, hard reality of the matter is that our degenerate society regularly produces sickos and monsters like James Holmes.  As I wrote about the other day, we lead the world in a whole host of bad categories.  We lead the world in child abuse, we lead the world in divorce, we lead the world in teen pregnancy and we lead the world in drug addiction.  The basic building blocks of society that tie us together and help keep us grounded (such as the family) are breaking down, but we still seem surprised that we have hordes of "lone wolf individuals" running around doing crazy things.  We are a sick, twisted society that is producing sick, twisted individuals.  If we do not admit how deep our problems really are, then we are never going to find any real solutions and we are going to keep being shocked when another James Holmes pops on to the scene.

Why didn't this type of thing happen back in the 1950s?

Why are our young people so violent and so mentally unstable?

What has changed?

Those are some very important questions.  But most Americans will forget this incident very quickly and they will move on with their self-absorbed lives.

But there is so much about this shooting that calls for further examination.

What would make a highly educated 24 year old man do something so incredibly evil?

Why are so many young people suddenly "snapping" these days?

As our society continues to decay, how much worse are things going to get?

It is almost to the point where people are going to start becoming afraid of gathering in public places.

Most Americans never would have imagined that it would be dangerous to go to the movie theater.

But now people are going to look at going to the movies much differently.

And could it have been possible that James Holmes had some help?

There are some important questions that the media is not really focusing on in this case....

-How did an impoverished college student put together an arsenal of weapons, ammunition and body armor worth tens of thousands of dollars?

-Why do some eyewitnesses claim that he had at least one other person assisting him?

-Why did he surrender to police without offering any resistance whatsoever?

It would be great if we could get some answers to those questions.

In any event, this is yet another sign of how far our society has fallen.  We are becoming more sick and more twisted with each passing day, and it is time to admit this fact.

The following are 20 more examples of the sickos that are overrunning America....

#1 A Sicko In Oregon That Breaks Into Homes In Order To Watch Computer Porn
According to CBS, one young man in Oregon has been breaking into homes with the intent of watching pornography on the Internet....

Police say a 21-year-old Oregon man broke into homes to look at pornography on the Internet, sometimes while the homeowners were inside.

Eugene police said Thursday they arrested Antone Forrest Deedward Owens on charges of burglary, menacing and coercion. Authorities say he broke into at least three homes since last September, sometimes entering the same home on multiple occasions.


#2 Delaware Pediatrician That Sexually Abused 103 Children
Who is the bigger monster - James Holmes or the Delaware doctor that sexually abused 103 children?  The following is from a recent Natural News article....

According to reports in 2010, Dr. Earl Bradley, who has since been dubbed "America's Worst Pedophile," stood accused of molesting 103 young patients in his office in the tiny town of Lewes, Del., since 1994.

Detailed in 160 pages of what ABC News described as "disturbing court documents," Bradley apparently videotaped his sex acts. The documents said Bradley repeatedly molested his child patients as their parents sat nearby and unsuspecting outside the waiting room of his BayBee's Pediatrics clinic.


#3 Jerry Sandusky
Jerry Sandusky was supposed to be a role model.  He was an assistant football coach at Penn State and he was heavily involved in charity work.

But it turns out that it was all a lie.  In fact, a whole bunch of people involved in the Penn State football program knew what was going on and did not report it.

In the end, Jerry Sandusky was found guilty of 45 counts of sexually abusing young boys.  He has become a national symbol of the depravity which is rotting away the very heart of this nation.


#4 Man That Kept His Wife Chained Up For 10 Years
What would you do to a man that kept his wife chained up for ten years?

According to one West Virginia news source, that is exactly what one man down in West Virginia did....

Earlier this month, Lizon was arrested after police say he kept his wife, Stephanie, chained up for nearly a decade in their home along Miller Hollow Road in Leroy, W.Va.

Lizon is accused of smashing Stephanie's feet with farm equipment and hitting her with a hot frying pan.

Police say she also had a miscarriage because of the abuse and was forced to have another baby while still chained.


#5 Serial Foot-Licker In New York
Did serial foot-lickers even exist back in the 1950s?

Why are there so many of them running around today?

The following is from the New York Daily News....

Police have a possible serial foot-licker in custody after a 49-year-old man was arrested for inappropriately touching two young girls at an upstate New York library.

Anthony Parri allegedly took off a child's shoe and rubbed the girl's foot against his nose and mouth in one of two incidents Tuesday at Penfield Library, according to reports.

One of the alleged attacks happened in an open area in the children's section, library director Bernadette Brickman told WHAM, ABC's affiliate in Rochester. The child's mom and a library employee witnessed the abuse and called the cops, according to the station.


#6 Houston Police Officer Accused Of Raping A Woman While On Duty
Who is supposed to keep all of these sickos under control?

The police?

Sadly, the police often are the sickos.

The following is from the Houston Chronicle....

DNA evidence has linked a Houston police officer to a rape he allegedly committed while on duty last month, according to the Harris County District Attorney's Office.

Officer Adan Jimenez Carranza, 32, was being held Friday at the Harris County Jail under a $30,000 bond, charged with aggravated sexual assault of a woman June 18 after a minor traffic accident, court records show.


#7 Philadelphia Police Officer Makes 14 Year Old Girl Watch Him Have Sex With A Prostitute After Sexually Assaulting Her
If we can't trust the police, then who can we trust?

Recently there have been a bunch of reports of sexual misconduct by police in the national news.

The following is how Fox News described one particularly disturbing incident from the Philadelphia area....

A Philadelphia cop was arrested over allegations that he abducted a 14-year-old girl, sexually assaulted her and made her watch him have sex with a prostitute.

Police found Anthony Dattilo, 36, at a motel in the Bensalem area of the city Wednesday while responding to a possible abduction, according to the Bucks County Courier Times.

Dattilo, a 12-year veteran of the Philadelphia Police Department, is reportedly in custody at the Bucks County prison on $500,000 bail.


#8 TSA Agent Spills Grandpa's Ashes And Laughs About It
Almost every single day there is another TSA horror story in the news.

But what you are about to read is one of the worst of them all.

The following is from an ABC News article....

John Gross was leaving Florida with the remains of his grandfather  in a tightly sealed jar marked "Human Remains, " ABC Indianapolis  affiliate RTV6 reported.

"They opened up my bag, and I told them, 'Please, be careful. These are my grandpa's ashes,'" Gross told the station. "She picked up the jar. She opened it up."

Gross said the TSA agent used her finger to sift through the ashes and accidentally spilled it.  He said one-third to one-half of the ashes spilled and that the agent laughed as he tried to gather what he could from the floor.

"She didn't apologize. She started laughing. I was on my hands and knees picking up bone fragments. I couldn't pick up all, everything that was lost. I mean, there was a long line behind me."


#9 Connecticut Man Threatens To Cut The Tongue Out Of The Mouth Of A 3 Year Old Child
What kind of a man would hold up a knife and threaten to cut the tongue out of the mouth of a 3 year old kid?

Sadly, that is exactly what happened up in Connecticut recently.

The following is from a WFSB report about this incident....

Police in Vernon are investigating reports that a man held a knife to a child's face and threatened to cut out his tongue.

On Friday, a woman named Heather Bonneville called police to inform them that a family acquaintance, who has been identified as Roman Fein, held the knife within inches of her 3-year-old son's face before making the threat to cut his tongue out of his mouth.


#10 Naked "Cannibal" Threatens To Eat Police Officers Down In Georgia
Why are so many criminals getting naked lately?

Why are so many criminals trying to eat people?

The following is from a recent Daily Mail article....

Karl Laventure, 21, was believed to be high on bath salts when he tried to attack the officers in Lilburn, Georgia.

And after they had managed to subdue him he began threatening to eat them.

Laventure appeared out of some woods and was seen running naked around a golf range near Atlanta, swinging a club around his head and screaming.

Police said that it took several officers to subdue the man who had 'super-human strength'.


#11 Public School Administrator In New York Fired For Not Participating In A Gay Orgy
Almost every day there is another story in the news about a new school sex scandal somewhere in America.

The following is from Courthouse News Service....

A public school administrator claims in court that his male boss sexually assaulted him in a hotel room after giving him pornography and trying to get him to join a foursome, then fired him for rebuffing the advances.


#12 Naked Florida Man Bites Chunk From Another Man's Stomach
This year criminals in America seem to have become obsessed with chewing on human flesh.

The following example is from a recent Daily Mail article....

A naked man allegedly flew into a violent rampage, biting a chunk out of another man's stomach after leaping from his roof onto a truck and urinating inside his home.

Officers responding to the scene needed backup to restrain Jeremiah Aaron Haughee with leg shackles, a spit hood and handcuffs after he continued fighting despite being Tasered five times.

Authorities did not carry out tests on Haughee to see if he was under the influence of any drugs.


Police first arrived at the home in Flagler Beach, Florida at 4.30 a.m. to find two men restraining the naked 22-year-old in a puddle of urine and glass.


#13 Father Who Killed His 3 Daughters Inside The Home Of His Ex-Wife
You know that society is really starting to break down when parents start killing their own children.

What one man up in Wisconsin is being charged with is absolutely horrific.

The following is from a recent CNN article....

A 34-year-old father was being held by authorities Wednesday in connection with the deaths of his three daughters, who were found inside his ex-wife's Wisconsin home with the gas fireplace turned on, officials said.


#14 Pregnant Woman Set On Fire In Detroit
These days not even pregnant women are immune to violence.

What one pregnant woman up in Detroit went through recently is hard to stomach....

A 22-year-old pregnant woman survived after being bound, driven to Detroit, set on fire and shot early Saturday morning.

The woman, who was nine-months pregnant, had returned from a movie with her boyfriend and dropped him off at his house in Warren when she was approached from behind, Warren police Sgt. Dave Geffert said.

The woman's hands, feet and eyes were bound with duct tape. She was then forced into her car and driven to an unknown place in Detroit where she was doused with lighter fluid, set on fire and shot once in the upper back, he said.


#15 New Jersey Man Throws His Own Intestines At Police
If the police were breaking into your home, would you cut out your own entrails and throw them at the police?

According to the Huffington Post, that is exactly what one man up in New Jersey did....

A New Jersey man allegedly cut out his entrails in front of police and then threw bits of his flesh and intestines at them.

The gruesome scene played out at a home in Hackensack, N.J., where 43-year-old Wayne Carter allegedly barricaded himself in on Sunday, NBC New York reported.

Officers got a call that morning when a witness said Carter was threatening to harm himself with a knife. Two cops responded, kicked in the door and found Carter in the corner, the station reported.

Carter allegedly ignored officers' orders to put down the knife, and instead began stabbing himself in the abdomen, neck and legs.


#16 Naked Man Brutally Murders A Hotel Maid
Why would anyone want to kill a 62 year old cleaning woman?

Many of the crimes that are being committed today are absolutely senseless.

The following is how the CBS affiliate in Sacramento reported this story....

A naked man who may have been on drugs was arrested Saturday for killing a Tracy motel employee.

Andrew Carreiro, 25, is behind bars accused of killing the 62-year-old woman who cleans rooms at the Hacienda Inn on the 600 block of West 11th Street.

Witnesses say they found Carreiro covered in blood and standing near the partially naked body of the woman, say witnesses.

"[It's] most definitely the craziest thing I've seen in my life, most definitely," said Jermaine Haynes, a motel resident who made the gruesome discovery.


#17 Crack-Fueled Sickos Abduct A Female Jogger
These days you are not safe anywhere in the country.

Just check out what happened to one math teacher from Montana.  The following is how a Daily Mail article described what two very sick drug addicts did to her....

After smoking crack cocaine over the entire trip, Waters allegedly told Spell the drug 'brought the devil out in him' and began talking about kidnapping and killing a female, AP reports.

After they spotted Arnold, Spell claims that Waters told him to 'grab the lady' and pull her into their Ford Explorer as she jogged by.

'Spell said Waters got into the back seat with the female and "choked her out",' the affidavit states.

After dropping Arnold's body in a rural area of North Dakota later that night, Waters bought a shovel at a nearby Walmart. They buried the body in a two- to three-feet-deep hole on an old farmstead.


#18 Female Teacher Has Sex With Four Male Students
Why are so many public school teachers having sex with their students?

Don't they realize that they will inevitably get caught?

Aren't the dozens of other school sex scandals in the news sufficient warnings?

The following is from the NBC affiliate in Tucson, Arizona....

A new police report reveals racy, disturbing details of the alleged relationships between an Ironwood Ridge High School teacher and four of her students.

Oro Valley Police picked up Melissa Dalton April 30th booking her on four counts of sexual conduct with a minor.

She posted bail and got out the next day.

Subsequently more Ironwood Ridge students came forward with more allegations. That prompted the Oro Valley Police Department to add eight more counts including six of sex with a minor.

Melissa Dalton was in her first year teaching at Ironwood Ridge High School. The 33 year old is a wife and mother.


#19 Texas House Of Horrors
The nightmares that were happening in one quiet house in Texas are so horrifying that it is hard to find the words to describe them.

The following is from a New York Daily News article....

Texas authorities said Tuesday they removed 11 children from a crowded home where a registered sex offender lives after they found eight confined in a small, dark bedroom with restraints tying some to their beds.

Along with the children, 10 adults were living in the one-story, 1,700-square-foot home in Dayton, about 30 miles northeast of Houston, Child Protective Services spokeswoman Gwen Carter said. One month after a raid on the house, authorities are still trying to determine how the children are related and why they were there, she said.

#20 Florida Man Bites The Lips Off Of A Kitten

What kind of a monster would bite the lips off of a kitten?

It is hard to imagine anyone actually doing such a thing, but according to WKMG this apparently happened....

A Palm Coast man was arrested on suspicion of biting the lips off a kitten and strangling another cat.

Angel Vega Roman, 28, was arrested Saturday and charged with cruelty to animals.

According to the Flagler County Sheriff's Office, Roman told an acquaintance that he accidentally choked his roommates' kitten a couple of weeks ago and bit the lips off another black and white kitten named Oreo.  Roman also tortured Oreo by burning its ear and whiskers with a lighter, a sheriff's report stated.

I know that I used a lot of disturbing examples in this article, but I wanted to make my point very strongly.

James Holmes is not an isolated case.  America is literally being overrun by sickos and monsters.

In the old days, our societal institutions were strong and they helped to tie us together.

But today there is very, very little that ties us together and keeps us grounded.  Faith in almost every major institution in society is very low and our families are falling apart.

The percentage of adult Americans that are married right now is at an all-time low.  The percentage of Americans with no religious affiliation at all is at an all-time high.

Our society is rotting from the inside out and many of our formerly great cities are degenerating into absolute hellholes.

Fixing America is not just a matter of fixing our economic system or our political system.

Fixing America is going to take a whole lot more than that.

While most remember 2008 as a landslide, Obuma only won by a 6.3% margin.  In 2010, he suffered a serious political defeat. Now just over four months from the election, the White House's margin for error is extraordinarily thin.

The economy certainly has helped put Obuma in this precarious political predicament... with some assistance from public resistance to his own policies... and it could easily put him in a worse one.  At this stage, it is clear that it will not put him in a better one.  The result is that the Administration must somehow try to make this election not be about the economy.  Simply: if the election is about the economy, Obuma loses.  Obama's comment that the "private sector is doing fine" is a direct manifestation of his need to make the economy not be the issue in November.

Nothing to see here, folks... move along.

Instead Obuma is attempting to run on a myriad of other issues... such as immigration to appeal to Hispanic voters, student loans to appeal to the young, and against the Administration's self-declared Republican "war on women"... in order to bring together parts of his 2008 coalition around noneconomic issues.

Obuma won these groups decisively in 2008 (receiving 68% of the Hispanic vote, 63% of 18-29 year olds, and 56% of women), and then saw Democrats' support fall sharply in all three in 2010 (to 60%, 55%, and 48%, respectively).  He needs to win them back.

     (http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y79/gschwertley/redneck-mansion.jpg?t=1318011528)


I'm trying to understand love of country. It's hard hoeing. Maybe some things just ain't understandable. Or maybe it's 'cause I'm from West Virginia and don't have shoes, 'cause they ain't any that fits people with twelve toes. How are you supposed to love a country where you can't get shoes?

I'm not even sure there's any such thing as a country. Mostly my country seems to be a bunch of brigands in Washington who send you tax forms to get money so they can kill people in some place that never did anything to you and you probably don't know where it is. When did I ask them to do that?

It looks to me like a country is just a temporary mood ginned up to get everybody hooting and hollering behind the grenade industry with other people's money. People just naturally like to get together in packs and kill each other, or beat each other full of concussions like in football, or have gangs and zip guns and ball bats and smack hell out of each other. A country's just a teenage gang with older teenagers and better zip guns, I reckon. All you got to do is get them riled up about something that probably don't exist. You send the dumb ones to get killed and the smart ones cash the checks at home. That's what a country is.

Think about it. Isn't it true? When the gummint wants to go kill folks we mostly never heard of, in Halfghanistan or Eye Rack this week anyway, it acts like the country is one solid thing, a big happy family, and has to think the same things. If the  gummint hates Halfghans, or wants their oil or something, we all got to hate them because we ought to love our country. It makes as much sense as lug nuts on a birthday cake.

I can't see how there's anything special about a country. It's just a big herd full of little herds that hate each other and want to swindle each other and pick everybody's pockets and burgle their houses if they can't actually steal them. I mean, the blacks hate the whites and beat them lopsided so they can take pictures, and half the whites hate blacks but don't dare say so, and want to run Mieesicans out of the country, and the Messicans hate the blacks and the whites that want to run them back to Messico, and everybody hates Moslems, whatever one of those is. Maybe that's a country. It looks more like a bar fight waiting to happen.

What's funny is how people talk about how they love their country, but don't act like it. I mean, there ain't nothing more patriotic than a businessman who thinks he can make money at it. The newspaper in Charlestown says the gummint spends a trillion dollars on wars every year, either fighting them or getting ready or looking for new ones. I don't know how much a trillion is. I do know it never sees the inside of a soldier's pockets.

No. All they get is stumps and blinded and dead. The businessmen don't want them to win, because then the gummint wouldn't buy as many helicopters to get shot down and then buy more. But businessmen don't want the troops to lose either, for exactly the same reason. Nobody in his right mind stops a going concern.

We got two kinds of businessman, and they both love their country the way a bank robber loves a bank. One kind wants to bring the whole country of Messico to America so they can pay them twelve cents an hour under the table and get rich. The other wants to send all America's factories to China where they can pay twelve cents an hour and get rich. Both kinds drip patriotism like oil from a 1964 Harley. If anyone loved me like businessmen love their country, I'd go into hiding.

Then we've got the military that loves its country something crazy. In West Virginia I noticed that ticks love cows. (Why did I think of that, I wonder?) In Washington you've got whole packs of colonels strutting around like barnyard roosters, but with less brains, and saying that hippies and reporters need to support the Pentagon's troops in killing Halfghans. It's so they can show how much they love their country.

See, colonels think they are the country, and nobody but them gets to decide what the country wants. But what if I think I'm the country as much as some useless tax-sucking colonel with colored gewgaws stuck on his coat jacket like a stamp collection? And what if I don't want to bomb anybody that I don't know, just to make money for bomb factories?

I didn't know that Lockheed-Martin was a country. I do now.

I got my doubts about some other patriots too. Suppose you went up north to Wall Street and asked those Yankee tape worms if they loved their country. Reckon they'd say yes? Of course they would. Why, they love their country like a hog loves cornbread. Of course, the hog don't care whose cornbread.

Thing is, the tapeworms, along with the other part of the gummint that stays in Washington, just busted the economy and left half of us with no house. If that ain't patriotism, I don't know what might be. And they didn't even say they was sorry, probably because they were too busy hiding the money in off-shore accounts.  Somehow, patriotism usually seems to have dollar signs attached.

A famous fraud said, "Ask not what your country can do for you," but that's just what everybody does ask. Best I can tell, lots of folk love the United States till their gums bleed, but don't want to do anything for it except run it broke. Congress takes bribes the way a Las Vegas slot machine eats quarters. Big Pharma swindles the public like a riverboat gambler with three decks of aces in his pockets. The Pentagon ain't nothing but Section Eight housing with five walls, so's you can tell whoever built it wasn't paying attention.

I guess with lots of practice I might learn to love hookworm, or leprosy, or even rap music like they have on the radio out of Wheeling—though that may be stretching it. But I can't go lower. I got my limits.

      (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BmUccyJwJNw/TLzKTMpK7yI/AAAAAAAAEeo/e4TWCy3KpR8/s1600/webb588.jpg)

                    (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-x2_S3EElG_8/UA7aggilmUI/AAAAAAAAZ7E/kobhPpLV89g/s1600/7-22-12%2B4.jpg)

"Violence And Destruction Are Heard Within Her"
By Michael Brown

As America reels from yet another devastating tragedy, the message of the ancient Hebrew prophets speaks to us afresh: A nation that is filled with violence is a nation on the verge of collapse. Consider where we stand today.

While grieving families in Aurora, CO come to grips with their agonizing losses, it is sobering to realize that the movie theater massacre was actually the sixth multiple-victim shooting in America so far in July, with a total of 24 killed and almost 100 wounded (again, this represents multiple-victim shootings only).

As we look back over the last five years, the roll-call of horror and pain is overwhelming, especially when we remember that each of these "statistics" represents a precious, irreplaceable, human life (and note that I'm not listing the large number of people who were wounded):  

• Jan. 8, 2011, Tuscon, AZ: 6 dead (at a political rally)

• Nov. 5, 2009, Ft. Hood, TX: 13 dead (at an army base)

• Apr. 3, 2009, Binghamton, NY: 13 dead (at an immigration center)

• Mar. 30, 2009, Carthage, NC: 8 dead (at a nursing home)

• Mar. 29, 2009, Santa Clara, CA: 6 dead (family members)

• Mar. 10, 2009, Samson, AL: 10 dead (including the killer's mother and grandparents)

• Dec. 24, 2008, Covina, CA: 9 dead (at a family Christmas party)

• Sept. 2, 2008: Alger, WA: 6 dead (at several locations)

• Feb. 14, 2008: Dekalb, IL: 6 dead (at a college campus)

• Feb. 2, 2008: Chicago, IL: 5 dead (at a store)

• Dec. 24, 2007: Carnation, WA: 6 dead (family members)

• April 16, 2007, Blacksburg, VA: 33 dead (at a college campus)

And can we ever forget April 20, 1999, the Columbine High School massacre, where the teenage murderers were reported to be laughing as they mowed down their fellow-students and teachers at close range and in cold blood?

Added to this – and perhaps related to this – is the ever intensifying culture of violence in TV and movies and video games, with a whole generation becoming increasingly desensitized to blood and gore. According to a report posted by the University of Michigan Health System,  

• An average American child will see 200,000 violent acts and 16,000 murders on TV by age 18.

• Two-thirds of all programming contains violence.

• Most violent acts go unpunished on TV and are often accompanied by humor. The consequences of human suffering and loss are rarely depicted.

• Many shows glamorize violence. TV often promotes violent acts as a fun and effective way to get what you want, without consequences

• Children imitate the violence they see on TV. Children under age eight cannot tell the difference between reality and fantasy, making them more vulnerable to learning from and adopting as reality the violence they see on TV.

• Repeated exposure to TV violence makes children less sensitive toward its effects on victims and the human suffering it causes.

When the Academy Award winning movie West Side Story came out in 1961, I remember hearing my family talk about the fact that it was violent. (I was 6 at the time.) Yes, West Side Story, where the gangs wore ties and danced to choreographed songs in the streets, and where the shootings and stabbings were basically bloodless, was considered violent. Just 6 years later, in 1967, Bonnie and Clyde was the big hit, and the blood was certainly flowing by then. And Bonnie and Clyde certainly looks tame compared to Natural Born Killers, which also looks tame compared to the latest spate of mutilation and torture flicks, all for our entertainment pleasure.

And let's not forget today's video games, where the gratuitous, explicit, intense, and utterly sick violence is at the control of the person (probably kid!) pulling the joystick trigger (in fact, as you play the game, you are that person). As a columnist noted, one well-known video game included "using cat carcasses as silencers on your gun, hitting people with anthrax-laden cow heads and playing 'fetch' with dogs using the severed heads of your dismembered victims." And there is a massive market for these types of "games."

The book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible, states that one of the reasons God destroyed the world in Noah's day was because the earth was "full of violence" (Gen 6:11, 13; even if you don't believe in Noah's flood, the moral lesson remains the same). What, then, can be said of a nation like America, a nation so filled with violence, not to mention entertained by violence? And I have not said a word about the violence done to babies in the womb, the ultimate example of innocent bloodshed.

Shortly before Jerusalem's fall 2,700 years ago, the prophet Jeremiah heard the Lord say these words, which could easily apply to our country today: "Violence and destruction are heard in her; her sickness and wounds are ever before me" (Jer 6:7). Yes, America, a nation with so much potential and such a rich history, finds itself in the spiraling death grip of violence. How do we turn the tide?

Talk of gun control or media censorship is hardly the solution. The fact is that we have lost the consciousness of God and the fear of God, and without a heartfelt, genuine turning to the Lord, our future looks more bloody than blessed. 

The hour is as late as it is urgent.

        (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qKiXgnvhlYM/UBjmHOT8kYI/AAAAAAAAauE/eeJ3Km5wvKA/s1600/8-1-12%2B2.jpg)

The drawback to elections, no matter where they take place, is that all sorts of people get to vote.  Just look around and you'll see the disastrous results of democratic elections.  In Gaza, the people elected terrorists who owe their allegiance to Hamas.  In Egypt, they elected Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, who gave a victory speech in which he announced that the future capital of Egypt would be Jerusalem, of all places, and put out a call to his people, saying, "You are all Hamas.  Come forward, you lovers of martyrdom."  Not exactly Churchillian or Reaganesque, I'm sure you'd agree.

I am proud to say that while pundits of all stripes were doing cartwheels over the so-called Arab Spring, I was predicting that it would quickly show itself to be a typical Arctic winter.  When votes are taken in sewers, the one thing you can always rely on is that a rodent will be elected.

Closer to home, we have Obuma once again giving himself an "A for effort," and blaming his miserable results on those darn House Republicans, along with George Bush, the Japanese tsunami, the European economy, Fox News and Lady GaGa.  I only wish I had been blessed with such an easy grader when I was taking high school geometry.  This lump has done everything but blame Bo for eating his homework.

Obuma also used Romney's summer vacation to berate his opponent, going so far as to claim that when his own family went on vacation, they used to ride a bus and stay at the Holiday Inn.  I'm not sure which family he has in mind, but it sure wasn't his mother and father, who split up when he was two; and it certainly wasn't his mother and step-father, who lived in Indonesia; and it certainly wasn't his grandmother and grandfather, who were very well off and lived in Hawaii, where nobody ever needs to go anywhere on vacation.

On the other hand, Obuma's remarks did serve to remind us of all the pricey vacations he and especially Moochelle take every other week.  The vacation she, the kids and 21 of their dearest chums, took to Africa in 2011, cost $425,000.  What's more, the kids were listed as members of the White House staff, which apparently turned the safari into official government business.

The bottom line, as usual, is that the Romneys spent their own money taking their family vacation; the Obumas, as usual, were spending ours.

Speaking of Mrs. Obuma, she recently used a church pulpit to announce that there's no better place for Americans to discuss politics and social issues than churches.  As I have often observed, the only time that liberals aren't prattling on about separation of church and state is at election time when black ministers rake in greenbacks renting out their pulpits to be used as props by left-wing politicians... and their wives. But, then again, the only time the Obamas feel the need to attend church is when they happen to be delivering the sermon.

     (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uJ3lArDT8jY/UBmCd2UHu8I/AAAAAAAAawY/UWFKh4LE2x0/s1600/9-2-10%2B3.jpg)


At about the same time that Secretary of State Clinton was apologizing for the U.S. military killing Afghan soldiers who had reportedly been firing on our planes, we were sending that country two billion dollars in foreign aid.  This is the same cesspool that has seen Afghans wearing military uniforms... probably because they were members of the Afghan military... regularly murdering American soldiers with impunity.

It would be ironic if Obuma were to be re-elected because the nation's unemployment numbers aren't as high this year as they were in 2010.  I say "ironic" because in November of that year, 17 states elected Republican governors.  As a result, thanks to those governors, including people named Walker, Kasich, Christie, Martinez, O'Donnell, LePage, Brownback and Scott, the unemployment numbers in those states have decreased on average 1.5%!  And as usual, Obuma takes the lion's share of credit. And for once, come to think of it, he's entitled; after all, without the leadership he displayed in 2009 and 2010, there's no way that so many Republican governors would have been elected.

When I hear black politicians playing the race card by referring every chance they get to DWB (driving while black), as code for police harassment, while ignoring the crime rate among urban blacks compared to every other racial group in the country, I keep wondering when someone will start referring to the victims of black killers, rapists and muggers, as WWW (walking while white).

Although I realize that the American voter has a notoriously short attention span, and that Romney is probably waiting until after the GOP convention to start lashing out at Obuma's record, I would advise him and his cohorts to stop defending RomneyCare and his years at Bain Capital.  Someone should remind him that he's not running for governor or auditioning to be the CEO of a venture capitalist firm.  He is running for the presidency, and it's never too early to apply the war paint.  Hell I've been attacking Obuma and his left-wing cronie clowns for the past four years, and I've barely scratched the surface of their infamy.

Defeating guys like Gingrich and Santorum is child's play compared to defeating an incumbent president.  So, no more silly remarks, Mr. Romney, like "Obuma is a nice guy, but..."  He is not a nice guy. He's a narcissistic, thin-skinned, anti-American radical, who, at most, should be a member of the Berkeley (CA) City Council or the mayor of San Francisco, not the president of the United States.  Calling him a nice guy simply goes counter to everything we all know about this racist weasel.  This isn't a high school debate, and points are not allotted on the basis of good sportsmanship, as John McCain discovered to his chagrin in 2008.

It's fine to use the catchphrase "Repeal and Replace ObumaCare," but an even catchier and more compelling slogan for Team Romney would be "Repeal and Replace Obuma."

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4FnpbBawzrM/UBmF9jzQcYI/AAAAAAAAaww/XqwtNrjDS0U/s1600/8-23-10%2B3.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-EhHH8TUvYRY/UBjo3rfSSjI/AAAAAAAAauc/-7p-SZhtwrk/s1600/8-19-10%2B1.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-btnmUO9l2u0/UBjcs8MsUyI/AAAAAAAAatA/Twq-17UN6cg/s1600/1-3-12%2B1.jpg)

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6PWJGJBTy3o/UBgQ0bFZbNI/AAAAAAAAarc/S2-7xmT3GGA/s1600/1-16-12%2B1.jpg)

STUFF


President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, U.S. sources familiar with the matter said.

Obama's order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence "finding," broadly permits the CIA and other U.S. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust Assad.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/01/us-usa-syria-obama-order-idUSBRE8701OK20120801


Mitt Romney called Jerusalem the capital of Israel and it angered  and hurt the feelings of the little so-called 'palestinians' who occupy parts of Israel.

Ouch.  It is too sad.    I am broken up over this blatant insensitivity... NOT!


Antonin Scalia, rumored to be a member of Opus Dei, a group whose allegiance is to the nation of the Vatican, says the states can regulate guns.

What has really happened is that his fat cells have squeezed his brain to such an extent that he has lost the ability to shut up.

Many in US politics are suspected of owing their prime allegiance to Opus Dei and the sovereign religion/state called  Vatican City.

Is it right for those in positions of power to swear their prime allegiance to foreign powers?    I think not.  But this is why some memberships are kept quiet.
The operative word there is prime as in primary allegiance.
Gun control is, of course, simply an effort made by America's enemies to weaken the United States.
Criminals can always get weapons and even make their own!
Just look at the UN forces.


Meanwhile Bloomberg has long ago lost it but now tries to top himself with  extreme nut cake behavior.

Fox News reports:
Mayor Bloomberg is pushing hospitals to hide their baby formula behind locked doors so more new mothers will breast-feed.
Starting Sept. 3, the city will keep tabs on the number of bottles that participating hospitals stock and use — the most restrictive pro-breast-milk program in the nation.  

This guy has far too much time on his hands.

   (http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/predator-drone.jpg)

Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress

Look! Up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It's ... a drone, and it's watching you. That's what privacy advocates fear from a bill Congress passed this week to make it easier for the government to fly unmanned spy planes in U.S. airspace.

The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015.

Privacy advocates say the measure will lead to widespread use of drones for electronic surveillance by police agencies across the country and eventually by private companies as well.

"There are serious policy questions on the horizon about privacy and surveillance, by both government agencies and commercial entities," said Steven Aftergood, who heads the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation also is "concerned about the implications for surveillance by government agencies," said attorney Jennifer Lynch.

The provision in the legislation is the fruit of "a huge push by lawmakers and the defense sector to expand the use of drones" in American airspace, she added.

According to some estimates, the commercial drone market in the United States could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars once the FAA clears their use.

The agency projects that 30,000 drones could be in the nation's skies by 2020.

Continued at: 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/coming-to-a-sky-near-you/

(http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/harry-reid-honesty-politics.jpg)(http://orangejuiceblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Harry-Reid-Sucks.jpg)(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_C5VMt0Sqis0/TI_8PcCdC8I/AAAAAAAAFFA/kiKrsR89PQQ/s1600/harry-reid-arrogance.jpg)

Harry Reid Accuses Romney of Federal Crime on Senate Floor, Offers Zero Evidence
By Guy Benson
8/2/2012

Let's get you up to speed on this idiotic flap: As you're already aware, Mitt Romney has declined to publicly release more than two years of tax returns. He's not legally obligated to do so; nor are Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, neither of whom have chosen to live up to the levels of "transparency" they're demanding of Romney. Frustrated by the Republican presidential candidate's refusal -- and clearly unperturbed by his own hypocrisy -- Reid began circulating a totally unsubstantiated rumor this week, suggesting that Mitt Romney is a tax evader. From yesterday:

"His poor father must be so embarrassed about his son," Reid said, in reference to George Romney's standard-setting decision to turn over 12 years of tax returns when he ran for president in the late 1960s. Saying he had "no problem with somebody being really, really wealthy," Reid sat up in his chair a bit before stirring the pot further. A month or so ago, he said, a person who had invested with Bain Capital called his office. Harry, he didn't pay any taxes for 10 years," Reid recounted the person as saying. He didn't pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that's true? Well, I'm not certain," said Reid. "But obviously he can't release those tax returns. How would it look?

CNN Money's Dan Primack promptly took Reid to the woodshed:

One of two things has happened:(1)Reid is simply making the whole thing up, in order to pressure Romney into releasing tax returns for years prior to 2010, or (2) Reid's investor pal lied, and the Senator didn't bother to conduct even a mild vetting before sharing the accusation with reporters. Either way, shame on [the] gossipy gentleman from Nevada. Let me make this crystal clear: Investors in private equity funds do not receive, nor are they entitled to request, personal tax returns for fund managers. Not just at Bain Capital, but everywhere. For example, ask the person managing your 401(k) for their personal tax returns. See how far you get. What makes this particular claim even sillier, of course, is that Romney hasn't even been managing Bain funds for the past 10 years.

(http://www.moonbattery.com/Reid%20boycott.jpg)

In other words, Reid is peddling pure, pungent BS. Even if this "source" at Bain (the identity of whom Reid has valiantly withheld -- on "principle," natch) exists, he would have zero knowledge of Romney's personal income taxes. Do your co-workers have access to your personal taxes? Exactly. This is ridiculous on its face. Has any of this opprobrium given Reid second thoughts? Not in the least. In fact, he dragged his baseless allegations of criminality(!) -- the Left's hot new trend, apparently -- onto the Senate floor earlier today:



He's refused to release his tax returns, as we know. If a person coming before this body wanted to be a cabinet officer, he couldn't be if he did the same refusal Mitt Romney does about tax returns. So the word's out that he hasn't paid any taxes for ten years. Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn't. We already know from one partial tax return that he gave us, he has money hidden in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and a Swiss bank account. Not making that up, that's in the partial year that he gave us. Mitt Romney makes more money in a single day than the average middle-class family makes in two years–or more.

"The word's out." What a standard! He fabricated that "word" out of thin air. By the way, someone told me Reid runs a secret dog-fighting ring in Nevada. Can't tell you who, but it sounds pretty true. Hey, have you heard the word's out about Reid's secret dog-fighting ring? What's that? Reid disputes it? Let him prove that he isn't a criminal animal abuser, because he is. (See how this works, Senator?) I'm also curious as to why Reid voted to confirm an actual tax cheat as Treasury Secretary. Reid's behavior has become so oafish and desperate that Lefty icon Jon Stewart has felt compelled to drop the hammer:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-%E2%80%98you-harry-reid-are-really-really-terrible%E2%80%99/

Click through for video. You'll enjoy it, even if it means sitting through a few gratuitous shots at Fox & Friends. One choice quotation: "Who the f***are you, Harry Reid...you two-bit, trash-talking son of a..." Whoa. The Romney campaign is also eagerly joining the beat down, sensing that Democrats are beginning to damage themselves:

Click here to watch:



Have you no sense of decency, sir? Is there nothing to debase yourself and the office you hold in the name of dirty politics?"

Breitbart's John Nolte is fit to be tied over all of this. He's livid that Democrats are once again forcing Romney on defense and controlling the narrative. I don't share his view. Reid has gone so far, so clumsily that he's crossed the line and entered into counter-productivity. This reeks of mindless political desperation. Reid jumped the shark and is tripling down. It's not helping. I'll leave you with this hot scoop: A nameless, third-hand source just informed me that Harry Reid hasn't always been a joyless asshat. Care to share any countervailing evidence, Senator?

UPDATE - Reid quadruples down, telling reporters that "a number of people" (all anonymous) have told him that Romney is a tax evader. No attempt to explain how they could possibly know this information. Keep digging, chump.

UPDATE II - Mitch McConnell unloads:
"I think the Majority Leader has more important things to do than use the Senate as a forum for his baseless accusations," McConnell said Thursday in a statement... "Frankly, it's beneath the dignity of his office," the Republican senator from Kentucky said.[/font][/size]

Harry Reid Is a Bad Mormon
Posted by Gregory of Yardale

Every four years, Dramacrat politicians like to show up at church for a photo op. Harry Reid planned something similar, going to a Nevada Stake meeting of the LDS church to speak at a "Why I Believe" fireside. He canceled when word came down that a few protesters might show up to picket peacefully outside... activity which is now labeled violent and dangerous behavior by the Drama Queen Left. (But when people throw things and scream obscenities at Ann Coulter or Karl Rove, it's considered "Free Speech.")

Harry Reid does not uphold the values of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. He supports the use of taxpayer dollars to butcher unborn babies, which is kind of a big deal to Mormons. He does not oppose redefining marriage to include same-sex couples. He supports financial irresponsibility and the reckless accumulation of debt; which is something the LDS Church strongly counsels against. His prideful arrogance is an affront to the humility followers of Jesus Christ are supposed to emulate. And most importantly, he supports the spreading of hatred and sowing divisions among people, ("contention") which is among the gravest sins within the LDS Church.

For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. -- 3 Nephi 11:29

Reid's attacks on president Bush, the dishonesty with which he has pushed his party's hard-left secular agenda, and his smears against opponents of the agenda tell me he sold his soul a long time ago. Reid is not a good example of what the LDS Church stands for, and his talk was obviously intended to burnish his image in the teeth of what looks to be --- despite a massive war chest funded by out-of-state donors and the Hollywood left --- a difficult campaign environment.

If Harry Reid wants to prove he really believes in Church teachings, he should prove it in his political life. He should reach out to Republicans and Tea Partiers in a Christ-like way instead of demonizing them. He should incorporate church teachings on charity, financial responsibility, and the sanctity of human life into the agenda of his party instead of fighting against them.

This would be a much more meaningful demonstration of faith than just showing up at a church to give a talk in an election year.

Harry Reid must go
By: John Hayward
8/3/2012 01:59 PM

Harry Reid must not remain the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate. That's an understandable objective for Republican voters in November, but it really shouldn't take until then. Reid deserves the strongest possible censure from the Senate, and it should be a bipartisan vote. For the moment, the Democrats have the majority, so someone from their party must be Majority Leader, but it shouldn't be Harry Reid.

This should be a simple enough consensus for a bipartisan majority to reach. Reid's record of obstructionism, and his failure to even produce a budget in accordance with the duties of the Senate, are certainly reasons to vote against his party in the upcoming elections. But when he took his weird effort to slander presidential candidate Mitt Romney onto the Senate floor, his incompetence reached a new level, and questions about his mental competence were invited.

For those unfamiliar with the origin of this scandal, Reid has taken to claiming that some anonymous Bain Capital investor has privately informed him that Mitt Romney hasn't paid any taxes for ten years. This would be a felony crime, exposing Romney to extensive penalties, and possibly even imprisonment.

Reid's claims are ludicrous on a number of levels. There's no reason any private investor would be privy to the confidential tax information of a partner at his investment firm. Bain doesn't prepare taxes for its partners in-house. Romney hasn't been actively involved in directing company operations since he left to manage the Salt Lake City Olympics in 1999, so Reid's imaginary "source" would be essentially claiming to have reviewed the enormously complex, confidential IRS submissions of someone who used to work for Bain Capital. And Romney has already released tax information for the last two years. He most certainly did pay taxes, and plenty of them. Are we supposed to believe he only started paying them two years ago? He ran for President in 2008. Was he dodging his taxes while he did that?

Reid's not really even pretending to believe his own story. When reporters challenged him in a conference call, he suddenly began claiming "I have had a number of people tell me that." The reporters wanted to know who those people might be. "No, that's the best you're going to get from me. I don't think the burden should be on me. The burden should be on him. He's the one I've alleged has not paid any taxes. Why didn't he release his tax returns?"

But when Reid made the remarkable and offensive decision to drag this garbage onto the floor of the Senate on Thursday, he was back to just one mysterious "source," and suddenly he was up to 12 years of Romney paying no taxes, instead of 10.

Conservatives have been having fun with Reid by turning his own ridiculous tactics against him, and claiming that "anonymous sources" have told them the Senate Majority Leader is guilty of all sorts of horrible crimes, which he must now aggressively prove himself innocent of. As funny as those jests might be, this is no laughing matter. The Senate Majority Leader is either mentally unfit to continue in office, or he's a disgusting liar who has employed his office to engage in the lowest form of political slander... all in the service of a distraction that was silly to begin with, as the Democrats somehow imagine that the public will forget about a collapsing economy and horrific unemployment because they really want to see Mitt Romney's tax returns from 2003.

The Senate has standards, and rules of ethics, designed in part to prevent a cheap political operator like Reid from hijacking the chamber for this kind of infantile theater. A lot of what transpires in both houses of Congress has primarily political motivations, of course, but there has to be some limit, based the barest notions of honor, professionalism, patriotism, and simple decency. Otherwise, what's to prevent every Senator from seizing the floor to launch baseless accusations at his political opponents, based on imaginary "sources," and turn the next session into an endless series of show trials?

Reid probably thinks he's clever for having backed Romney into a corner, since even if the Republican candidate had been considering the release of more tax information, he can hardly afford to be seen capitulating to Reid's thug tactics. But in reality, Reid's overreach has made the whole "Mitt Romney's taxes" storyline radioactive for Democrats. They're the ones who must now carefully consider whether they want to associate themselves, in even the most tangential way, with Reid's disgraceful performance.

                (http://www.greenberg-art.com/.Toons/.Toons,%20political/qqxsgClownVote.gif)

                                   (http://howcanoneknow.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/New-Black-Panther-Party-image-public-domain.jpg)


Why not let dead people vote?

Maybe I better explain.

A recent article in the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch says the Washington-based Voter Participation Center has sent voter registration applications...with names and addresses already filled in .... to dead people, pets, felons, children, nonresidents, noncitizens and others who ought not be voting.

There is suspicion among some that the group, which targets Democrat voting blocs, such as unmarried people, blacks, Latinos and young adults, is trying to pad voter rolls with ineligible voters who are likely to support Democrats.  But the center says all it is trying to do is to get legitimate, under-represented voters, who may be unregistered, to register and exercise their right to vote. It says it is using commercial mailing lists that are imperfect and produce all kinds of odd results.

According to CBS News, one woman, Brenda Charleston, received a filled-in application for a Rosie Charleston; "Rosie" was the name of her long-deceased dog.

The Washington Post reports one convicted felon received a filled-in application in the mail, signed it and became registered to vote. He was caught and tried, but some wonder how many other felons are voting illegally.

In other examples, people are receiving applications for children who are younger than 18 or live out of state, as well as long-deceased family members.

If people sign and return such applications, the only way a dead person or pet won't become an eligible voter is if a state's voting officials, who are doing crossword puzzles at Dunkin' Donuts as you read this, let them slip through.

But while Republicans cry "Voter fraud!" and Democrats fume over Republican-backed voter ID laws that they contend are disenfranchising folks who don't have ID handy when they vote, I ask this: Why not let the dead vote?

Look, the vast majority of Americans are on the public dole now, happily selling their votes to the politician who promises them the biggest goodies and I'm not talking just about those at the bottom end of the economic scale.

Food stamp programs, some $70 billion a year, have ballooned under President Barack Insane Obuma.

But the real spending is with entitlement programs, such as Social Security, Medicare and now ObumaCare.  People are taking out four and five times more from the programs than they ever paid in.

These programs need to be reformed, but any politician who tries to do so faces widespread rebellion among voters who won't hear of it.

Way too many people are on the dole these days... farmers who get subsidies not to grow, "green" businesses that get grants because of their political connections, global corporations that lobby for special tax breaks.

     So why not dead people?  Don't they deserve a piece of the government pie?

                  (http://texasfred.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Vote-the-Dead-4.jpg)

What about American children who are too young to vote?  They will be paying for our current government handouts for the rest of their lives.  Don't they deserve a voice now?

If we're going to toss our country away on runaway spending and benefits, why not be above-board about it?


                             So... why not let the dead vote?

                                                        (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HZT5MBM3L._SL500_AA300_.gif)

(http://c10.nrostatic.com/uploaded/tmp/pic_giant_073012_C.jpg)

San Bernardino, California – On the front door of the San Bernardino city hall is a sign that reads: "Out of Order." Broke city, broken door: There's a certain pleasing symmetry in the fact that the San Bernardino city council meets behind a door that, like the city government itself, does not work and is in need of replacement. On this particular evening in late July, the council has met to make public what everybody already knows: Intellectually bankrupt, morally bankrupt — the city is under criminal investigation for sundry financial shenanigans — San Bernardino is above all old-fashioned bankrupt bankrupt, a pitiful penniless pauper that cannot even afford a cup of coffee: Seriously — the coffee guy wants cash up front now and has stopped serving the municipal office building until the city makes good on its latte liabilities. This is a paddle-free scato-riparian fiscal expedition of the first order.


San Bernardino spends about 75 percent of its general-fund budget on salaries, benefits, and pensions, with the vast majority of those expenses coming from one class of employee: public-safety workers, meaning cops and firemen, who earn as much as $230,000 a year with overtime. Their pensions, as will not surprise anybody who has been paying attention to government finances in recent years, are extraordinarily generous.

In 2007, a consulting firm warned the city that its budget was in trouble because its personnel costs were growing considerably more quickly than revenue, and the city's response was #. . .# to offer even more generous pensions in the same year.

The firemen are fat and happy in the California sunshine, but the rest of San Bernardino is not doing as well: "When times were good, my wife and I didn't go hog-wild and play the let's-get-a-bigger-house game," says Mike Potter, who works for a local construction firm. "But now times aren't good. At my company, 50 percent of the employees have been laid off, and I've taken a 15 percent pay cut. I was the head of engineering, and now I'm also a part-time receptionist and janitor." He is one of the lucky ones — the local unemployment rate runs around 15 percent — and he is blunt on the subject of what encumbers San Bernardino and other bankruptcy-bound California cities: "The public-employee unions are killing us. They are killing our cities, our states, and our country."

Clint Eastwood comes out of the closet....

(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1129093.1344112808!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/eastwood5n-1-web.jpg)

...and endorses Mitt Romney.

In recent years, Hollywood conservatives have been as deep in the closet as 1950s gays. But Barack Obama, the man of hope and change, has changed that. The times are so terrible that more and more entertainment industry conservatives are coming out and risking irritating their fuddy-duddy liberal peers, maybe even losing a job or two into the bargain.

The latter is not a problem for the latest Hollywood con to come out, Clint Eastwood, who just publicly endorsed Romney with the words "the country is in need of a boost." (No kidding!) Clint has arguably been America's finest director for the last decade or so. The likes of Sean Penn abandoned their bourgeois lefty politics in a heartbeat to work with him. So no job issues for Clint.

And everyone has known Eastwood was a man of the right for years now. He just hasn't made a very big deal about it, unlike the mouthier libs. He has more class. Clint is a figure out of old Hollywood when stars shut their mouths and did their work.

So his coming out is not inconsequential. One wonders what his peers — the Redfords, Beattys, etc. – think. Some of them are such knee-jerk liberals that they probably just put it down to Clint imitating his make-my-day character and don't give it another thought. But I suspect not all. The extremity of the economic situation is not lost on all these people. They just don't have the guts to speak. Walking around Hollywood now is not like it was a year or two ago. You don't hear anyone publicly defending Obama. What you get mostly is silence and a seeming desire to change the subject.

Whether Clint is the stalking horse for more major entertainment figures to start coming out for Romney remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: After three plus years of the Obama administration, it's easier for Hollywood conservatives to declare themselves, not harder. What an irony.


(http://www.tantusgalerie.de/images/stories/Photografie/celebrities/Clint_Eastwood.jpg)

          "Make My Day, Mitt!"

Mars Rover "Curiosity" Lands on Mars Sunday 08/05/2012

           (http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/673294main_Scoreboard_4x3_946-710.jpg)
"This artist's scoreboard displays a fictional game between Mars and Earth, with Mars in the lead. It refers to the success rate of sending missions to Mars, both as orbiters and landers. Of the previous 39 missions targeted for Mars from around the world, 15 have been successes and 24 failures. For baseball fans, that's a batting average of .385. The United States has had 13 successes out of 18 attempts, or a "batting average" of .722. NASA's Curiosity rover, set to land on the Red Planet the evening of Aug. 5, 2012 PDT (morning of Aug. 6 EDT), will mark the United States' 19th attempt to tackle the challenge of Mars, and the world's 40th attempt."  
 

Remember those spunky little rovers that were landed on Mars, sending back pictures of the Red Planet for years on end?  Well, another rover is scheduled to touch down on Mars this Sunday, August 6.

It's the size of an SUV, with massive digging arms, lasers, and automated laboratories that may settle the question of Martian life once and for all.  The plan is for this 2000 pound vehicle, named "Curiosity," to be dropped inside a Martian crater that appears to have once held water.  The difficulty of this landing, requiring pin-point precision of all systems, is being described as "seven minutes of terror" for the NASA team trying to pull this off.

If it works, we will greatly expand our knowledge of Mars.  And have some sublime photos of another world.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/news/msl20120804.html

           (http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/672637main_malin-4-43_800-600.jpg)
"This graphic shows the locations of the cameras on NASA's Curiosity rover. The rover's mast features seven cameras: the Remote Micro Imager, part of the Chemistry and Camera suite; four black-and-white Navigation Cameras (two on the left and two on the right) and two color Mast Cameras (Mastcams). The left Mastcam has a 34-millimeter lens and the right Mastcam has a 100-millimeter lens. There is one camera on the end of a robotic arm that is stowed in this graphic; it is called the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI).

There are nine cameras hard-mounted to the rover: two pairs of black-and-white Hazard Avoidance Cameras in the front, another two pair mounted to the rear of the rover, (dashed arrows in the graphic) and the color Mars Descent Imager (MARDI)."  

           (http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/605917main_pia15101-43_800-600.jpg)
"Oblique View of Gale Crater, Mars, with Vertical Exaggeration"
Gale Crater, where the rover Curiosity of NASA's Mars Science Laboratory mission will land in August 2012, contains a mountain rising from the crater floor. This oblique view of Gale Crater, looking toward the southeast, is an artist's impression using two-fold vertical exaggeration to emphasize thearea's topography. Curiosity's landing site is on the crater floor northeast of the mountain. The crater's diameter is 96 miles (154 kilometers).

The image combines elevation data from the High Resolution Stereo Camera on the European Space Agency's Mars Express orbiter, image data from the Context Camera on NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, and color information from Viking Orbiter imagery.

How Crooked Is Harry Reid?


According to Open Secrets, Senator Harry Reid has a minimum net worth of $2,827,056.00, a maximum worth of $6,307,999.00 and an average net worth of $4,567,527.00. Why all the discrepancies?

Because our leaders, much as they set up campaign finance laws to protect themselves, have set up their disclosure requirements to hide things. They don't really want us to know how much they have and thus the millions of dollars of variance possible in Reid's fortune.

Still, taking that nearly $4.6 million average for Reid seems fair – if it's really off, then it's up to Reid to correct the record. And that is quite a rise for a man who endlessly reminds us was born poor.

I'm pretty sure I'm safe in saying that for everyone reading this, that is quite a lot of money. In fact, more money than any of us are likely to (a) ever have or (b) even know what to do with, if we did have it. Lots of people start poor, work hard, and get rich – in the private sector.

The problem, for Harry Reid, is that since he graduated college, there hasn't been a lot of time outside of government service. Reid was elected to the State Assembly in 1966 and in the past 43 years (when Reid went from 27 years old to 70 – and your humble correspondent went from 2 to 45), the only gap in public service was the two years in the mid-70′s between his term as Lt. Governor and his service on the Nevada Gaming Commission. And during that time he ran for Mayor of Las Vegas, leaving little time to build up a fortune in the private sector.

Right now, as Senate Majority Leader, Reid earns $193,400.00 per year – a back-bencher earns $174,000.00.

Reid has been earning that 193 grand for a few years, but when he first entered the Senate in 1987, I think the Senate salary was about $125,000.00 per year. In order to build up $4.6 million dollars over the past 43 years, Reid would have had to sock aside – out of various government salaries – nearly $107,000.00 per year.

Does anyone want to believe that Reid has done this? That he has saved his government-salary pennies (including for all those years when he made far less than even $107,000.00 per year) and built up his fortune just out of the money we know he's been earning since he entered public office? And what if Reid's fortune is actually closer to the higher estimate of $6.3 million?

It's just not credible that Reid has done this just out of his government salary. The man has raised 5 kids, through college. His various government salaries were enough to live on but how, with all the expenses, did Reid build up so much money? What did he do? How did he do it?

How does a man who's "product" is legislation make so much money that he can build up more than four and a half million dollars of net worth?

Its small wonder that Reid believes in the power of government to make things good. They've certainly made things good for him. He's risen from the son of a hard-rock miner to a fabulously wealthy Senate Majority Leader. Being in government, for Reid, has been like finding the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. He hasn't had to work for money, but he's managed to acquire quite a lot of it.

But is this what we want? Do we want people who enter politics poor and leave it very rich? Nothing wrong with a poor man being in government. Nothing wrong with being a rich man in government. But to start poor and end rich while never doing anything in the private sector is a clear indicator of trading on one's position.

And this is why Reid wants so desperately to remain in power – because it's all he's got.

The whole of Reid's position in life has been built on his government office. Wealth, power and prestige, for Reid, are dependent upon his remaining in office. To lose office is to lose the ability to, say, build up another four million dollars. It's not like Reid has any marketable skills for the private sector – even his skill as a lawyer is probably rusty as he hasn't done any real legal practice since the 1960′s.

Reid, out of the Senate, is a nobody.

Reid is asking us to entrust him with 6 more years in the United States Senate. Before we do such a thing, it is fair for us to ask: "Reid, how did you become a rich man?"

All evidence indicates that Reid has enriched himself off his government position and unless we get evidence, from Reid, to the contrary, we daren't re-elect him. Nevada is in trouble and we need leaders who are for us, not just living off us.

Why the disclosure requirements in the first place?

We ought to be looking where they stand.  How much government money has Reid voted to
send to corporations and people?  That ought to be a real issue with Americans - don't ya think? 

It's no wonder that conservatives like Ron Paul do not draw the interest of a majority of the citizens. 
On the Presidential side we have two (2) socilaists - Obama and Romney.

Meanwhile, some in Elk County are rejoicing over a proposed County "Revitalization" program as their
contribution to the create a greater government "stimulus" movement in America.  We'll see if the
socialists get a victory with their own local stimulus package or if Americans will be counted to stand against tyranny.

   

Quote from: redcliffsw on August 05, 2012, 05:36:27 AM

Why the disclosure requirements in the first place?

Why not?  Here is a few items on how crooked Dirty Harry is.  The American ought to know this, don't ya think ???  If you get a chance, Watch "Casino"... Dick Smothers plays Dirty Harry, the gambling Czar in the film.This is how Dirty Harry made the bulk of his money... he and his mafia buddies.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harry_Reid#Improper_donation_from_lobbyist

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1561650/posts

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/honest-harry-reid-got-11m-for-land-he-didnt-own

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2914866/posts?page=3 [/color]

(http://www.ldsfilm.com/pmstills/Casino_05.jpg)



We ought to be looking where they stand.  How much government money has Reid voted to
send to corporations and people?  That ought to be a real issue with Americans - don't ya think? 


Senator Harry Reid's Ethical Scandals

Over the course of his political career, Reid has been implicated in several serious ethics scandals:
In a 1998 real estate deal engineered by Jay Brown (a former casino lawyer and a longtime friend of Reid), the senator purchased two undeveloped residential-property lots on Las Vegas' rapidly growing outskirts for approximately $400,000. Reid bought one of the parcels on his own, and the second one jointly with Brown. One of the sellers was a developer who was benefiting from a government land swap supported by Reid. In 2001 Reid sold both of his lots for $400,000 to a limited liability corporation created by Jay Brown, but he never disclosed the sale on his annual public ethics report. Nor did he inform Congress that he held any stake in Brown's company. As far as Congress knew, Reid was still the owner of the two lots he had purchased three years earlier.

In 2004 Brown's company, having negotiated with local officials to rezone the property for a shopping center, sold the land to other developers in a deal that earned Reid $1.1 million -- a $700,000 profit on his initial investment. Reid falsely reported the transaction to Congress as a personal land sale.

In 2001 Reid paid cash for a $750,000 condominium at the Washington, D.C. Ritz-Carlton where he resides. When he subsequently gave Christmas bonuses (in 2002, 2004, and 2005) to the doorman and other support staff at his building, he used $3,300 in campaign donations rather than his own separate funds -- in contravention of federal election law. Reid's campaign falsely listed the bonuses as campaign "salary" expenditures for two of the years in question, and as a "contribution" for the other year. When news of Reid's misappropriation of campaign funds became public in 2006, the senator's office said the listing as salary had been a "clerical error." Added Reid: "I am reimbursing the campaign from my own pocket to prevent this issue from being used in the current campaign season to deflect attention from Republican failures."

In a $286 billion federal transportation bill passed by Congress in 2005, Reid secured $300 million in earmarks for projects in his home state, including $18 million to fund the construction of a bridge spanning the Colorado River. On the Arizona side of that bridge, Reid owned 160 acres of undeveloped land around which many new housing units were being built. Noting that the new bridge would cause the value of Reid's property to skyrocket, Norman Ornstein, co-author of a book that examines earmarking, said: "It's a really bad idea for lawmakers to earmark projects when they have a financial interest that could in any way be affected by it." Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, noted: "Unwittingly, the taxpayer may have helped inflate the value" of Reid's land.

Between 2002 and 2006, Reid intervened to gain monumental government concessions on behalf of a powerful Nevada land developer, Harvey Whittemore, who wished to build thousands of homes and numerous golf courses on 43,000 acres of barren land in an area called Coyote Springs, an hour northeast of Las Vegas. This land had a number of federal restrictions on its use: One-fourth of it was off-limits to developers because of federal protections for an "endangered" species of desert tortoise that dwelt there; another one-fourth was government-owned and was subject to a federal power-line right of way; and the territory overall was rife with streams and washes that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had designated as crucial to the health of the desert's ecosystem, and was therefore generally off-limits to construction.

Thanks to Senator Reid's intercession, however, the Bureau of Land Management agreed to relocate the tortoises to an adjacent federal preserve, thereby opening that portion of Coyote Springs to developers.

In 2002 Reid inserted some obscure provisions into a land-management bill that relocated the aforementioned power corridor, thereby apparently freeing Whittemore to build on the 10,500-acre parcel he coveted. But the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee balked at the deal, and Reid in turn negotiated an alternate arrangement where Whittemore was permitted to purchase the land at a fair market rate while the government relocated the corridor.

Finally, in 2005 Reid and fellow Nevada Senator John Ensign used their influence with the EPA to eliminate the environmental-impact obstacle.

In return for Reid's efforts, Whittemore gave tens of thousands of dollars to the senator's political campaigns and to his leadership fund (which Reid used to help bankroll the campaigns of fellow Democrats). In addition, Whittemore gave $5,000 to each of Reid's two sons, to finance their efforts to win local political offices. The developer also hired one of those sons as his personal lawyer to represent him in his dealings with federal officials.

Between 2001 and 2004, Reid wrote at least four letters pressing the Bush administration to take action on certain issues of importance to Indian tribes that were clients of the lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Abramoff, whose staff was in regular contact with Reid's office, lobbied on behalf of tribes involved in the gambling casino industry; he would later be convicted in federal court for defrauding those tribes. Each time Reid wrote a letter on behalf of the Indian tribes, he collected donations from Abramoff and his lobbying partners and clients around the same time period. All told, these donations totaled nearly $68,000. Also between 2001 and 2004, Reid received more than $50,000 directly from four Indian tribes that were clients of Abramoff.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/SenatorHarryReidsEthicalScandals.html




Dirty Harry's Voting Record in the Senate:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/reidvotingrecord.html

During his legislative career, a few votes that Senator Harry Reid has voted thru 2009:

*in favor of a 2003 bill to ban oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;

*against a 2007 proposal to permit natural gas exploration and extraction at least fifty miles off the coast of Virginia;

*in favor of a 1993 amendment to reduce funding for ballistic-missile defense programs;

*against major tax-cut proposals in 1999, 2000, 2000 (again), 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2006;

*in favor of an October 2002 joint resolution to authorize the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against Iraq;

*against a 2006 proposal to create military commissions to try unlawful enemy combatants for war crimes they had committed against the U.S.;

*in favor of a 2007 proposal to impose an arbitrary timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq;

*in favor of a 1995 amendment to make it easier for law-enforcement authorities to wiretap roving terrorism suspects;

*in favor of a 2006 proposal authorizing the FBI to conduct "roving wiretaps" and to access certain business records, as well as to make most provisions of the Patriot Act permanent;

*in favor of a 2008 amendment removing telecommunications companies' immunity from the FISA Amendments Act of 2008;

*in favor of the 2006 Immigration Reform Bill, which would have created a path to citizenship for all illegal aliens who had resided in the U.S. for at least five years;

*in favor of a 2006 bill to finance the construction of several hundred miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border, and for additional measures to stem the flow of illegal immigration;

*against two other proposals (in 2006 and 2008) to finance the construction of border fencing and other border-protection measures;

*in favor of a 2007 proposal to end the use of a point-based immigration system, (i.e., a system that seeks to ensure that people with skills that society needs are given preference for entry into the United States);

*in favor of affirmative-action policies awarding preferential treatment to business enterprises owned by nonwhite minorities and women;

*in favor of a 1996 welfare-reform bill designed to move large numbers of people off the welfare rolls and into paying jobs;

*against a 1993 amendment banning the possession of certain semiautomatic firearms;

*against a 2004 proposal to ban lawsuits against gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others;

*in favor of a 2005 bill that similarly would have banned lawsuits against gun dealers and manufacturers;

*in favor of separate bills (in 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2003) designed to ban the late-term procedure commonly known as "partial-birth abortion";

*in favor of a 2004 proposal to make it an added criminal offense for someone to injure or kill a fetus while carrying out a crime against a pregnant woman; and

*in favor of a 1996 bill defining marriage exclusively as a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Harry_Reid.htm
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/a_three_sections_with_teasers/votes.htm


It's no wonder that conservatives like Ron Paul do not draw the interest of a majority of the citizens. 
On the Presidential side we have two (2) socilaists - Obama and Romney.

Ron Paul Who ???



Meanwhile, some in Elk County are rejoicing over a proposed County "Revitalization" program as their
contribution to the create a greater government "stimulus" movement in America.  We'll see if the
socialists get a victory with their own local stimulus package or if Americans will be counted to stand against tyranny.

Good Luck with that.  ;D

        (http://www.funnyhype.com/files/funny-pictures/2009/change-obama.jpg)

Obama, A President Of Many Firsts
By Chris Vaca on Aug 05, 2012

I am without a doubt, no fan of President Obama. One has to wonder why he is not running on any of his so called accomplishments. Is it because he has none? A President sits in the White House for 3 1/2 years you would think he would have accomplished something that he could hang his hat on. Well, I took it upon myself to do some digging, what I came up with surprised me, he is a president of many firsts.

Let's quit trashing President Obama & start to recognize his accomplishments! After all, it is an impressive list..........
First President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.

First President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.

First President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.

First President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.

First President to spend a trillion dollars on 'shovel-ready' jobs when there was no such thing as 'shovel-ready' jobs.

First President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.

First President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat. .

First President to terminate America's ability to put a man in space.

First President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.

First President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.

First President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke-out on the reasons for their rate increases.

First President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.

First President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).

First President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.

First President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office. .

First President to golf 73 separate times in his first two and a half years in office, 90 to date.

First President to hide his medical, educational and travel records.

First President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.

First President to go on multiple global 'apology tours'.

First President to go on 17 lavish vacations, including date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends; paid for by the taxpayer.

First President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.

First President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.

First President to take a 17 day vacation.

So, how is this "CHANGE" working out?

(http://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/The-Cure-590.jpg)

(http://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Jobs-RoadKill-590.jpg)

(http://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Bad-doj-Smell-590.jpg)

        (http://www.conservativedailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HC-Look-back1.jpg)

     (http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/assets/660/558/Curioisty4.jpg)

Touchdown On Mars.

PASADENA, Calif. –  In a show of technological wizardry, the robotic explorer Curiosity blazed through the pink skies of Mars, steering itself to a gentle landing inside a giant crater for the most ambitious dig yet into the red planet's past.

A chorus of cheers and applause echoed through the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory on Sunday night after the most high-tech interplanetary rover ever built signaled it had survived a harrowing plunge through the thin Mars atmosphere.

"Touchdown confirmed," said engineer Allen Chen. "We're safe on Mars."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/08/06/nasa-rover-curiosity-lands-on-mars-after-plummet/#ixzz22ktlG8gN

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VgrCjjbLuk4/UCAHg43y6eI/AAAAAAAAbMc/v7e1HGvgefs/s1600/8-6-12%2B5.jpg)

Barack Obama is Harry Reid's "Credible" Source

By Katie Pavlich
8/6/2012

According to Romney campaign surrogate John Sununu, Harry Reid's "credible" source who supposedly told him Mitt Romney hasn't paid taxes for ten years, is actually Barack Obama and his campaign team.

"Look, Harry Reid is a bumbling Senate leader," the former N.H. governor said Monday on Fox News. "He hasn't been able to pass a budget, he hasn't been able to do anything about entitlement reform, he's done nothing worthwhile except the bidding of the Obama administration. They have pointed out that Harry is lying, and the public is beginning to understand that Harry is lying."

Sununu said he suspects the White House is behind Reid's claims because Obama launched similar attacks against Sarah Palin, Sen. John McCain and Hillary Clinton during the 2008 campaign.

"It's not Harry Reid, it's President Obama and the Obama campaign doing what they always do," he said. "The Obama campaign and President Obama are the ones that are behind this dishonesty and misrepresentation because they are trying to hide the failure of this abysmal presidency that we have had in office the last four years."

"But the fact is, is that he was encouraged to do stuff like this by [Obama strategist David] Axelrod, by the president, and by the White House. This is the way they operate. It is Chicago-style gutter politics trying to hide the failure that they have had for the last four years," the Romney surrogate said.

Over the weekend, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called Reid a "dirty liar" and is standing by his remarks.

"You know there's no triple-down in blackjack but I'll triple down on my comments from yesterday," Reince Priebus said on Fox News. "It's the truth."

I Give You Mr. & Mrs. Jim Ready:


    (http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-TR308_Barney_G_20120708150347.jpg)


Awwwwww... how cute is this photo?  Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and his new husband Jimmy.

America's first openly gay member of Congress officially became the first gay member of Congress to have a gay wedding over the weekend of July 9th.  Rep. Barney Frank, 72, got hitched to his longtime partner Jim Ready, 42.  According to the Washington Post, the couple's 300 closest friends and relatives took over the Boston Marriott Hotel in Newton, Mass., including Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Dennis Kucinich and Steny Hoyer.

Their Vows:
"Do you promise to love each other and be each other's best friend,
In sickness and in health,
In Congress or in retirement,
Whether the surf is up or the surf's flat,
For richer or for poorer,
Under the Democrats or the Republicans,
Whether the slopes are powdery or icy,
Whether the book reviews are good or bad,
For better or for worse,
On MSNBC or on Fox,
For as long as you both shall live?"

In addition, guests left with gift bags featuring campaign buttons which read, "Barney and Jim for Congress"... with "Forever" stamped across the word "Congress."  How sweet is that?

     (http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/61555000/jpg/_61555254_barneyfrankmarriesjamesready.jpg)
No word on where the lovebirds will honeymoon.

Worth reading again:


(http://bobmccarty.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/chicago-politics-inked.jpg)

Dirty Trickter David Axelrod's Pattern of Sexual Misbehavior
By: Ann Coulter


Herman Cain has spent his life living and working all over the country — Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. — but never in Chicago.

So it's curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod.

Suspicions had already fallen on Sheila O'Grady, who is close with David Axelrod and went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley's chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA), as being the person who dug up Herman Cain's personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA).

The Daley-controlled IRA works hand-in-glove with the NRA. And strangely enough, Cain's short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he's alleged to have been a sexual predator.

After O'Grady's name surfaced in connection with the miraculous appearance of Cain's personnel files from the NRA, she issued a Clintonesque denial of any involvement in producing them — by vigorously denying that she knew Cain when he was at the NRA. (Duh.)

And now, after a week of conservative eye-rolling over unspecified, anonymous accusations against Cain, we've suddenly got very specific sexual assault allegations from an all-new accuser out of ... Chicago.

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago. But you know who has? David Axelrod! And guess who lived in Axelrod's very building? Right again: Cain's latest accuser, Sharon Bialek.

Bialek's accusations were certainly specific. But they also demonstrated why anonymous accusations are worthless.

Within 24 hours of Bialek's press conference, friends and acquaintances of hers stepped forward to say that she's a "gold-digger," that she was constantly in financial trouble — having filed for personal bankruptcy twice — and, of course, that she had lived in Axelrod's apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive, where, she admits, she knew the man The New York Times calls Obama's "hired muscle."

Throw in some federal tax evasion, and she's Obama's next Cabinet pick.

The reason all this is relevant is that both Axelrod and Daley have a history of smearing political opponents by digging up claims of sexual misconduct against them.

John Brooks, Chicago's former fire commissioner, filed a lawsuit against Daley six months ago claiming Daley threatened to smear him with sexual harassment accusations if Brooks didn't resign. He resigned — and the sexual harassment allegations were later found to be completely false.

Meanwhile, as extensively detailed in my book Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America, the only reason Obama became a U.S. senator — allowing him to run for president — is that David Axelrod pulled sealed divorce records out of a hat, first, against Obama's Democratic primary opponent, and then against Obama's Republican opponent.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was way down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader.

But then The Chicago Tribune — where Axelrod used to work — began publishing claims that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.

From then until Election Day, Hull was embroiled in fighting the allegation that he was a "wife beater." He and his ex-wife eventually agreed to release their sealed divorce records. His first ex-wife, daughters and nanny defended him at a press conference, swearing he was never violent. During a Democratic debate, Hull was forced to explain that his wife kicked him and he had merely kicked her back.

Hull's substantial lead just a month before the primary collapsed with the nonstop media attention to his divorce records. Obama sailed to the front of the pack and won the primary. Hull finished third with 10 percent of the vote.

Luckily for Axelrod, Obama's opponent in the general election had also been divorced.

The Republican nominee was Jack Ryan, a graduate of Dartmouth and Harvard law and business schools, who had left his lucrative partnership at Goldman Sachs to teach at an inner-city school on the South Side of Chicago.

But in a child custody dispute some years earlier, Ryan's ex-wife, Hollywood sex kitten Jeri Lynn Ryan, had alleged that, while the couple was married, Jack had taken her to swingers clubs in Paris and New York.

Jack Ryan adamantly denied the allegations. In the interest of protecting their son, he also requested that the records be put permanently under seal.

Axelrod's courthouse moles obtained the "sealed" records and, in no time, they were in the hands of every political operative in Chicago. Knowing perfectly well what was in the records, Chicago Tribune attorneys flew to California and requested that the court officially "unseal" them — over the objections of both Jack and Jeri Ryan.

Your honor, who knows what could be in these records!

A California judge ordered them unsealed, which allowed newspapers to publish the salacious allegations, and four days later, Ryan dropped out of the race under pressure from idiot Republicans (who should be tracked down and shot).

With a last-minute replacement of Alan Keyes as Obama's Republican opponent, Obama was able to set an all-time record in an Illinois Senate election, winning with a 43 percent margin.

And that's how Obama became a senator four years after losing a congressional race to Bobby Rush. (In a disastrous turn of events, Rush was not divorced.)

Axelrod destroyed the only two men who stood between Obama and the Senate with illicitly obtained, lurid allegations from their pasts.

In 2007, long after Obama was safely ensconced in the U.S. Senate, The New York Times reported: "The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece (on Hull's sealed divorce records) later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had 'worked aggressively behind the scenes' to push the story."

Some had suggested, the Times article continued, that Axelrod had "an even more significant role — that he leaked the initial story."

This time, Obama's little helpers have not only thrown a bomb into the Republican primary, but are hoping to destroy the man who deprives the Democrats of their only argument in 2012: If you oppose Obama, you must be a racist.

    (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1103/tea-party-tea-party-political-poster-1299438662.jpg)


25 Examples of What America Would Be Like if We Were All Christian Conservative Tea Partiers
By John Hawkins

If every American was a Christian conservative Tea Partier...

1) ...There would be fewer regulations, lower taxes, a business-friendly environment, and a much smaller government that would lead to considerably stronger economic growth and job creation. In fact, we'd probably have to dramatically increase the number of work permits we hand out to foreign workers, not because there are "jobs Americans won't do" (which don't actually exist), but because so many Americans would be employed that we'd have to bring in more people to do all of the available work.

2) ...The richest Americans would have more money. Of course, so would the middle class and the poor. In fact, the only Americans who wouldn't benefit economically would be the Americans who spend their lives relying on the government, instead of their own effort, to pay their bills.

3) ...We'd have some form of a Balanced Budget Amendment to insure that we don't have a deficit or a debt.

4) ...We'd have a much flatter, simpler tax code that you could fill out on a single sheet of paper.

5) ...Welfare and food stamps would still exist, but there wouldn't be as much need for them, it would be considered shameful to take either, and you can be sure that people would have to work for every hand-out they receive.

6) ...Social Security would be privatized and invested. That means the people who put nothing in would have nothing to take out, but the people who do pay in would have a lot more money to withdraw.

7) ...We'd still put some research money into alternative energy, but we'd also work to build a lot more nuclear power plants and we'd encourage private industry to produce more clean coal and natural gas. Oil would also be much cheaper because we'd have already drilled ANWR, the keystone pipeline would be built, and we'd be opening up federal land to environmentally responsible drilling at every opportunity. This would lead to much lower energy bills for the average American.

8 ) ...We'd have the same sort of "loser pays" legal system that's practiced in much of the rest of the civilized world. That would dramatically reduce the number of lawsuits and the cost of legal insurance.

9) ...There would be a lot less government workers and the ones we'd have would make less on average than the taxpayers paying their salary.

10) ...Health care would be much cheaper and more efficient because you could buy insurance across state lines; we'd have tort reform, health care savings accounts, and tax credits for health care would go to individuals instead of companies, which means that you wouldn't lose your insurance if you lose your job.

11) ...The fence would be built, the border would be secure, anyone who overstayed his VISA would be tracked down and deported, and illegal aliens who did make it into the country would be forever barred from visiting here legally or becoming citizens.

12) ...Legal immigration would be faster, cheaper, and much more efficient. We'd also be selecting new American immigrants based on merit instead of rewarding people for breaking our laws or allowing them to come here because their son or cousin already managed to become a citizen.

13) ...English would be the national language.

14) ...People would look at you like you're an idiot, as they should today, if you suggest that the Constitution is a living document. You'd also see a lot more Constitutional amendments because the Supreme Court would stick to the law as written unless it was amended.

15) ...The crime rate would be so low because of the lack of criminals and the prevalence of guns that in much of the country, people wouldn't bother to lock their doors.

16) ...The death penalty would be applied much more liberally for terrible crimes and it wouldn't take 15 years of appeals to carry it out.

17) ...All people would be welcome to practice their religious faith with no official state-run religion, just as the Founding Fathers intended. So, yes, you could have a manger in front of the town hall at Christmas and the Ten Commandments on a court house wall, and teachers in public school could teach from the Bible in class when it was appropriate.

18) ...Not only would there be no gay marriage, we'd be taking steps to strengthen marriage -- like getting rid of no-fault divorce and it would be acknowledged that a mother and a father would do a better job of raising kids than any other combination.

19) ....Children would be taught abstinence in school, having kids out of wedlock would be frowned upon, and abortion would be legal only in the case of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother.

20) ...Kids would start out school with the Pledge of Allegiance and a daily prayer.

21) ...We'd have school vouchers so that we could introduce competition into our school systems and allow all parents to send their kids to the same kind of schools that the rich do today. We'd also spend a lot more time teaching kids reading, writing, arithmetic, history, and economics and spend a lot less time worrying about their self-esteem.

22) ...You wouldn't have terrorists, communists, and people who hate America teaching at our universities.

23) ...Racism would practically be non-existent, there would be no need for the NAACP, LA RAZA, or Affirmative Action and people would, "not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

24) ...We'd have safe water, safe food, clean air, and a clean environment, but we'd put an end to the years of legal challenges to new building projects and people having their land declared a "wetland" because the ground gets soggy for a few days a year.

25) ...There would be no public unions. Private unions would, of course, still exist, but no one would be forced to join and employers, if they so desire, would be able to fire everyone in the union and get a new work force.

     (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QusmMdLZZ-M/UCFwCmocQtI/AAAAAAAAKw0/49ZeQ9TzEoQ/s400/OSpeaks.jpg)

You probably saw this Obuma Ad on cable news:

A certain fellow lost his job and health insurance.  Later his wife got pneumonia and he took her to the hospital.  Sadly, the poor woman passed away three weeks later of advanced cancer no one knew she had.

This occurs to people with the best of insurance as well but an anti-Romney slur ad implies that Romney caused her to get cancer and is ultimately responsible for her death.

What is not said is that if ObumaCare had been in force, this man would have been fined for not having health insurance.  Fined for not being able to afford something.

How sick is that.  It has to be THE WORST Political Ad... EVER!

The plant that closed leading to the guy losing his insurance, did so after Romney was gone from Bain Capital for about 9 years but so what if he had been there.

Businesses open and close all the time.  It is the nature of business.

Let's be clear on this.  Obuma has closed down thousands upon thousands of car dealerships putting multiple thousands of men and women out of work.   

Ask him about putting workers out of a job when he rejected the oil pipeline and all the other projects he has closed and rejected that would have employed people.  How many has he allowed to lose their insurance and daily meals? 

What needs to be asked is how many wives died because Obuma shut down car dealerships?  Why the number could be in the thousands.  How many died because Obuma closed down so much in America.  Under Obuma the unemployment number has risen to extreme heights.  These people might not have insurance or adequate insurance.  This is Obuma's fault by his own standards.

Politics is so dirty even with the man, Barack Insane Obuma, who said he would bring back decency to politics.

                                (http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002009725/5238295488_gun_control_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg)

"If only the evil United States of America didn't have that bill of rights they would not be such violent, blood thirsty war mongers who all carry guns, eat sugar incessantly and pillage and maraud 24 hours a day, 365 days a year never doing a bit of good for anyone.  The Bill of Rights is responsible for all the evils done in the world.  If only it didn't exist!" ...Far-Left Newscaster - MS/NBC

"President Barack Insane Obuma said on Monday that mass killings like the weekend shooting rampage at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin were happening with "too much regularity" and should prompt soul searching by all Americans on ways to reduce gun violence."...this from Reuters.

What outrageous horse hockey* is this?

Is there "too much regularity" because they are false flag operations in order to garner support for gun control?

Don't blame me for wondering.  It is a legitimate question because every single time gun control is on the table shooting and violence suddenly increase.  Very suddenly.  Every.  Single.  Time.

Mr. President, you don't question this?  Don't you wonder about them all being doped up to the max.  You don't seek to limit the drugs though right?   No, not that.  As Hillary Clinton said there is too much money in drugs.

They will regulate your food, your drinks, your guns, your speech, your internet, your ability to maintain personal dignity when traveling but they will keep and encourage you to be doped up at all times.  Take a pill.  Chill out.  Keep those kids doped up.

All of the mass shooters were on some kind of prescription drug for depression, or pain,etc. and yet you don't seek to ban those.  Why not?  Why don't you investigate that relationship as well as the relation to gun control/increase in violence.  Why does it seem that violence is increasing as times leads up to his election?       

The only soul searching America should do is in thinking why in the name of heaven anyone voted your wonky behind into office.
This guy doesn't defend the US, he kicks it every chance he gets.  He loves failure.  He loves faults.  He can't find one thing he likes about the nation.  Though maybe it's gullibility in electing him is something he likes.

And good old India is busy blaming the US for the shooting.  Who did India blame for Mumbai?

*I am sometimes asked what horse hockey is. 
Here is the definition from Urban dictionary:
Definition of horse hockey
1. horse excrement
2. nonsense

(See also horseshit)

No, Romney Won't Raise Your Taxes $2,000

By Peter Ferrara on 8.8.12 @ 6:10AM
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/08/romneys-tax-plan-is-a-winner

Mitt Romney's tax plan is a winner, and, lacking a serious rebuttal, President Obama settles for fabricating charges.


In a campaign stop at Rollins College in Florida last week, Barack Obama suggested that the middle class should resent Mitt Romney's tax proposals:

"I want everybody to understand here -- he's not asking you to pay an extra $2,000 [in taxes] to reduce our deficit; he's not asking you to pay an additional $2,000 to help care for our seniors; he's not asking you to pay an additional $2,000 in order to rebuild America or to fight a war," the president said. "He's asking you to pay more so that people like him can pay less."

But here is the actual truth: Mitt Romney is not asking the middle class or anyone else to pay more taxes. Mitt Romney is proposing to cut tax rates for everyone, across the board. That would finally liberate the economy for a long overdue recovery. Increased revenues from that booming economic growth, combined with savings from cutting Obama's runaway spending and closing loopholes that mostly benefit the highest income taxpayers, would enable a U-turn, from the four straight highest deficits in world history to a balanced budget in 5 years. The roadmap for doing that is Paul Ryan's 2013 budget, which has already been adopted by the Republican controlled House. (The Democrat majority Senate, by contrast, has never shown up for work.) This is classic tax reform, cutting rates and closing loopholes.

Obama's Tax Plan: Higher Taxes, No Jobs

(http://www.nocommunism.com/Obama_tax_hikes.jpg)
The only candidate in this race proposing to increase taxes is Barack Obama. He has already enacted increases in the top rates of virtually every major federal tax, which will go into effect January 1. That is when the tax increases of Obamacare will hit, and when the Bush tax cuts will expire. (Remedial education for Obama supporters: "Bush tax cuts expire" means tax increases).

As a result, the top two income tax rates are already scheduled in current law to increase by nearly 20 percent; the capital gains tax rate is slated to soar by nearly 60 percent; the tax rate on dividends will explode to nearly three times its current level; the Medicare payroll tax rate will rocket up by 62 percent for disfavored taxpayers (the nation's job creators, investors, and successful small business entrepreneurs); and the death tax will rise further from the grave with a 57 percent increase in the top rate.

This is all on top of the corporate income tax rate, which under President Obama is already the highest in the industrialized world at 35 percent -- or nearly 40 percent counting state corporate rates on average. Even Communist China has a lower corporate income tax of 25 percent. The average in the social welfare states of the EU is less than that. Germany has an 18 percent federal corporate rate. Canada, which has been booming under a conservative government, is now at 15 percent. American businesses are uncompetitive in the global economy under these tax policies. But with President Obama there is no relief in sight. Instead he is continually barnstorming the country calling for still more tax increases. Under his so-called Buffett rule, the capital gains tax rate would increase by 100 percent, to the fourth highest in the industrialized world.

Then in 2014, the Obamacare mandate tax will go into effect, requiring every employer and every worker in the country to buy the expensive health insurance plan that the federal government decides you must have. That is another tax increase on the middle class, which -- in addition to all the other tax increases in Obamacare they will have to pay -- trashes Obama's central campaign promise in 2008 not to raise taxes on working people.


Obama promised in 2008 that he would only increase tax rates on the wealthy -- the nation's job creators, investors, and small business owners -- to the levels that existed under President Clinton. But this talking point, which he and his brain dead supporters are still repeating, is now long outdated. In total, these tax increases will raise top rates well beyond the Clinton rates, and in an even worse context. Other countries have learned the lessons of Reaganomics and slashed rates on capital in particular since then, and so they are already outcompeting America today. Thus, the combined effect of all those tax rate increases on "the rich" would be a renewed recession, double-digit unemployment, and a federal deficit that tops $2 trillion.

The Romney Tax Plan

Mitt Romney, in sharp contrast, actually has a very good tax plan that will get the economy booming again and restore the American Dream. The key is reducing tax rates, in particular marginal tax rates, which are the rates that applies to the next dollar of income. Marginal rates determine the incentive for productive activity, such as working, saving, investing, expanding businesses, starting businesses, or creating jobs.

Romney's tax plan proposes to:

• Extend all of the Bush tax cuts that are scheduled to expire in January.

• Repeal the unfair death tax, which taxes yet again a lifetime of savings that have already been taxed multiple times.

• Repeal all of the Obamacare taxes.

• Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which was originally meant to stop the richest from avoiding taxes altogether, but which increasingly applies to millions in the middle class.

• Cut income tax rates by one-fifth across the board. So the top rate would be reduced from 35 percent to the 28 percent originally established in the Reagan tax reform. The bottom tax rates, paid by working people and the middle class, would be reduced to 8 percent and 12 percent -- even lower than under Reagan.

• Completely eliminate federal income taxes on long-term capital gains, dividends, and interest income for workers earning less than $100,000 and married couples earning less than $200,000.

• Reduce the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to a more internationally competitive 25 percent, close to the global average, which would restore international competitiveness for American business. That rate would be reduced further in conjunction with broader corporate tax reform to close the numerous and extensive loopholes.

• Allow a tax holiday for the repatriation of the trillions in profits that corporations have parked overseas to avoid the double taxation they face in bringing the money back to America. Over the long run he would eliminate that double taxation by adopting a system of territoriality, so taxes apply to corporate profits only in the country where those profits are earned. Romney also proposes to make the federal research and development tax credit permanent.

The central theme is actually to cut taxes on the middle class, multiple times, over and over. Romney nowhere proposes any tax increase on the middle class, or on anyone else for that matter. Obama's allegation that Romney would raise taxes on the middle class by $2,000 per family is a complete fabrication. Obama did the same thing to Ryan's budget plan, alleging a litany of supposed cuts that were nowhere to be found in the plan. Obama just made them up well.

Even the Tax Policy Center study that Obama cites for his charge says that Romney "promises that low- and middle-income households will pay no larger shares of federal taxes than they do now." The study argues that in order to raise the same amount of money, the federal government would have to raise taxes on middle- and lower-class families -- but it does not suggest that any such thing has been proposed by Romney. In addition, the study fails to give nearly adequate credit to the fact that Romney's tax plan will increase economic growth and jobs -- and thus, tax revenue. Reagan cut overall tax rates by far more than Romney is proposing, and during the 1980s, federal revenue doubled.

The bottom line is that Obama is disgracefully campaigning as a damn liar, to the great shame of the entire Democrat Party that he represents. It is old-fashioned Soviet propaganda to publicly campaign on the opposite of the truth, as Obama is doing. That reflects Obama's Marxist upbringing and the nature of today's Che Guevara Democrat Party.

     

A Gut Check on What Obama Means by 'Fairness'
By David Catron on 8.8.12 @ 6:09AM
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/08/a-gut-check-on-what-obama-mean

Obama receives preventive care his HHS bureaucrats deny Medicare patients.

Last month, the President told a crowd of supporters in Texas that he was glad his unpopular health care law is known as "Obamacare" to its opponents: "You know what, they're right, I do care. I care about folks who get sick ..." This claim would have been more truthful had he told them he cares about some folks who become ill. Indeed, it would have been more consistent with his actual behavior had he said, "I care about myself when I get sick." President Obama, you see, has been availing himself of medical tests his HHS apparatchiks won't approve for payment if Medicare patients receive them.

In his routine physicals, for example, he has taken advantage of a state-of the art test shown by studies to be effective at detecting early colon cancer without exposing the patient to the potential risks associated with traditional colonoscopy: "President Obama, in his first routine physical exam as commander in chief, received a CT colonography (CTC), commonly known as a virtual colonoscopy, to screen him for colorectal cancer." A good call by Obama and his doctors. Unfortunately for Medicare patients, his HHS apparatchiks have decreed that Medicare patients will not enjoy the same quality of care.

In 2009, the government's health care bureaucrats decided, "The evidence is inadequate to conclude that CT colonography is an appropriate colorectal cancer screening test." Somehow, though, the evidence was convincing enough for the President's doctors to recommend it. And the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society said at the time, "Virtual colonoscopy, or CT colonography, ought to be available as one of several options for colon cancer screening." So, if it's good enough for the leader of the free world, why isn't it good enough for Medicare patients? Well, one reason involved a concern "that costs would increase..."

Take a moment to consider that. The President of the United States, a public servant paid by the taxpayers, followed the advice of his taxpayer-paid doctors that he should have a taxpayer-paid CTC. Yet his health care commissars, also paid by taxpayers, have decreed that that it is too expensive to provide this very test to actual taxpayers when they retire and sign up for the Medicare program for which they have been paying all their working lives. This perverse system, it should be remembered, is not merely presided over but taken advantage of by a man who incessantly lectures these very taxpayers about "fairness."

And this is by no means the only example of Obama's peculiar brand of fairness. Paul Hsieh, a practicing radiologist and proponent of free-market health care, recently reported more of the same in a Forbes column titled, "Is the President's Prostate Gland More Important Than Yours?" Writing that Obama chose to have a PSA test when he turned 50, Hsieh points out that the rest of us may not have that option once Obamacare is implemented: "ObamaCare empowers the government U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) to determine which preventive health services are medically appropriate."

Does the USPSTF sound familiar? It should. It's the bevy of Beltway bureaucrats who recommended restricting screening mammograms to women over age 50. The uproar caused by that proposal caused such a headache for the people trying to pass Obamacare that HHS Commissar Sebelius was eventually forced to partially walk it back. But this bureaucracy is still animated by an affinity for rationing. And, as Hsieh writes, this affinity isn't limited to preventive care for women: "This year, the USPSTF aroused similar controversy by giving a 'D' grade ('not recommended') to routine PSA prostate cancer screening."

PSA screening is not, of course, blessed with a perfect record of accuracy. Even the American Cancer Society has stopped short of a full-throated endorsement of the test. Yet the physicians who actually treat the victims of prostate cancer, which is the second leading cause of cancer deaths, oppose the USPSTF guidelines. Hsieh links to this story about the annual meeting of the American Urological Association at which the majority of urologists present were not merely opposed to the guidelines but mad as hell about them. They are well aware of the role USPSTF will play under Obamacare and they know it will kill people.

But not the President. Obama won't have to do without a PSA or a CTC any more than his wife will have to wait until she's 50 to get a screening mammogram. Neither will ever be subjected to the tender mercies of the soulless drones with which he has filled the adumbral halls of HHS. Both will get what they need, and you will get the bill. The president has frequently said he wants everyone to enjoy the same level of care that he and members of Congress enjoy. You have no more chance of getting that under Obamacare than you do of being invited to play golf with the President or flying to Paris with Michelle to buy shoes

For the hoi polloi (i.e. you and me), USPSTF guidelines and government-imposed rationing will determine the quality and quantity of care. That's why the opponents of government-run health care use the term Obamacare in the pejorative sense. We believe it's a system that will benefit the ruling class to which Obama belongs and render life shorter and more painful for the rest of us. And, as the President succinctly put it, we're right.

Don't know how true this is but.... see for yourself.  You make the call... Warph


Michelle Obama Caught Giving Her Dog A Prostate Exam
by Bryan Blake - on Jun 15th 2012
http://dailybleach.com/michelle-obama-caught-giving-her-dog-a-prostate-exam/

(http://dailybleach.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/michelle-obama.jpg)

Washington D.C. – After months and months of embarrassing situations for The President himself, chalk up the latest "face palm" for Obama to his health Nazi and Ru Paul look-a-like wife, Michelle. Today Mrs. Obama was caught sticking her finger up her obviously uncomfortable dog's rectum, trying to check his prostate. I guess besides telling you what your kids can and can't eat, Michelle is now diving into the study of house pets so she can divulge a plan to take control of how you raise your hairy family member. I'm sure in the following weeks Michelle will be whispering commands into the ear of her puppet husband to propose some anti-American bill to force pet owners to have their pet's given a monthly prostate exams at hand picked vet offices and on the tax payer's dime. I'm sure any non tax paying citizens will get the service free. The President and his wife would not comment on this situation.

         (http://www.davegranlund.com/cartoons/wp-content/uploads/Color-Obama-gay-marriage.jpg)

Does the Left Really Care About Gay Marriage?
By Aaron Goldstein on 8.8.12 @ 6:08AM

Only if it's a white conservative Christian who opposes it. Otherwise...

It has been almost exactly four years to the day since Barack Obama attended Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback Forum. You may recall that during this forum, candidate Obama said, "I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman."

Remember the hue and cry that followed from outraged liberals and progressives?

Well, of course you don't.

The reason you don't remember is that there wasn't any outrage from the Left concerning Obama's position on gay marriage. If anything, the Left loved Obama even more.

Ellen DeGeneres didn't see fit to question Obama on gay marriage during an October 2008 appearance on her show via satellite. Instead, Ellen grilled him on such pressing matters of state such as Halloween, George Clooney, and dancing. Let's just say that Ellen didn't give John McCain the kid glove treatment even though his position on gay marriage was exactly that of Obama's. And if not for Vice President Biden's loose lips, Obama's public position on gay marriage in 2012 would have been the same as it was in 2008 and, for that matter, the same as it was during much of 2012. I submit that if President Obama still maintained that marriage was between a man and a woman that he would not lose a single liberal or progressive vote. Did the Left ever give Dick Cheney props for supporting gay marriage before his distant cousin President Obama? When push comes to shove, the Left doesn't really care about gay marriage all that much.

This, of course, isn't to say the Left doesn't care about gay marriage at all. The Left certainly cares about gay marriage when it's a white, Christian conservative who says marriage is between a man and a woman. If said white, Christian conservative happens to own a successful chicken restaurant franchise, then the Left sees fit to deploy tar and feathers. This tarring and feathering has taken the form of liberal mayors telling Chick-fil-A not to come to their town, Chick-fil-As being defaced with graffiti, and Chick-fil-A employees being berated by customers with an insatiable appetite for liberal tolerance.

Yet in the midst of all this tarring and feathering of Chick-fil-A, a campaign in favor of traditional marriage was launched with little fanfare at the National Press Club last week. This campaign was launched by the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP). Its president, Reverend William Owens, stated, "The time has come for a broad-based assault against the power that be that wants to change our culture to one of men marrying men and women marrying women."

If you think about it, Reverend Owens's remarks aren't all that different from those of Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy. Yet you don't see liberal mayors telling black churches they aren't welcome in their towns for opposing gay marriage. You don't see black churches being defaced with graffiti nor do you see supporters of gay marriage accosting parishioners with phone cameras in tow for belonging to houses of worship that oppose gay marriage. I mean, how many same sex couples who kissed in front of a Chick-fil-A tried to pull the same stunt in front of a church in Compton after African-Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of California's Proposition 8 in 2008? Or what about kissing in front of a mosque? The Islamic Society of Boston built a mosque with money from Sheikh Yusuf Abdullah al-Qardawi and has been inspired by his teachings. Amongst the Sheikh's teachings are that homosexuals should be burned or thrown from a high place. It could explain why same sex couples wouldn't be inclined to public displays of affection in front of a mosque.

As committed as the Left is about gay marriage; it is far more committed to maintaining appearances and not wanting to be accused of racism. When it comes down to it, race trumps sexual orientation (and everything else). This explains why the Left gives a pass to African-American pastors who oppose same sex marriage. This is why the Left gave a pass to Barack Obama for opposing gay marriage in 2008 and would have done so again in 2012 if not for his "evolution." The Left doesn't care as much about gay marriage as it does about re-electing President Obama.

By now it's obvious that Obuma realizes the only way he can be re-elected is for people to ignore his record and to focus, instead, on Romney's negatives.  So it is that Obuma is constantly reminding voters that Romney is a rich guy.  Fortunately, that's a strategy fraught with problems.  For one thing, Obuma is a millionaire.  So are such left-wing politicians as Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid.  And while it's true that Romney is richer than they are, the Clintons are worth well over a hundred million dollars, while John and Teresa Kerry could buy and sell the Romneys.

In fact, considering how wealth-conscious liberals are, I find it odd that they never held their family fortune against John, Ted or Bobby Kennedy.  And that was a fortune built the old-fashioned way, through bootlegging.

                                                               (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/small/1105/obamas-obama-israel-jews-stabbed-in-the-back-political-poster-1305939388.jpg)

When it comes to hypocrisy, probably nothing compares to international groups such as the U.N. and the Global Counterterrorism Forum.  The GCF is comprised of 30 nations, co-chaired by the United States and Turkey.  Its purpose is to bring together those nations that have suffered terrorist attacks in an attempt to prevent and punish those responsible.  The problem is that because Islamic Turkey doesn't like Israel, Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma and Hillary Clinton have agreed to exclude the Jewish state, in spite of the fact that it has suffered more terrorist attacks and, aside from the U.S., done more to combat terrorism than the other 29 nations combined.  This is the same Turkey, by the way, that was behind the so-called "Gaza Freedom Flotilla" that set out to provoke an armed response by attempting to run the Israeli blockade and provide Hamas with weaponry.

This is also the same American president and secretary of state... let us not forget.... who are always claiming to be Israel's friend and ally, at least when election times roll around.  In the meantime, however, these are the same two people who condemn the Israelis for building apartment houses in Jerusalem and for defending themselves against relentless missile attacks.  With friends like these, Israel, as the old saying goes, doesn't have to go looking for enemies.

Finally, for those of us who regard Obuma's voice as the biggest drone in America's arsenal, one of the great things about a Romney victory is that it will totally shock the egomaniacal Obuma and render him speechless.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bCmC89qkM8s/UCKhula6ZNI/AAAAAAAAbhg/83NYaHoab1Q/s1600/2-22-09%2B1.jpg)

Liberals, Progressives and Socialists
By Walter E. Williams
8/8/2012


In Europe, especially in Germany, hoisting a swastika-emblazoned Nazi flag is a crime. For decades after World War II, people have hunted down and sought punishment for Nazi murderers, who were responsible for the deaths of more than 20 million people.

Here's my question: Why are the horrors of Nazism so well-known and widely condemned but not those of socialism and communism? What goes untaught -- and possibly is covered up -- is that socialist and communist ideas have produced the greatest evil in mankind's history. You say, "Williams, what in the world are you talking about? Socialists, communists and their fellow travelers, such as the Wall Street occupiers supported by our president, care about the little guy in his struggle for a fair shake! They're trying to promote social justice." Let's look at some of the history of socialism and communism.

What's not appreciated is that Nazism is a form of socialism. In fact, the term Nazi stands for the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The unspeakable acts of Adolf Hitler's Nazis pale in comparison to the horrors committed by the communists in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People's Republic of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, China's communists, led by Mao Zedong and his successors, murdered and were otherwise responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese. The most authoritative tally of history's most murderous regimes is documented on University of Hawaii Professor Rudolph J. Rummel's website here, and in his book "Death by Government."

How much hunting down and punishment have there been for these communist murderers? To the contrary, it's acceptable both in Europe and in the U.S. to hoist and march under the former USSR's red flag emblazoned with a hammer and sickle. Mao Zedong has long been admired by academics and leftists across our country, as they often marched around singing the praises of Mao and waving his little red book, "Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-tung." President Barack Obama's communications director, Anita Dunn, in her June 2009 commencement address to St. Andrews Episcopal High School at Washington National Cathedral, said Mao was one of her heroes.

Whether it's the academic community, the media elite, stalwarts of the Democratic Party or organizations such as the NAACP, the National Council of La Raza, Green for All, the Sierra Club and the Children's Defense Fund, there is a great tolerance for the ideas of socialism -- a system that has caused more deaths and human misery than all other systems combined.

Today's leftists, socialists and progressives would bristle at the suggestion that their agenda differs little from those of Nazi, Soviet and Maoist mass murderers. One does not have to be in favor of death camps or wars of conquest to be a tyrant. The only requirement is that one has to believe in the primacy of the state over individual rights.

The unspeakable horrors of Nazism didn't happen overnight. They were simply the end result of a long evolution of ideas leading to consolidation of power in central government in the quest for "social justice." It was decent but misguided earlier generations of Germans -- who would have cringed at the thought of genocide -- who created the Trojan horse for Hitler's ascendancy. Today's Americans are similarly accepting the massive consolidation of power in Washington in the name of social justice.

If you don't believe it, just ask yourself: Which way are we headed tiny steps at a time -- toward greater liberty or toward more government control over our lives?

Perhaps we think that we are better human beings than the German people who created the conditions that brought Hitler to power. I say, don't count on it.

Posted by: CNN White House Producer Adam Aigner-Treworgy:

http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/08/obama-camp-has-history-with-star-of-new-super-pac-ad/

       (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mbWFsN2TDuk/UBqvBjNlpGI/AAAAAAAAazQ/8qQVJ0D-90E/s1600/obama_lies.jpg)

Obama camp has history with star (Joe Soptic) of new Super PAC ad

CNN - Representatives from the Obama campaign tried to distance themselves on Wednesday from a new ad released by the pro-Obama Super PAC Priorities USA that links actions taken by Bain Capital to the death of former steelworker Joe Soptic's wife.

Aboard Air Force One, campaign spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters that the campaign had "no involvement with any ads that are done by Priorities USA."

"We don't have any knowledge of the story of the family," Psaki said when asked about Soptic's story.

On CNN's Early Start Wednesday morning, Obama for America Deputy Campaign Manager Stephanie Cutter also denied that she knew the details of Soptic's story.

"Well, you do know that we don't have anything to do with Priorities USA," Cutter told CNN's John Berman. "That by law, we're not allowed to coordinate with them, and by law we don't have anything to do with their ads. I don't know the facts of when Joe Soptic's wife got sick or when she died."

But in an interview with CNN on Tuesday, Soptic said that the campaign had asked him to appear at events on behalf of the president to talk about his experiences with Bain."I was asked to fly to some of the battleground states, but I have been unable to do that," Soptic said in a phone call.

On a May 14 Obama campaign conference call featuring both Soptic and Cutter, he even told an almost identical story to the one he tells in the new Super PAC ad.

In the ad Soptic claims that when Bain shut down the Kansas City steel mill where he had worked for nearly 30 years, his family lost their health insurance. His wife Ilyona became ill "a short time after," and he says in the ad, "I think maybe she didn't say anything because she knew that we couldn't afford the insurance."

He then describes taking his wife to the county hospital only to discover that she had cancer.

"She passed away in 22 days," Soptic says.

On the conference call, Soptic phrased his story this way:

"After we lost our jobs, we found out that we were going to lose our health insurance, and that our pensions hadn't been funded like Bain promised they would be. I was lucky to find another job as a custodian in a local school district. They gave me some health insurance, but I couldn't afford to buy it for my wife. A little while later she was diagnosed with lung cancer. I had to put her in a county hospital because she didn't have health care, and when the cancer took her away, all I got was an enormous bill. That put a lot of stress on me. I thought I'd be paying it off until I died myself. That probably wouldn't have happened if Bain kept its promise and I was allowed to keep our health insurance. I know it wouldn't have happened if I still had my old job at the steel mill. Its upsetting what Mitt Romney and his partners did to us here in Kansas City."

At the end of his remarks, Soptic turns the call back over to Cutter.

"We really appreciate you sharing your experiences," Cutter said.

      (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mbWFsN2TDuk/UBqvBjNlpGI/AAAAAAAAazQ/8qQVJ0D-90E/s1600/obama_lies.jpg)

Team Obama Caught Planting Veterans
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/stunner-obama-s-3-surprised-veterans-at-portland-diner-were-likely-plants/

(http://nation.foxnews.com/sites/nation.foxnews.com/files/styles/dv1/public/725_plant.gif)
Busted... Team O Plants 3 "Surprised" Veterans at Out-of-the-Way Diner to Speak With Obama – Then Releases Their Bios

What a coincidence! Obama just happened to find three friendly veterans in a booth at a Portland diner this week.
It was a "surprise stop."

         (http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/king-5-surprise.jpg)

         (http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obama-portland-lunch-e1343249267226.jpg) 
PORTLAND, OREGON – June 24, 2012 – President Barack Obama visited Portland Tuesday greeting diners Mark Peterson, center, and Thomas Foeller, right, at the Gateway Breakfast House in an unschedueld stop on the way to fundraisers at the Oregon Convention Center. Michael Lloyd/The Oregonian.

But then the truth came out—-
The three veterans were not regulars. They were plants from the Obama Election Campaign
They just happened to be sitting in a booth at the diner when Obama popped in.

    "No, they were not regulars." The waitress who served President Obama, Mary, told me the veterans with whom the President discussed "health care" were not regulars. "Well, maybe one of the guys came in here before..."
In fact, the Obama Campaign even had a copy of their bios on hand.
And, one of the veterans just happens to be an Obama for America volunteer!

The roundtable participants, as provided by the campaign:

-Dean Dilley from Portland
Dean enlisted in the U.S. Army 1972 when he was 20 years old. He served for three years, from 1972-1975 as a supply specialist. He retired from American Honda Motor Company in 2009, where he worked as a stock and material handler and is currently a volunteer for Obama for America.

Dean says that health care is the issue that is most important to him, particularly as he is getting older. He is also focused on veterans-related issues and says he is grateful for the President's commitment to supporting veterans like himself.

-Mark Peterson from Portland
Mark is a retired veteran. He served in the Air Force and Air National Guard for 27 years, from 1966 – 1993. In the Air Force, he was rated as a Navigator and flew B-52s as an Electronic Warfare Officer and in the Air National Guard he was a Weapons System Officer in F-4s and F-101s. Following his service he worked as a CPA, and retired around 2006.

Mark is focused on health care and foreign policy. He is thankful for his military benefits and Medicare coverage, but as the father of two disabled children, he knows a lot of people who have had problems with coverage, so he knows how important it is to have access to quality, affordable health care.

-Thomas Foeller from Oak Grove
Tom is a retired Vietnam War era veteran. He enlisted in the Navy Reserves in 1967 during his junior year at Portland State University because he wanted to serve his country. He left the Navy Reserves as a lieutenant in 1976. He served for a total of nine years; four of those were active duty. He was a member of the Inshore Undersea Warfare Unit and spent six months stationed in Japan, then six months in Guam while on call to deploy to Vietnam. His unit never received the call to deploy.

Tom retried from a career in the housing industry six years ago. At the time of his retirement, Tom was diagnosed with stage III rectal cancer, during a routine physical. He believes that had the Affordable Care Act – and the emphasis on preventative care – been in place a decade or two ago, he would have caught his cancer earlier and could have saved tens of thousands of dollars in healthcare costs.

What a complete surprise.
It was all manufactured – just for Obama.

UPDATE: Dan Riehl has more on this manufactured media story.
Here's a report via Oregon Live:
http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2012/07/three_portland_area_veterans_a.html

All have connections to the Obama reelection campaign and were presumably chosen for good political reasons.

None of the three vets knew each other before being chosen by the Obama campaign to meet with the president.

Dilley, 60, who served in the Army for three years and worked for Honda until retiring in 2009, said he has done a little voter registration work for the campaign.  But he said he thinks he came to the campaign's attention when he called a couple of months ago asking if he could talk to the president about veterans issues.

"I never expected it to happen," Dilley added with a laugh.

Foeller, who said he's mostly active in a group fighting colorectal cancer, said he's also done some volunteer work for the Obama campaign.  And Peterson said his wife volunteers for the campaign.

On Tuesday morning, all three met with a staffer and were driven to the restaurant and arrived shortly before Obama.  The three said the restaurant workers and other patrons received notice only a few minutes before the president arrived.

Foeller and Dilley said Obama ate half of a cheese sandwich and skipped the ham in his split pea soup.  "He's a pretty tall and slender guy," said Dilley.  "Maybe that's why."



UPDATE: Reportedly, the veterans declined to go on the air today with a conservative host.
http://victoriataftkpam.blogspot.com/2012/07/transparency-obama-staff-urge-diner.html

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/obama-campaign/2012/07/25/team-obama-caught-planting-veterans#ixzz233KFsfiE

                                  (http://faltufunde.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/1.jpg?w=490&h=384)


Charles Krauthammer: Obama Camp 'Jumped the Shark' Today

                                 

Charles Krauthammer weighed in on the attack by the Obama administration  against Mitt Romney.  Romney was accused of being a 'Felon' regarding the timing of his departure from Bain Capital.

"I think the charges up to now that he's a guy who doesn't care, he outsources was an effect. But when you get the Obama campaign accusing him of being a felon, you've jumped the shark. You can say a lot of stuff about Mitt Romney. Unfeeling, out of touch, stiff, but a felon he's not. I mean, he's a guy who not only doesn't have a skeleton in his closet, he doesn't have a closet. He's as clean as they come,"

"So when they accuse him of deliberately lying to the SEC and committing a felony, they are then retroactively questioning all the series of charges up to that. That's jumping the shark." 

                                            (http://guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/jump_the_shark.png)

      (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mbWFsN2TDuk/UBqvBjNlpGI/AAAAAAAAazQ/8qQVJ0D-90E/s1600/obama_lies.jpg)


Step one - The Obama campaign claims no knowledge of Joe Soptic's story while refusing to denounce a shockingly offensive and false political ad produced by their former colleague's pro-Obama SuperPAC:

Asked about the Priorities spot on MSNBC Wednesday morning, Robert Gibbs said he doesn't "know the specifics" while Stephanie Cutter said on CNN: "I don't know the facts about when Mr. Soptic's wife got sick or the facts about his health insurance." And Jen Psaki told reporters on Air Force One that "we don't' have any knowledge of the story of the family."

Step two - The coordinated lie goes down in flames:

But Cutter hosted an Obama campaign conference call in May in which Soptic told reporters the very story featured in the Priorities spot. Both the campaign and the Priorities USA Action said there was no coordination about Soptic's appearances. In the campaign's ad, Soptic speaks only about the plant. In the Priorities spot, he tells the personal story he relayed during the Obama campaign conference call. On the May 14 Obama campaign call, Soptic detailed his wife's illness and death.


Update:  Guess who was running Bain Capital when Mr. Soptic was laid off? A major Obama fundraiser by the name of Jonathan Lavine .

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/oops-obamas-top-bundler-jonathan-lavine-was-in-charge-of-bain-during-gst-steel-layoffs/

Oops!... Obama's Top Bundler Jonathan Lavine Was In Charge of Bain During GST Steel Layoffs
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, July 18, 2012, 5:43 AM  

The Obama campaign has been blaming Mitt Romney for the failure of the GST Steel Company in 2001, conveniently ignoring the fact that Mitt Romney left Bain Capital, which had taken over GST, in 1999. This in itself is a dishonest attack, which will surprise no one, but it gets even more egregious when coupled with this salient fact: one of Barack Obama's top bundlers, Jonathan Lavine, managing director at Bain, who has bundled between $100,000 and $200,000 in contributions for the 2012 Obama Victory Fund, was one of the guys running Bain when GST went belly-up.


It will be hard for Obama to knock Romney on steel; when Romney was at Bain in 1994, he helped launch Steel Dynamics, which currently employs over 6,000 people. When it comes to investment choice and American job creation, Obama is simply no match for Romney.


Photo: Obama and top Democrat campaign bundler
Jonathan Lavine from Bain Capital.
          (http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/obama-lavine-e1342617273233.jpg)


The Obama campaign blamed Governor Mitt Romney for the demise of GST Steel company in a video they released in May. The plant closed in 2001. Mitt left Bain in 1999.

For some reason the Obama camp forgot to mention this...
Obama's top bundler Jonathan Lavine was in charge of Bain during the BST layoffs.





Chuck Slowe reported:Blaming Governor Romney for any issues surrounding the failure of GST is wrong and it is a blatant lie. Mitt Romney had been long gone when the company started to fail and subsequently closed it doors. When are the President and his campaign hacks going to get the story correct? When are they going to get back to their economy and its dreadful condition? Mr. President, you can run but you cannot hide.

It turns out that Jonathan Lavine, current Obama bundler, was actually in charge, at Bain, during that period, when the layoffs occurred. Oops, that isn't right, is it? Yes, that story is the one that needs to be reported on. Sorry Mr. President, your lies are just getting to be more than many of us are able to handle.

And, Jonathan Lavine is not your average Obama Bain donor. Lavine is one of Barack Obama's top bundlers.

ABC reported:
While Democrats assail presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's Bain Capital business practices, Republicans note that President Obama has not been bashful about accepting cash from Bain executives or other high-profile figures in the corporate buyout business...

...One of Obama's top campaign financiers – Jonathan Lavine – is also managing director at Bain, bundling between $100,000 and $200,000 in contributions for the 2012 Obama Victory Fund, according to estimates released by the Obama campaign. The president has also relied on other leading figures in the private equity sector as hosts for high-dollar fundraisers and as members of his Jobs Council.[/font][/size]

Maybe someday the liberal media will report on this.

      (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UOwol37ckdM/UCNL13pNETI/AAAAAAAAbkk/FT5-rO12Zhw/s1600/8-7-12%2B11.jpg)

http://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2012/08/08/new_obama_slogan_from_one_many

New Obama Slogan: From One, Many
By Ben Shapiro
8/8/2012

President Obama is my president. He's not illegitimate. He's not a usurper. He was duly elected by my fellow citizens -- and as much as I think he's a horrible commander-in-chief with anti-American ideals, that's the choice Americans made in 2008.

But by the same token, President Obama isn't my president. He isn't doing anything for me, the typical, faceless American citizen. I'm not a member of a minority group -- at least a minority group that counts (being Jewish obviously doesn't count when it comes to Obama's giveaway grab bag). I'm not a welfare case, and I'm employed. I'm not a member of a public sector union.

And so I don't count when it comes to President Obama.

President Obama's entire re-election campaign -- and, thus far, his entire presidency -- has been predicated on appealing to various splinter groups within the American population. He isn't interested in presenting broad policy initiatives that appeal to the vast swath of Americans; in fact, his one major policy initiative, Obamacare, bombed with the American public so badly that the Democrats were unceremoniously thrown from Congress in 2010.

That's why Obama finds himself on the defensive with regard to his polarizing campaign tactics. In an interview with Black Enterprise magazine, Obama said, "I want all Americans to have opportunity. I'm not the president of black America. I'm the president of the United States of America." But that's not what he says on his campaign website, where he breaks down Americans by color, including a subgroup of African-Americans for Obama, where he pushes posters urging blacks to "get his back" -- just $35 to show your support!

Obama's website also offers groups for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, Jewish Americans (well, liberal Jewish Americans), Latinos, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgenders, people with disabilities, small business owners (all two of them who support Obama), seniors, women, and young Americans, among others.

Obama sees America as a country of differences papered over with the flag; Americans, by contrast, have historically seen America as a country of different folks united by dreams, goals and principles. To Obama, unity is aesthetic, an idea to be photoshopped to the front of a campaign brochure. To Americans, unity is engraved on our coinage.

But that fundamental difference in perspective has yet to manifest itself in this campaign. Americans seem to want to take Obama at his word. They don't understand that his campaign philosophy of 2008 is worlds apart from his campaign philosophy of 2012. He has failed as a universal president -- a president whose rising tide has lifted all boats. His only success must spring from his particularism. He must deconstruct his "all things to all people" persona in order to appeal to any one particular group.

But Obama's enigmatic persona means that there's no there there. He hasn't offered enough to any one group to qualify as a representative member. His answer to Black Enterprise came in response to a question about whether he's done enough for the black community. And he hasn't. But he can only campaign as a black candidate or a gay candidate or a Latino candidate or a whatever-he-is-this-week candidate.

And that just won't fly. Because, to paraphrase a famously unifying politician of the recent past, we're not black states and white states, gay states and straight states -- we're the United States. Even if our president seems to like us better scattered and disunited.

      (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9RL-wExtpFw/UB4JkMosmAI/AAAAAAAAbB4/sCzdyPrqy_s/s1600/8-5-12%2B1.jpg)

'Mad Dog' Harry Reid
By Cal Thomas
8/9/2012
http://townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/2012/08/09/mad_dog_harry_reid


To call Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid a "mad dog," as Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank did, is an affront to the canine community and those suffering from legitimate mental illness. Reid was completely sane when he spread hearsay about an anonymous Bain Capital investor who allegedly told him Mitt Romney paid no taxes for 10 years.

Doesn't Reid, a Mormon like Romney, subscribe to the prohibition in the Ninth Commandment: "Thou shall not bear false witness"? He appears to pay no political price because he's a Democrat and unlike Joe McCarthy, to whom some are comparing him, no prominent fellow Democrat or top media figure has asked Reid the question put to the commie-hunting McCarthy by attorney Joseph Welch in 1953: "Have you no sense of decency, sir?"

Reid is a sideshow, a clown in a political circus that seeks to draw the public's attention away from President Obama's record.
Romney's tax returns won't create a single job or revive the economy. Romney must change the subject by shifting the focus to where it belongs: to President Obama, his failed promises and his disastrous economic mismanagement.

If he wants to belabor the point, Romney can challenge Obama to release his college records and other information mentioned in his book "Dreams from My Father." He can offer to release more years of his tax returns in return for the transparency Obama promised.

Or Romney can reiterate that he has fully complied with the law, including the payment of all taxes owed. Would his critics prefer he pay more than his legal obligation? In addition, Romney has certainly made sizable charitable contributions, while Biden and his wife, according to USA Today, averaged just $369 in annual charitable contributions over a 10-year period.

What about the president? Here's what Washington Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler wrote: "When then-presidential candidate Obama released his tax returns during the 2008 campaign, it was revealed that he began making significant gifts to charity after he started making serious money from his books -- and after he decided to run for president.

Here's what the numbers look like: 2005: $77,315 to charity out of income of $1.66 million (4.6 percent); 2004: "$2,500 out of $207,647 (1.2 percent); 2003: $3,400 out of $238,327 (1.4 percent); 2002: $1,050 out of $259,394 (0.4 percent)." In 2010, the number increased to 13.6 percent.

We can go tit for tat on contributions or income taxes forever. The tax returns issue is a smoke screen for the Obama administration's failures. The Romney campaign now appears to be doing what it should to reclaim and redirect the narrative. Romney can prevail if the issue becomes government spending.

People know that waste is a moral failure. Romney could go after Pentagon waste. Washington Post columnist Walter Pincus recently wrote: "How can the Pentagon keep $2.5 billion left over from a canceled program sloshing around for 'reinvestment by the Army' when Capitol Hill and the White House are worried about Pentagon budget cuts and national security?"

Romney has begun to press the president on his "reform" of welfare reform. The Department of Health and Human Services announced last month it will consider waivers to the work requirements for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Requiring welfare recipients to work was a hard-won provision of the landmark welfare reform law passed by a Republican Congress and signed by Bill Clinton in 1996. And it worked. Those receiving welfare benefits, instead of relying on government assistance, were compelled to transition themselves toward work or educational opportunities as a way of creating a better life for themselves and for their families.

Senator Reid is a stink bomb at the garden party. Let "Dirty Harry," as some have dubbed him, continue to demonstrate his flawed character. Romney should not descend to the gutter with him. He should ignore Reid and focus on what most Americans care most about: rebuilding our shattered economy.

         (http://www.cartoonsbyhenry.com/political_cartoons/2008/20081106.jpg)

Yes, vote fraud's real
By MICHAEL A. WALSH
Posted: 11:18 PM, August 8, 2012

The vote of one idiot can cancel out the vote of a single genius — such is the glory of our one-man, one-vote system. But what about the vote of an illegal alien? The deceased? Or a convicted felon? Should they be allowed to spoil the electoral process — and perhaps change history?

And why — in the name of "civil rights" — is Attorney General Eric Holder using the power of the Justice Department to hamstring states trying to put a stop to voter fraud by requiring a secure ID in order to vote?

                             (http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1106/voter-id-fraud-vote-id-politics-1308752310.jpg)

The answer is clear: In an election that promises to be every bit as close as Bush v. Gore in 2000, each side is going to need every vote it can get. And one way, historically, that Democrats have been able to swing close elections is through fraud.

Consider:
* In the 2004 Washington state governor's race, the Republican's early lead was overcome by the miraculous discovery of previously uncounted ballots squirreled away in the Democratic stronghold of Seattle, handing the election to the Democrat.

* In the close governor's race in Connecticut in 2010, a mysterious shortage of ballots in Bridgeport kept the polls open an extra two hours as allegedly blank ballots were photocopied and handed out in the heavily Democratic city. Dannel Malloy defeated Republican Tom Foley by nearly 7,000 votes statewide — but by almost 14,000 votes in Bridgeport.

* Now a new book — "Who's Counting?" by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky — charges that Al Franken's 2008 defeat of incumbent Republican Sen. Norm Coleman may be directly attributable to felons voting illegally.

Coleman led on election night, but a series of recounts lasting eight months eventually gave the seat to the former Saturday Night Live star.

Later, a conservative watchdog group matched criminal records with the voting rolls and discovered that 1,099 felons had illegally cast ballots. State law mandates prosecutions in such cases; 177 have been convicted so far, with 66 more awaiting trial.

Franken's eventual margin of "victory"? A mere 312 votes.

The Minnesota win gave the Democrats their 60th Senate seat, creating the filibuster-proof majority that helped shovel ObamaCare into law.

Democrats' chicanery extends back to the days of Tammany Hall and other big-city machines. But today, much of the dirty work is done by lawyers. So maybe it's not so surprising that Holder is either "investigating" or actually suing states like South Carolina, Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania that have instituted tougher new requirements, including the presentation of government-issued ID.

Never mind that the Supreme Court by a 6-3 vote has already upheld the constitutionality of requiring valid identification in a 2008 case in Indiana.

Holder, the most politicized attorney general since Nixon's John Mitchell, has consistently moved against any efforts to protect the integrity of the ballot box in the service of the party that keeps him employed.

Infamously, he dropped prosecution of members of the New Black Panther Party, who were intimidating white voters outside a Philadelphia polling place during the 2008 presidential election.

And he killed the case despite the urging of lawyers at Justice and members of the US Civil Rights Commission, which in a 2010 report accused Justice of "open hostility and opposition" to prosecuting cases with white victims.

In a speech last month to the NAACP, the AG charged that Republican efforts to ensure the integrity of the electoral process effectively amount to "voter suppression," under the absurd premise that minorities are incapable of obtaining proper ID.

Risibly, Holder likened the tougher ID requirements to the days of Jim Crow and the poll tax — despite the fact that, in Pennsylvania for example, the state provides photo IDs free of charge.

Studies show that the cemetery, illegal-immigrant and felon votes tends to break heavily Democratic. Just ask Norm Coleman, who would have blocked ObamaCare and kept circus clown Al Franken away from Washington.

                                    (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_YqNdVQsH0IM/TDcfxelaCxI/AAAAAAAAJyA/Ii_x3GON6xk/s1600/rainbow-cartoon.jpg)



Matt Lauer:  Bought & Paid For By The Democratic Party


Matt Lauer became a regular co-host of NBC's Today show on January 6, 1997 and while his partners have changed over the years from Katie Couric, to Meredith Vieira and most recently Ann Curry, he's joined them in regularly serving viewers a hearty portion of liberal spin to go along with their morning cup of coffee.

Over the years Lauer has treated his Democratic guests with light and frothy questions, as was the case when he asked Barack Obama how he would be able to "manage" the "expectations" of those hoping he would be their "Savior" and "Messiah." In contrast he's hit Republicans with  bitter queries about their ability to lead, like the time he asked then Senator-Elect Rand Paul if Republicans, after having rode a "wave of anger and energy" into office in the 2010 midterms, would then "govern in Washington with anger?"


The following is a collection of examples of Lauer sticking up for Democrats and persistently taking the liberal side on every issue from gun control to global warming:

Hating Conservatives/Wishing They Would Moderate Their Ways....

Matt Lauer: "When you look at some of the things the Tea Party and others on the far right are asking for — no funding for Planned Parenthood, no funding for climate control, public broadcasting — does it seem to you, Senator, that this is less about a fiscal debate or an economic policy debate and they are making an ideological stand here?"
Democratic Senator Charles Schumer: "That's exactly right, Matt. You've hit the nail on the head."
— Exchange on NBC's Today, April 6, 2011


Co-host Matt Lauer: "For people who don't remember, Senator, your time in the Senate, how would you describe yourself in terms of the political spectrum? Some have called you an ultra-conservative on social issues. Is that fair?"
Former Senator Rick Santorum: "Look, I'm a conservative. Yeah, I mean, I believe life begins at conception and I believe marriage is between a man a woman...."
Lauer: "In a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 65 percent of people said they are most likely to vote for a candidate in 2012 who is strong on the economy, on the deficit, on jobs, not social issues. That's not really what they are concerned about. So are you, are you barking up the right tree?"
— NBC's Today, March 8, 2011


"Critics of conservative voices right now are saying for the first time in a very long time, the conservatives have lost. They haven't been able to choose their nominee and it's the political version now of a 3-year-old saying, 'if you can't play the game the way I want to play, I'm taking my football and I'm going home.' How do you respond to that?"
— Lauer to Ann Coulter on Today, February 8, 2008.


"A former Cabinet member says the President's party is being held hostage by the far right....[Christine Todd Whitman's] new book criticizing the far right is called It's My Party Too....You say that today's conservatives are not true conservatives. Let me read you a portion: 'Much of their agenda is simply inconsistent with true conservatism. They seem to have forgotten that one of America's greatest strengths has always been its ability to respect the broad range of ideas centered on a core set of values: freedom, opportunity, diversity....' When it comes to the President's agenda for his second term, things like Social Security, how much do you think it's possible he could be held hostage by that far right?"
— Lauer to Whitman on NBC's Today, January 27, 2005.


"They were college classmates from the '60s, mourning the loss of a friend and their idealism....It was 1983, a time of Reaganomics, burgeoning yuppies, and the Decade of Greed."
– NBC's Matt Lauer on the December 30, 2003 Today show, in a story on the 20th anniversary of the film The Big Chill.


Matt Lauer: "Let me write [sic] what one reviewer wrote about you. 'Clancy insists on subjecting readers to a simplistically conservative political philosophy, whether or not they want it. For long stretches in this book it reads like the transcript of a Rush Limbaugh talkathon.'"
Tom Clancy, author, The Bear and The Dragon: "Obviously somebody who voted for George McGovern in 1972."
Lauer: "You too conservative? Does it come through on every page?"
Clancy: "I don't think so. The American people voted for Reagan twice."
Lauer: "You think you're in step with the feelings of this country?"
Clancy: "I'm in step with the feelings of a couple of million readers. I'll settle for that. You know people vote for my books with their money, as opposed to saying yes when the Gallup poll calls them up on the phone."
– Exchange on NBC's Today, August 22, 2000.

"And when you talk about votes like that, that he [Dick Cheney] made while in Congress, anti-affirmative action, anti-abortion, anti-gun control, anti-equal rights, how does George Bush portray him as a compassionate conservative?"
- Today co-host Matt Lauer to Tim Russert, July 26, 2000.

"Governor Bush did very well with voters on the far right of the Republican Party in South Carolina; that may have been his margin of victory. Is it necessary for you now, Senator McCain, to make that a liability for Governor Bush, to portray him as someone beholden to that wing of the party?"
-Today co-host Matt Lauer to John McCain, Feb. 21, 2000.


Democratic Cheerleader/Recruiter...

"You said at a speech recently, you said, you know, 'The Republicans, they're treating me like a dog.' There's a lot of rhetoric out there, coming from the Republicans toward you, coming from the Tea Party toward you. Former President Clinton said he doesn't think the Democrats, and you included, have been rigorous enough in pushing back against some of the Republican attacks. Over these next five weeks, Mr. President, do you intend to change your tone or your emotion in terms of your pushing back?"
— Matt Lauer to President Obama in a September 27, 2010 interview shown across most of NBC Universal's networks, including NBC, MSNBC, Bravo, USA and SyFy


"Passage of this bill and turning it into law has left this country as politically divided as I think it has been in a long time. You might be able to cite some other examples, but the vitriol, the rhetoric, the sniping, the threats — how are you possibly going to continue with any kind of legislative agenda when your opponents have said to you, 'I'm not gonna cooperate with this President, with these Democrats, unless it's a matter of national security.' How do you move on?"
— Matt Lauer to President Obama on NBC's Today, March 30, 2010


"Have you stopped to think what the Obama version of Swift Boating might be in this campaign cycle if you get to the general election? What they did to John Kerry, what's that version going to be with Barack Obama?"
— Lauer to Barack Obama on Today, February 19, 2008.


"Brilliant....Skilled and surprisingly self-destructive....Despite the scandals and investigations, Bill Clinton was an incredibly popular President who connected with the American people....Under Clinton the economy boomed — deficits turned into surplus — and more than 22 million jobs were created. Along with the character flaws and the subpoenas came peace and prosperity."
— Lauer summarizing Bill Clinton's biography during the June 5, 2005 Discovery Channel special listing 25 finalists for the title of "Greatest American."


"Secretary of State Katherine Harris in Florida. As you know she's a Republican, a Bush supporter. Warren Christopher said yesterday that her, her decision on this five o'clock deadline has the look of trying to produce a certain result in the election. Do you think, and to use a rather crude term, that her decision does not pass the smell test?"
– Matt Lauer to Gore aide Bill Daley, Nov. 14, 2000 Today.


"Let's talk about what they are now calling, Mr. Vice President, 'The Kiss'. You heard about 'The Catch' in that football game, this is 'The Kiss.' You really planted one on Mrs. Gore at the beginning of your speech there. What were you thinking?"
"Were you trying to tell the American people that you're really a kind of emotional guy?"
"Well after watching that kiss I know how you survived 30 years, Mr. Vice President. Way to go! It's nice talking to you."
– Today co-host Matt Lauer to Al Gore, August 21, 2000.


Sucking Up to Obama....

"Fit to serve: Barack Obama photographed shirtless in Hawaii and a lot of women are giving him the presidential seal of approval."
— NBC's Matt Lauer starting out the Today show, December 23, 2009


"People have called you 'The Savior,' 'The Messiah,' 'The Messenger of Change.' The expectations have been raised to such a level....If you are, as you just say, lucky enough to be elected the next President, are you going to have to consciously manage expectations during the first several months of your administration?"
— Lauer to Barack Obama on Today, Oct. 20, 2008.


Defending Bill Clinton...

Matt Lauer: "You talk about the loss of opportunity which frustrates Bill Clinton and also must frustrate the American people. So will the lesson that will be learned out of all this, Doris, be that maybe we go back to a time where we give less scrutiny to a President's personal life, back to the Kennedy and Eisenhower and Roosevelt years?"
Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin: "....I hope that the media does go back to that earlier standard. I don't want to talk about this. None of us do. Think about how much more exciting it would be if we were talking about civil rights, education, health care..."
Lauer: "Yeah, but I hope you're right. I hope that the American people would find it more exciting to talk about health care and Social Security and not about these personal peccadilloes."
- Lauer on May 23, 2000 Today.


"Let me end with this. How many times, sitting in front of your computer typing away stories about cigars and cocktail dresses, did you look up and think to yourself 'Why did I ever pursue the Paula Jones story?'"
- Last question from Today co-host Matt Lauer to Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff on his Lewinsky scandal book Uncovering Clinton, April 8, 1999.


"Speaker Wright, let me start with you. When you resigned nine years ago, you had been battered by the right. You called for an end to what you called 'mindless cannibalism.' Nine years later we're hearing terms like that again and others swirling around the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Have we learned nothing in nine years?"
-Matt Lauer to former Speaker Jim Wright, who resigned over ethical problems, December 21, 1998 Today.


"Speaker Wright, during McCarthy's sort of communist witch hunt, the really turning point was when one person being grilled by the Senator said 'Do you have no decency.' Do you see anybody with the credibility in Washington right now to ask that same question?"
-Lauer to Wright, same show.


"Remember when the First Lady was here back in January and she talked about the vast right-wing conspiracy. You agree with a lot of what she had to say. If there is a hierarchy in that conspiracy, like a military hierarchy, where does Ken Starr fall? Is he a private, is he a general, what is he?"
-Today co-host Matt Lauer to James Carville in interview promoting his book, And the Horse He Rode In On: The People vs. Kenneth Starr, October 26, 1998.


"Senator, he brings up an interesting point. If there were no major revelations in the Starr report about all the gates -- Filegate, Travelgate, Whitewater – why shouldn't Ken Starr then pick up the other portion of the tab?"
-Matt Lauer to Republican Senator Frank Murkowski, who had suggested making Clinton pay the tab for the Lewinsky probe, after a clip of White House press secretary Mike McCurry urging Starr be made to pay the cost of the probe incurred before Lewinsky, September 16, 1998 Today.


"Based on your dreams for the information age, can you give me your reaction to the type of information we are hearing in the current situation between the President and Monica Lewinsky? Is that the way you envision the information age turning out?"
"But in this particular case, do you think it's gotten to the point where possibly there is a chance that there is too much information on this particular subject?"
"As our partner I'm sure you watch our programming, you're probably a news junkie like the rest of us. Do you think though that we as journalists have gone overboard on this story?"
— NBC Today co-host Matt Lauer pressing Microsoft chief Bill Gates, February 24, 1998.


"You just heard Mr. Panetta and his comments on the proposed Senate Whitewater hearings. Polls in the past, Mr. Gingrich, have said that: a) the American people really don't understand Whitewater; and b) they really don't care about it. Is there a reason for hearings now, other than to inflict political damage on the President prior to the elections?"
— Today substitute co-host Matt Lauer interviewing Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, May 18, 1995.


Matt Lauer Wants to Raise Your Taxes...

"When it comes to taxes, this issue of revenues, is there any way this deal gets done without the Republicans compromising somewhat on taxes?...President Obama talks about shared sacrifice. Where is the shared sacrifice going to come from on the Republican side?"
— Co-host Matt Lauer to conservative radio host Laura Ingraham on NBC's Today, July 12.

"Why not use an increase in revenues? Tax hikes to help with that debt problem? What is the evidence that you can present that the tax cuts of the Bush era have actually accomplished their goals?...When the Bush era tax cuts were passed in 2001, unemployment in this country was 4.5 percent. Today it's at 9 percent, just down from 10 percent. So why are the Bush era tax cuts creating jobs?"
— Host Matt Lauer to House Speaker John Boehner on NBC's Today, May 10, 2011. In the five years after the full tax cut package was passed in 2003, the economy added more than 8.3 million new jobs.


"Like Congressman Ryan is suggesting, Medicare needs to be revamped....that affects the elderly and the poor...why shouldn't the burden be equally shared? Why shouldn't we put some of that burden on the wealthy and corporations?"
-Lauer to Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann on the April 13, 2011 Today show.

Co-host Matt Lauer: "Do you ever think about how much money is in politics, in political contributions, in lobbying? And wouldn't it be a great idea if we took even half of that money that's spent by corporations and special interests trying to influence politics and dedicated it to changing the world for the better?...What about a lobbying tax? If you're gonna spend a certain amount of money lobbying for a special interest cause, you have to match that amount of money by giving it to help education or to fight AIDS?"     
Ex-President Bill Clinton: "Well, that's not a bad idea."
— NBC's Today, September 5, 2007.

"That cost [of a war in Iraq] is adding to the potential deficit, some $50-100 billion. Doesn't that have something to do with the President's ability to get his tax cut passed? A lot of people say, 'Why are you cutting taxes now when you're increasing the deficit.' Shouldn't this be a time when you're increasing taxes?"
– NBC's Matt Lauer to CNBC's Ron Insana on Today, March 7, 2003.

And Spend Your Money....

"A bitter battle on Capitol Hill has ended with a deep slash in federal spending. The House made more than $9 billion in cuts, hitting education and employment programs especially hard."
— NBC Today anchor Matt Lauer, August 4, 1995.


Saluting Socialism....

Co-host Matt Lauer: "What's the civics lesson in this for our kids as they're watching this on TV?"
Correspondent Natalie Morales: "Well, I think there — as a parent, there's a huge civics lesson, and it teaches, you know, what is important about this. What are — I think you have to ask the questions, 'What are they there for, what are the reasons behind this?' And I think the idea of having that civil discourse is important to teach our kids and it's something in history we've seen...."
— Exchange on NBC's Today about the Occupy Wall Street protestors on October 21, 2011.

"I'm worried if you think if that's a good thing [for Goldman Sachs to pay back its bailout money early]. Are they doing this because of financial stability, or might they be talking about that simply to get out from under the thumb of the federal government and be allowed to go back to running the business the way they want to run it, as opposed to the way the government wants them to run it?"
— Lauer to Obama economic adviser Christina Romer, April 14, 2009 Today.

"Russia's rush to capitalism left the vast majority scrambling to survive. For many, life is worse than it was in Soviet times."
– NBC's Matt Lauer in Moscow on the February 12, 2004 Today.

"Americans are working more and getting less vacation time than people in any other industrialized nation....I feel strange saying, I never stopped to think about the fact there is no official U.S. policy on vacation time."
-Today host Matt Lauer to Escape magazine's Joe Robinson, a proponent of mandated vacation, June 12, 2000.


Baffled/Embarrassed by Unabashed Expressions of Liberty and Patriotism....

Matt Lauer: "Two thousand British moviegoers were recently polled on a very important question. What are the Top 10 Cheesiest Movie Lines of all-time?...Braveheart takes #8 with the baffling battle cry."
Clip of Mel Gibson on horseback rallying his warriors in the movie Braveheart about 13th century Scots battling the British: "That they may take our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!"
— NBC's Today, December 7, 2004.


Matt Lauer: "You are expecting a greater wave of patriotism here in the United States, in this particular time, than other countries have shown when they've hosted the games."
Lloyd Ward, U.S. Olympic Committee President: "I certainly expect the stands to be rocking. I expect the flags to be flying. And you know, the expression of patriotism is fine for any country that hosts the Olympics. We want to express our nationalism as a part of the world's community and I expect to see that."
Lauer: "But we have to also be careful and draw a line not to let our patriotism get in the way of the games in general."
– Exchange on NBC's Today, February 7, 2002.


Anti-War/Torture.... 

Matt Lauer: "If there are flickers, as you say, of al Qaeda among the rebels, would it not be a sign to them or showing them that the United States has compassion and we are willing to use our military might to help all people?"

Michele Bachmann: "Compassion for al Qaeda?"

-Lauer trying to convince Bachmann that Obama's strategy of bombing was a good way to show support for rebels on the March 30, 2011 Today show. Lauer later scrambled to clarify he meant "civilians in Benghazi." Bachmann pointed out to Lauer: "Well of course we have compassion for people. That is not the point."


"For months now, the White House has rejected claims that the situation in Iraq has deteriorated into civil war, and for the most part news organizations like NBC have hesitated to characterize it as such. But after careful consideration, NBC News has decided a change in terminology is warranted, that the situation in Iraq with armed militarized factions fighting for their own political agendas can now be characterized as civil war."
— Lauer leading off NBC's Today, Nov. 27, 2006.


Host Matt Lauer: "He [Senator John Kerry] made a joke, he says he blew the joke and inadvertently sounded as though he questioned the intelligence of U.S. troops in Iraq. Look me in the eye and tell me, if, with even a fraction of your heart, you think John Kerry meant to question the intelligence of U.S. troops in Iraq."
Former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card: "Well, he's had a past bias that would allow people to believe that....Even more significantly, it's the Democrats that have said, 'John Kerry stay home.'"
Lauer: "And, by the way, I think a lot of Democrats should have shame on their shoulders, because they ran away from this guy, as opposed to standing up and saying it was just a mistake."
— NBC's Today, November 3, 2006.


NBC's Matt Lauer: "You admitted that there were these CIA secret facilities. Okay?"
President George W. Bush: "So what? Why is that not within the law?"
Lauer: "The head of Amnesty International says secret sites are against international law....Are you at all concerned that at some point, even if you get results, there is a blurring the lines of, between ourselves and the people we're trying to protect us against?"     
— Interview shown on NBC's Today, September 11, 2006.



Matt Lauer in Baghdad: "Talk to me...about morale here. We've heard so much about the insurgent attacks, so much about the uncertainty as to when you folks are going to get to go home. How would you describe morale?"
Chief Warrant Officer Randy Kirgiss: "In my unit morale is pretty good. Every day we go out and do our missions and people are ready to execute their missions. They're excited to be here."
Lauer: "How much does that uncertainty of [not] knowing how long you're going to be here impact morale?"
Specialist Steven Chitterer: "Morale is always high. Soldiers know they have a mission. They like taking on new objectives and taking on the new challenges...."
Lauer: "Don't get me wrong here, I think you are probably telling me the truth but a lot of people at home are wondering how that could be possible with the conditions you're facing and with the attacks you're facing. What would you say to those people who are doubtful that morale can be that high?"
Captain Sherman Powell: "Sir, if I got my news from the newspapers also, I'd be pretty depressed as well."
— Exchange on NBC's Today, August 17, 2005.


"Because he did not attend any of the funerals of the fallen soldiers in Iraq, some family members felt he was not showing compassion, or a connection to the suffering that they have felt as a result of this war. Was this trip an effort to blunt that criticism?"
– NBC's Matt Lauer to Condoleezza Rice on Today, Nov. 28, 2003. Since the war began, Bush has repeatedly met with hospitalized soldiers and with the families of those killed in Iraq.



Anti-Gun...

"You know, [Mexican] President Calderon wants a reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that expired during the Bush administration....How can President Obama, who ran against assault weapons, how can he not deliver on that?"
— Lauer to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, April 16, 2009 Today.

Matt Lauer: "Have you ever gotten up one morning, read the newspaper or seen the news about a particularly horrific crime or event that involved a shooting and thought even for a second, I may be on the wrong side of this issue?"
NRA President Charlton Heston: "No, I never felt that."
Lauer: "Never wavered?"
– Exchange on NBC's Today, September 5, 2002.

"Let's take hijacking and potential crimes out of this for a second, and I know you say you don't want to dwell on [a] worst case scenario, but pilots are human beings. They get depressed, they get suicidal, they get angry. If they're armed, isn't that a formula for disaster?"
-Question from NBC's Matt Lauer to the head of the Airline Pilots Association about a plan to permit pilots to carry guns to protect their planes, September 26, 2001 Today.

Matt Lauer: "Let's say I come down to your dealership, I buy a car tomorrow, I get my voucher, I go out and get my gun and then in a week or so I decide that I don't want it, what's to stop me from selling it to anyone I want to sell it to?...."
"And so if then the person that buys that gun from me goes out and commits a crime with it, or God forbid takes a life with it, how are you going to feel at your auto dealership?"
Tennessee car dealer Greg Lambert, who gave free gun to car buyers: "I'm not responsible for the actions of other people...what we need is crime control, not gun control."
Lauer: "Yeah, but why not take away the possibility? If you give someone a CD player, they can't go out and kill someone with it....From what I understand, Mr. Lambert, you're taking the promotion a little bit further. Even children who come to your dealership are going to get a free water pistol, and some people say that's just going too far."
– Aug. 25, 2000 Today interview.

"But isn't it just a case of terrible timing, Mr. LaPierre? I mean, not coincidentally, we've had a show this morning that's been filled with a murder in Los Angeles, a murder in Florida, five people were executed in a Wendy's restaurant here in New York just last week. I mean, this doesn't seem like the time you want to be promoting guns?"
— Matt Lauer to NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre about plans to open a restaurant in Times Square, May 30, 2000 Today.

"When Lauer has to report stories such as the recent first-grade shooting in Michigan, he says, a part of him wishes he weren't a journalist. Then he wouldn't have to appear objective. 'I'd love to be more opinionated about guns.' He fears historians will describe turn-of-the-21st-century America 'in just two words: gun violence.' He tells of attending a party where friends discussed their office layouts – which closets they'd hide in to save their lives. 'People at cocktail parties now talk about their personal safety. There's something really wrong here.'....
"If he could ask President Clinton just two questions: 'It wouldn't be about [Monica Lewinsky]. I'd ask, "What are you going to do about guns? Why not make this issue one of your legacies?'"
-From a profile of Today co-host Matt Lauer by Jeffrey Zaslow in the April 28-30, 2000 edition of USA Weekend.

"And General Powell, one of the aspects of the program that I think may get some attention is that there is training in riflery, in marksmanship here. I understand they use .22 caliber rifles. At a time when we are so sensitive, it seems, to the connection between young people and guns, do you think it's a good idea to be putting them in contact with guns in high school?"
-Today co-host Matt Lauer to Colin Powell in interview about expanding ROTC in high schools, July 30, 1999.

"You'll start debate on the youth violence bill today. That, of course, comes up with tougher punishments for youths who commit crimes with guns. But then you will deal with the actual gun bill. Why talk about the penalties for guns before you talk about the guns themselves?"
-Today co-host Matt Lauer to Congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga.), June 16, 1999.



...but Pro-Green

Co-host Matt Lauer: "The book is called The World Without Us, and it asks the question what would happen to planet Earth if human beings were to suddenly disappear....And really it's all about trying to figure out how long it would take nature to reclaim what we've created."
Co-host Meredith Vieira: "The mess."
Lauer: "How long it would take nature to fix the mess we've made?"
— Teasing upcoming segment on NBC's Today, September 4, 2007.



"A controversy in Washington over what literally could be the end of the world as we know it. Did the Bush administration freeze out scientists trying to sound the alarm on global warming?"
— Lauer on NBC's Today, January 31, 2007.



Matt Lauer: "From your point of view, if you were to run for President you could take this issue [global warming] to the next level, even during just a campaign. And if you were fortunate enough to win the presidency, you'd sit in the most powerful office in the free world with a real chance to make — you could be in a position to save the planet, without putting too much emphasis on it. Wouldn't that be enough of a reason to run for President for you?"     
Former Vice President Al Gore: "Well, I appreciate the impulse behind the question. I am not planning to run...."
Lauer: "But as someone who feels as passionately about the subject as you do, and your documentary is evidence of that, why pass up the opportunity to have that world stage again?"
— Exchange on NBC's Today, December 6, 2006.

                     (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bwe0xEtjrdQ/UCViJDg_CyI/AAAAAAAAbsA/fvDdZehPFIE/s400/1%2BGeorge%2BW.%2BBush.jpg)

5 Things That Will Be Different If Mitt Romney Defeats Barack Obama
By John Hawkins
8/10/2012

       (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-udzJq6V4CIg/UCVnVfBO1TI/AAAAAAAAbtQ/I92n6HojGGs/s1600/8-9-12%2B2.jpg)

Far too much of the campaign season so far has revolved around trivia. That's largely Barack Obama's fault. Obama wants to see more of Mitt's tax returns. Who cares? Obama's rich, but Mitt's really rich; so we should hate him because he has more money than we do -- or something. After Mitt left Bain, some company went bust, some random guy lost his health care and later got it back, but it wasn't as good as it was at Bain; so Mitt killed his wife somehow or another? On the other hand, while Mitt's campaign has at least focused on meaningful issues, the ad dollars have mostly been spent highlighting the sea of incompetence that has been Barack Obama's first four years in the White House, as opposed to what Romney would do when he gets elected. On top of that, neither candidate has exactly been a model of consistency when it comes to his views. So, it's worth asking the question: What will be different if Mitt Romney defeats Barack Obama?

1) Businesses will feel more comfortable hiring and spending money: As William Henry Harrison noted, "The prudent capitalist will never adventure his capital... if there exists a state of uncertainty as to whether the government will repeal tomorrow what it has enacted today." Barack Obama has introduced just that kind of uncertainty into the economy with his demonization of business, Obamacare, the fiscal cliff, and the threat of tax increases in his second term. That's why American corporations have piled up record cash reserves instead of using that money to increase production and hire new workers. Romney will be business-friendly, will oppose tax hikes, cut regulations, and reassure these companies that they're not going to be under attack for the next four years. In and of itself, that should significantly improve the economy and help create jobs.

2) Obamacare will be gutted: Obamacare is essentially Romneycare writ large and if Mitt were perfectly honest, he'd probably tell you that he thinks there's a lot to like in the plan. While there's always an outside chance that Mitt might be looking for some way to save Obamacare, he has gone so far out on a limb to condemn the unpopular plan that there would be serious political ramifications if he doesn't pull the trigger when the time comes. So, whether Obamacare will ultimately live or die on the vine seems likely to depend on who wins in November.

3) Taking a crack at entitlement reform may be tackled: It is impossible for the United States to get its spending under control without real entitlement reform and Barack Obama has chosen to demagogue the issue instead of making a serious attempt to fix the problem. Whether Romney could pull it off is up in the air because realistically, without some Democratic cooperation, it's not going to be possible to reform Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Still, when someone as cautious as Mitt Romney makes the politically risky decision to embrace Paul Ryan's plan, it means something. Mitt may not be able to push through entitlement reform, but if it's passed in the next four years, he'll deserve the lion's share of the credit.

4) Taxes are more likely to go down than up: If Barack Obama is reelected, we can be sure that he will push a number of new tax increases and there are signs that the Republican Party is starting to soften its position on the issue. On the other hand, Mitt Romney is likely to push cuts to the marginal tax rate, the death tax, and the corporate tax rate in an effort to stimulate economic growth. That doesn't mean it's impossible that we could see a tax increase because Democrats are likely to demand higher taxes in return for their cooperation on any sort of serious entitlement reform or deficit reduction plan. However, Obama would be likely to raise taxes significantly in his second term, while Romney would be much more likely to cut them.

5) The Supreme Court may move to the right: Currently, we have four doctrinaire liberals on the Supreme Court (Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer), three originalist conservatives (Alito, Thomas, Scalia), and two right leaning moderates (Roberts, Kennedy). After looking at that precarious balance, consider that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 79, Antonin Scalia is 76, Anthony Kennedy is 75, and Stephen Breyer is 73. What that means is that depending on who retires, a single appointment has the potential to lead to a historic shift on the Court. Given the buzzsaw that George W. Bush ran into when he tried to appoint Harriet Miers, Mitt Romney has very little room to maneuver here. Appointing candidates that the base believes are originalists will be a necessity and then we'll face the same crapshoot that we always do with conservative judges: Will they stay true to the law or move to the left?

    (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2XGzhgYuQY0/UCVlLOIXrFI/AAAAAAAAbsQ/ZN0eWMrcxr4/s1600/8-10-12%2B3.jpg)

If You Like Obama's Failed Policies, Vote for Him
By David Limbaugh
8/10/2012

Those who understand that America is now on the wrong track cannot reasonably vote for Obama in November, because he is absolutely unwilling to change, perhaps even ideologically incapable of changing, course. Evidence abounds.

First, consider his disastrous economic record and his rejection of any semblance of a course change. He and his economic advisers told us his stimulus would keep unemployment below 8 percent. It didn't. He didn't consider for a second that his policies exacerbated the economic crisis. He blamed Bush and said that if anything, he -- Obama -- hadn't spent enough. He demanded more stimulus packages -- high-speed rail, other infrastructure, American Jobs Act. He continued to grow government in a wide variety of areas; things continued to get worse. No sign of any significant economic recovery; we had the worst recovery in 50 years. No sign of unemployment relief. He didn't change course.

Despite his failed performance, he told us in 2009 that only the government could break this business cycle. He told us in Osawatomie, Kan., that the private sector couldn't lead us back to economic vitality on its own. Recently, he told us that successful entrepreneurs didn't build their businesses -- or roads or bridges or whatever claptrap he pretended to have meant. He refuses to reconsider his flawed notions. Arrogance, as much as ignorance.

If you think that despite all this, Obama may have learned his lesson and will change course going forward, you are fooling yourself. Obama won't change his economic policies, because he is addicted to spending and to growing government on several levels. His economic philosophy, his ideology and his political survival demand that he stay the course.

He firmly believes that only government spending -- Keynesian pump priming -- can stimulate a moribund economy. He believes it to the point that he's willing to bankrupt the nation to do it. His philosophy countenances no other alternative methods of recovery, specifically letting the private sector breathe and recover on its own. That's the economic philosophy component.

He also knows that the most efficient way to redistribute wealth and otherwise reallocate resources from groups he believes less deserving to those he believes more deserving is through an increasingly progressive tax code and more government spending. That is, even if he shared the ordinary American's debt aversion and reasonable anxiety about our horrifying financial predicament, he wouldn't discontinue (hasn't discontinued) his pursuit of ever-greater taxing and spending, because to do so would be tantamount to abandoning his quest, his obsession to fundamentally transform America. That's the ideological component.

Finally, he fully realizes that even if he didn't firmly believe in expanding the welfare state -- incentivizing states to expand their food stamp rolls, extending unemployment benefits, sabotaging welfare reform, increasing the percentage of people not paying income taxes and otherwise presiding over the unprecedented swelling of the welfare state and those dependent on government aid of one form or another -- he would still be compelled to continue expanding it because he believes a great majority of his constituents depend on this expansion. He couldn't win re-election without doing so. That's the political component.

The same general themes hold true for Obama's extremist environmental agenda. His policies are enormously destructive to our coal, oil, nuclear energy and natural gas industries, but he shows no signs of letting up, even though these policies are also manifestly destroying American jobs and otherwise harming the economy. Why would he? He telegraphed his actions, and he's merely fulfilling his promise.

While sabotaging our reliable energy sources, he is also throwing as much federal money as he can at failed green energy projects, which are so ill-conceived that a reasonable person might conclude his goal is to waste money. Solyndra wasn't the only such failed enterprise, as we've shown. There were a dozen others, and despite these failures and the unconscionable waste, he has revealed nothing but a defiant determination to double down and spend more on other such projects. It's mind-blowing.

Likewise, he pursued Obamacare with maniacal intensity, even when the public clearly and emphatically registered its dissent. His response was more haranguing speeches to browbeat the recalcitrant, ignorant masses into seeing his superior wisdom. Even after the stated purposes for his grand design have been shown to be fundamentally flawed -- it's going to bend the cost curve up, not down, and dramatically so, and it's going to leave 30 million people uninsured -- he is more determined than ever to implement it against the people's will.

I am just getting warmed up here; I haven't even discussed his politics of division or his wars on business, our defenses and the Constitution.

The bottom line is this: If you like Obama's record, vote for him, because you're only going to get more of it -- way more if he wins and thinks he has a mandate.

         (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0PzbqMRDEZY/UCVoSgjalII/AAAAAAAAbtc/0ZZM6ClHWiU/s1600/8-10-12%2B2.jpg)

Unfit To Govern
By Mona Charen
8/10/2012

We have reached a point in the 2012 campaign when you long for a referee -- someone with a whistle to call foul and declare that one side has so discredited itself that it must forfeit points or be otherwise disqualified.

Nancy Pelosi, the leader who warned that we were losing "500 million jobs a month" without the stimulus bill and who said "God bless them" regarding Occupy Wall Street but condemned the tea party as "AstroTurf," has declared that the Republican Party supports E. coli. True, it's not news when Pelosi mangles the facts. But until her colleagues demote her, she remains the leader of House Democrats. Speaking at a fundraiser, she described the Republican Party as follows: "It's an ideology. We shouldn't have a government role. So reduce the police, the fire, the teachers -- reduce their role." As a mother, she continued, "You could depend on the government for one thing -- it was about, you had to be able to trust the water that our kids drank and the food that they ate. But this is the E. coli club. They do not want to spend money to do that."

In an ideal world, a loud buzzer would issue from the heavens. Foul! The Democrats have presided over an expansion of the welfare state to the point where 1 in 3 American households now receive some form of welfare. That's 100 million Americans receiving benefits -- excluding those receiving Social Security, Medicare and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Yet to suggest that the federal government must reduce the rate of increase in federal spending -- or even to cut back to the comparatively sane levels of spending that prevailed under Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- is to be the party of E. coli. Maybe Pelosi should stick to theology. She once explained that the Catholic Church didn't oppose abortion.

Don't look to the other body for relief. The Senate majority leader, who holds a post usually associated with at least a minimal level of dignity, has descended into outright McCarthyism -- claiming that "the word is out" that Mitt Romney hadn't paid taxes in 10 years. How did the "word" get out? Some anonymous caller supposedly told it to Harry Reid. Where's that buzzer? An equivalent accusation would be for John Boehner to announce that "the word is out" that Barack Obama quietly and illegally gutted the work requirements in the welfare reform law passed in 1996. Oh, wait ...

Now, an Obama Super PAC, Priorities USA, has issued an ad that is so cartoonish that it seems to have come straight from The Onion. A former employee of GST Steel, Joe Soptic, accuses Mitt Romney of closing the plant. Actually, the plant was shut down two years after Romney left Bain. Soptic then relates that his wife became ill, but because he had lost his health coverage due to the plant closing, she couldn't afford health coverage and died of cancer. Not quite. The plant closed in 2001. She died in 2006. Ranae Soptic didn't lose health coverage because of what happened to her husband. She was covered by her own employer, until an injury caused her to lose her job. The ad closes with Soptic saying, "I do not think Mitt Romney realizes what he's done to anyone, and furthermore I do not think Mitt Romney is concerned." Buzz.

As CNN and others have noted, Soptic has cooperated with the Obama campaign before and appeared in an Obama ad back in May -- though, oddly, Obama campaign advisor Robert Gibbs insists that he "doesn't know the specifics of this woman's case." Bain bought the troubled steel company, couldn't revive it and closed it. It's possible that if Bain hadn't invested in the company, it would have closed in 1993 instead of 2001. It's possible that even if Ranae Soptic's cancer had been detected earlier, she would have died anyway. It's possible that Joe Soptic might have contracted cancer if the plant had remained open, leaving his wife a widow. Who knows? The beat of a butterfly's wings in Bolivia supposedly can cause a thunderstorm in Bangor. But never let a misfortune go to waste when you can accuse your opponent of murder.

This has become the season of Democrat disgrace. Beyond running the dirtiest, emptiest and most deceptive campaign in memory, the party has demonstrated a total incapacity to govern. The Democrat-controlled Senate has not passed a budget -- the sine qua non of governing -- in more than three years. Under Reid's leadership, no budget resolution has even been brought to the floor. The federal debt, under Barack Obama, has increased by more than $5 trillion in less than four years. The economy is stalled. After saying (in a nonelection year) that he lacked the power unilaterally to alter immigration laws, the president did exactly that. The administration was so heedless of national security in its haste to laud Obama's accomplishments that even the usually phlegmatic former Obama administration secretary of defense, Robert Gates, felt obliged to tell the president's national security advisor to "shut the f--- up."
There is no cosmic buzzer. It's all up to us voters.

     (http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/K/S/4/Obama-Gas-Prices.jpg)

When an Insufferable Blowhard Runs Out of Money. This is What it Looks Like:
By John Ransom
8/10/2012

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/08/10/when_an_insufferable_blowhard_runs_out_of_money_this_is_what_it_looks_like

Let me set the scene for you: Rising oil and gas prices, rising equity prices and falling housing prices. Storm signals start winking on the global economic front after a month of a braggadocious presidential tour telling us all that finally the economy has got it right; that it's on its way to recovery.

Where have I seen this film before? Oh yeah: February 2010, 2011, 2012.

In his State of the Union address of January 2011 and 2012, Obama was bragging about his economic accomplishments.

"We are poised for progress," he told Congress in 2011. "Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again."

At the start of 2011, the president was an insufferable blowhard, anxious to let us know that he saved the economy. He was even more of a blowhard in December going into 2012.

But after successfully destabilizing the Islamic world by intervening in Libya, Obama, along with loose money policies of the Federal Reserve, created successively higher oil prices as more and more regimes felt pressure from the Islamic Spring and Obama stifled production at home. And it wasn't just oil prices, either, that went up. Food prices, gold and silver and other basic material prices were heading up just at a time when the global economy was showing signs of slowing.
Inflation then acted as a brake on economies that were struggling to gain traction.

Then Mr. President Obama- who has always looked disinterested in real policy work- took several long vacations, inspired a sovereign debt crisis in the US and started the class warfare rhetoric that he now clings to bitterly as a substitute for religion and guns and real tax reform.

Several sovereign debt crises later, the largest economic union in the world, the Eurozone, is on life support, while China deteriorates economically and Japan is listless.

And how did America do in this after all of Obama's bragging?

Corporate profits are mixed, unemployment is ticking back up, while GDP grows at about 1.5 percent annually. The S&P 500 returned a measly 1.02 percent for 2011, however much Obama was roaring about the stock market in January.

Apparently the president doesn't get to decide in January what the market will do for the year.

Now Obama knows that.

Investors, who make economic decisions, not political speeches, didn't buy the all-is-well mantra and bought very little equity in the stock market in 2011, despite "record profits."

This time around, in 2012, as Obama's economy rises from the dead once again, he's claiming only to have saved the auto industry on the backs of the taxpayers' gift of ten and twenty dollars bills that stretches out a billion times.

General Motors, which made "record profits" last year, after getting the largest forgivable loan in the history of mankind- seriously- from the federal government, has announced profits have plunged.

Investors haven't been buying those "record profits" either, chasing shares down to $20 from an offering of $33 in late 2010. $54 is break even for taxpayers- I guess investors were waiting for higher "record profits" before they are convinced that GM is as valuable as Obama says.

Now Obama has a big problem.

He wants you to believe that the economy is so bad that he needed trillions more to fix it. If that's true, then all the bragging in the world by him isn't going to remove the responsibility he has for the mess that he's created over three years.

But he also wants you to think that things are improving as well. If that's true, if unemployment is heading downward, as Obama would want you to believe, then the question becomes: Why does he need trillions more to fix an economy already in recovery?

It's clear the both-ways president, as usual, wants it both ways. He wants to declaim any responsibility for anything, while taking credit for everything.

He got Bin Laden, he saved GM and he blamed Bush.

Subtle clues can be seen in places other than the bottom line of the employment report that the economy is fragile and at risk of fracturing.

Let's for a moment ignore the contortions that socialist economists execute in order to make it appear the best-of-times and the worst-of-times alternately for the benefit of Obama.

Millions of people have left the workforce in the last year, driving labor participation rates to a 30 year low and costing the economy literally hundreds of billions of dollars per year. Consumer sentiment is down markedly, but that's a lagging indicator of the economy. Confidence will be meaningful only on election-day. Even still, consumer confidence is well below what is considered healthy- for an economy or a president.

Getting the picture?

While GDP was not-so great in the first half, that was a one-off event. It will be a disaster in the second half of the year. And the first quarter of 2013 will be decidedly worse, maybe even 2008-9 type worse.

Already we have seen durable goods orders drop. And quarterly dividend futures point to companies eager to retain cash despite "record profits."

Now add into that potent mix of economic miasma: 1) an Obama energy policy that has resulted in higher, less stable prices; 2) an Obama foreign policy that has resulted in more hostile and less stable global relationships, and; 3) world wide central bank policies that admits of one conclusion: We are out of money.

We. Are. Out. Of. Money.

So this is what it looks like when an insufferable blow hard runs out of money?

Yes, sir.

   (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8pbOXXloWvk/UCQdO9qfAKI/AAAAAAAAbn8/wDDOjmIDcFY/s1600/Israel%2B-%2BWorld%2BFlag.jpg)

Health Care, Israeli-Style
By P. David Hornik on 8.9.12 @ 6:07AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/09/health-care-israeli-style

When good deeds don't pay.

On Wednesday one of Israel's largest dailies had a scoop: four months ago a man from Gaza received urgent medical treatment at Beilinson Hospital in Petah Tikva, Israel. He had had a serious cardiac episode that no hospital in Gaza was able to treat.

Not such a scoop, one might think? The man was the husband of Suhila Abd el-Salam Ahmed Haniyeh -- sister of Ismail Haniyeh, political leader of Hamas in Gaza and an ideological enemy of Israel, to put it mildly.

Haniyeh's movement, Hamas, says in its charter that "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"; and quotes the famous hadith: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'"

And Hamas regularly acts in the spirit of such statements, having killed and injured thousands of Israelis in suicide bombings, rocket firings, and other terror. As for Ismail Haniyeh, you can see him here at Hamas's 24th anniversary rally in Gaza last December 14, bellowing decidedly unfriendly things about Israel such as:

the armed resistance and the armed struggle are the path and the strategic choice for liberating the Palestinian land, from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river, and for the expulsion of the [Israeli] invaders and usurpers from the blessed land of Palestine. The Hamas movement will lead Intifada after Intifada until we liberate Palestine -- all of Palestine, Allah willing.... We won't relinquish one inch of the land of Palestine.

Words that don't leave much room for a "two-state solution" or any sort of peaceful rapprochement. Most recently Haniyeh has blamed Israel for Sunday night's terror attack at the Israeli-Egyptian border, in which global-jihad terrorists killed 16 Egyptian border guards, commandeered their armored vehicle, and would have rammed it into an Israeli community if not stopped in time by the Israeli army and air force. Egypt, rather than pinning this exploit on Israel, has been retaliating against comrades of the actual culprits.

It was this background, then, that made the lifesaving treatment of Haniyeh's brother-in-law by an Israeli hospital noteworthy -- not the fact that the brother-in-law is a Palestinian. In 2010 over 100,000 Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza were treated in Israeli hospitals, over 100 Palestinian doctors interned at them, and five organ donations were performed.

In one notorious case, a Palestinian woman patient from Gaza didn't show much appreciation for her treatment. In 2005 Wafa al-Biri was treated at Soroka Hospital in Beersheva for burns sustained over 45 percent of her body in a gas-cooker accident. Her family wrote a thank-you note to the hospital on her behalf. Two months later Al-Biri, on the way to Soroka for follow-up tests, was detained at a checkpoint; hidden in her clothing was a 20-pound bomb with which, she said, she had hoped to kill 30 to 50 Jews once inside the hospital. [/color]

Though admittedly an extreme case, it would be nice to think this large number of Palestinians' benefiting from Israeli medicine would have a conciliatory effect. In the case of Haniyeh's brother-in-law, the above-linked report says that, after his cardiac episode, the couple filed an urgent entry request with Israeli authorities, a Palestinian ambulance transported the husband to the Erez Crossing, [and] he was moved to [an Israeli ambulance] and taken to the hospital in Petah Tikva along with his wife.

The husband was hospitalized in Israel for about a week, during which his condition was stabilized. Following the treatment, the couple returned to Gaza.

When the chips were down, then, they knew not only that an Israeli hospital could give lifesaving treatment that Gaza hospitals couldn't give, but that there was a chance the Israeli authorities would consent to their request even though Gaza is a hostile entity that instills hate and regularly bombards Israel with rockets and mortars -- in part at the instigation of the distressed man's own brother-in-law.

Ideally, this would induce soul-searching not only about Israel's technological superiority but a value system that sees the humanity even of members of a hostile population. There is, though, no sign of such a reckoning.

        (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KxWJ0ZcvHIg/UCIRRWm4IAI/AAAAAAAAbac/MmxGOE0oa8U/s1600/8-7-12%2B3.jpg)

Something that surprises me, but probably shouldn't, is that college towns are inevitably centers of left-wing derangement.  Whether we're discussing Berkeley (CA), Boulder (CO) or Cambridge (MA), there is more conformity of thought and opinion than you are likely to find anywhere outside a gathering of Islamic mullahs or Obuma's election headquarters.  Ivory towers, whether they're located in New York or Texas, are just another name for Towers of Babel.

I think we can all agree that both political parties could do better.  The difference is that the Democrats could hardly do worse.  It also occurs to me that politics is not only show business for ugly people, but when you consider such ignoramuses as Patty Murray, Barbara Boxer, Andre Carson, Nancy Pelosi and Sheila Jackson Lee, you realize it also provides gainful employment for those too ignorant to pass a civil service exam.

I find it odd that Romney has been labeled a flip-flopper when it's Obuma who should go to London and compete for a gold medal.  Nobody can approach him when it comes to flipping; as for flopping, he's setting records that may never be equaled.

For instance, he said he would be a one-term president if his trillion dollar stimulus didn't keep unemployment from exceeding eight percent.  Under his stewardship, it's never been below that figure.  He also vowed to cut the deficit in half.

This is the same big-eared oaf who said his efforts would create five million energy sector jobs, and who, after two years of spouting off about how his program would create millions of shovel-ready jobs, admitted, while sharing a chuckle with his pal, jobs czar Jeffrey Immelt, that there was no such thing as a shovel-ready job.

He also said that doing things his way would put a stop to home foreclosures and that ObumaCare would lower health care costs by $2,500-a-year for the average family.  If Pinocchio had uttered such enormous whoppers, a platoon of eagles could have perched on his shnoz.

Obuma said a person would have to be a "Insane-Hussein" to raise taxes in the middle of a recession, and then proved it by trying to raise income taxes on those making over $250,000, hiking taxes on dividends from 15% to 43%, and doubling the current 15% rate on capital gains.

As for Obuma's oft-stated desire to raise income taxes on the top 1%, in spite of the fact that it would hurt businesses looking to expand and individuals looking to invest, the increased annual revenue would cover a scant eight days at the rate Obuma blows through our tax dollars.

It's actually closer to six days if it's a week during which his wife is taking one of her vacations at our expense.

When you get right down to it, aside from Michelle and his Chicago cronies, there are only two people who have a good reason to be grateful that Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma was elected in 2008.  The first is Jimmy Carter, who is no longer the worst president in U.S. history.  The other is George W. Bush, who left office under a cloud, but who now, by comparison, looks more and more like Mt. Rushmore material.

Keep em coming, Warph.  While some of us see it clearly, it may take awhile for others.  Sooner or later maybe it will soak in somewhere.

For those who are reading all this consolidated agony and can see America heading down the entirely wrong path, it might be wise to remember two words on November 6th:  Democrat and Moderate. 

Why Democrats?  That should be self explanatory by now.

Why moderates some will ask?  Because it is they who have too often foolishly 'reached across the isle' and handed our country over to the likes of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer & others of the same ilk.  Happens in Topeka all the time, and there's a real battle raging over it right now in Kansas political circles.  Heck, even we have a local democrat who switched parties on paper a few years back and is still in office. Why the D to R switch?  Because a real conservative light bulb came on?  Can't see that from the evidence.  No, likely the change was a strategy just to get elected, and they would surely self describe today as moderate.  Looking at our mill levy (among other things), I'm not  sure that's turned out too well for the taxpayers.

Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.  Alexander Hamilton

It sure was nice of Mitt to introduce Paul Ryan as the next President. Now I know who I can vote for!...The one who sticks his foot in his mouth the least often! ;) HA!

Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 11, 2012, 11:26:44 AM
It sure was nice of Mitt to introduce Paul Ryan as the next President. Now I know who I can vote for!...The one who sticks his foot in his mouth the least often! ;) HA!

Good... if not Mitt, then go for Paul Ryan!  ;)  :laugh:


(http://rlv.zcache.com/paul_ryan_for_vice_president_tees-r8645285b458545acb9eb0741536a06e4_f0ceo_325.jpg)

          (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UlRTxKdHsz8/UCKHVYy3JLI/AAAAAAAAbd0/cRUi84OL2M8/s400/Japan%2Btidal%2Bwave.bmp)

Scientists Baffled - What was missing in Japan?

There was an article in the US World Report regarding the orderly behavior of the Japanese citizens and the absence of looting after the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear nightmare.

Social scientists were baffled by the total non-existence of looting and savage behavior in Japan considering the magnitude of this catastrophe. They conferred with human study organizations as well as sociology experts throughout the United States.

Finally, after days and days of studies and meetings, they came to a conclusion.

          Guess what was missing in Japan??


          (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3a54XV182Oo/UCKHic8rYdI/AAAAAAAAbeA/KXZY6y6T2vY/s400/Blacks%2Blooting.bmp)

          The entitlement crowd!

          The Truth hurts.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 11, 2012, 11:26:44 AM
It sure was nice of Mitt to introduce Paul Ryan as the next President. Now I know who I can vote for!...The one who sticks his foot in his mouth the least often! ;) HA!

My oh my, Diane... lookie what I found:

Barack Obuma: Let me introduce, the NEXT PRESIDENT (Whoops) .. the next vp of the U.S. ... Joe Biden!  ;D

             

                How To Destroy America!

Re-elect Barack Insane-Hussein Obama

   (http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/169847.jpeg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mbWFsN2TDuk/UBqvBjNlpGI/AAAAAAAAazQ/8qQVJ0D-90E/s1600/obama_lies.jpg)


It Begins: Democrats Repeat 'Lie of the Year' on Medicare
By Guy Benson
8/11/2012

Well, that didn't take long:

In an effort to scare senior citizens, Democrats repeated and overheated a charge that Politifact branded the 2011 "lie of the year" upon hearing that Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., has joined Mitt Romney as a running mate.

    (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ErgcpOoHWwk/UCdJRu7ysUI/AAAAAAAAbxM/8T0QHtS4_HY/s1600/Obama%2BSebelius%2Bkillers.jpg)

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee called Ryan "the architect of the Republican plan to kill Medicare" in a fundraising message sent by DCCC executive director Robby Mook. Mook explained the thinking behind making that charge in the next line, explaining that he wants to define Ryan in the minds of the American people as quickly as possible.

        (http://patriotupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/obama-lies-cartoon.jpg)

Lie Of The Year:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/

Remember, Politifact is a Left-leaning outfit, yet even they felt compelled to slam Democrats for their egregious distortions of Paul Ryan's Medicare plan. This debate is just getting (re) started, so here are a few key points to keep in mind as the "kill Medicare" falsehood gets spread far and wide:

(1) The Republican reform plan totally exempts anyone over the age of 55 from any changes. When President Obama promised Americans "if you like your plan, you can keep it" to push Obamacare, he didn't tell the truth. The Ryan plan explicitly, in black and white, protects current and soon-to-be seniors. No changes.(This is what scares the living crap out of Obuma!)

(2) The Democrats' non-plan does the opposite. It has already slashed more than half-a-trillion dollars (Update: $741 Billion, according to the latest CBO score) from Medicare to fund Obamacare, and it has established an unaccountable and extremely powerful bureaucratic board to ration care in order to keep costs down. To repeat, current seniors have already seen their Medicare cut by President Obama, not Republicans.

(3) Medicare's own accountants have calculated that Medicare will be insolvent within 12 years. As Democrats claim that Romney and Ryan want to "kill Medicare" or "end Medicare as we know it," they fail to mention that the calendar and basic arithmetic will do that in the face of inaction. Doing nothing is President Obama's plan because it tempts voters with the illusion that everything is going to be just fine, and that he's protecting them from "draconian cuts." He hopes this charade will get him through the election cycle. But reality is gaining on us. Medicare "as we know it" will be obliterated for generations to come unless we start making changes for the future, while shielding people currently at or near retirement from any switch. Between items two and three on this list, the truth is revealed: Democrats' plans cut Medicare, and Democrats' calculated inaction will result in its ultimate demise. The Republican plan is an urgently necessary move to save the program.

(4) After his plan was criticized for being too partisan in the first "Path to Prosperity" budget, Paul Ryan adjusted his reforms in the FY 2013 version. He updated his Medicare reform to embrace a bipartsian solution he co-crafted with progressive Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), which maintains the original "premium support" model, but includes traditional Medicare as an option for future seniors. Again, the Medicare reform plan for future seniors is bipartisan, and co-authored by a committed liberal who understands that the clock is running out to save the program. The updated version's provisions are also means-tested, meaning they entail more federal assistance to poorer and sicker future seniors than richer and healthier ones.

(5) The Romney/Ryan plan does not impose "draconian and radical cuts." In fact, the Republican budget increases spending. Every year. It simply slows the rate of increase. The most recent House-passed budget increases spending from $3.53 Trillion to $4.88 Trillion within the next ten years. This does, however, spend trillions less than President Obama's unanimously-defeated budgets envisioned. In case you hadn't noticed, we're broke, and it's getting worse.

Democrats are going to go all-in to ensure that these facts never see the light of day. They will try to frighten current seniors and paint Romney and Ryan as heartless monsters. The best response is to tell the truth, early and often -- and to push back hard. Why are Democrats actually cutting Medicare to pay for a new expensive entitlement program? Why have they set up a rationing board for the elderly? And what is their plan to avoid the 2024 Medicare expiration date, according to their own government numbers? As we've learned, they don't have answers to these questions. The president hopes he will evade these issues by constantly blaming and distorting. Don't let him get away with that abdication of leadership; Paul Ryan certainly won't. For these reasons, the Romney campaign says bring it on:

The Romney campaign relishes this fight. There is only one person in this race who has already cut Medicare for seniors, and that is President Obama. Obamacare cut Medicare for America's seniors by $700 billion. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have a bipartisan plan to strengthen Medicare for today and tomorrow's seniors. Obama's campaign has accused Mitt Romney of committing crimes and killing people, and now they have turned their smear campaign to Paul Ryan. They have lost all credibility.

UPDATE - Rasmussen shows that Paul Ryan's favorability rating is above water by double digits overall, and sky high among seniors. This is a good starting point, but there are many persuadables, and the Left will throw everything they've got at him to plunge those figures into the toilet.

For years now, I have tried to envision just how bizarre a world run entirely by liberals would be, but, with each passing day, I realize how limited I am by an imagination that can never totally encompass the extent of their lunacy.  For instance, the U.S. Navy has decided that the new class of carriers will be outfitted without urinals.  This, the Navy insists, will improve "sailors' quality of life."  I have no doubt that their next order of business will be to produce toilet seats that are impossible to raise, thus ensuring that female gobs will never again suffer the indignity of having to lower a toilet seat.

According to a friend of mine, The Dark Knight Rises, the latest Batman saga attacks the rich, indulges the poor and features a vicious mercenary named Bane.  The producers insist that it was not written by an Obuma operative, but one has to assume that at the very least David Axelrod supplied the storyline and got to name the villains.

                                        (http://www.westernfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/obama_food_stamp_presidency-570x427.jpg)

                                      (http://www.vanshaver.com/pictures/1foodstampobama.jpg)

The Obuma administration has not only paid for radio ads pushing people to apply for food stamps, but is also trying to undo Slick Willie's signature legislation, welfare reform, by revising the work requirements.  Towards that end, the Department of Health and Human Resources is defining personal care activities, which I take to mean hair combing, hand washing and nail cutting; massage; attendance at PTA meetings; and even bed rest, as work-related activities.  The upside is that all over America, husbands are now able to defend their afternoon naps as work.  Snoring adds the element of cardio-vascular exercise.  Wives can open their own damn bottles and water their own damn lawns!

Thanks heaven that Mitt Romney saw the light and picked Paul Ryan for his V.P.  At one time when the rumor was floated that Condoleezza Rice was at the top of Romney's V.P. list, I kept hearing that conservative Republicans would be cool to the idea because she had once described her position on abortion as being moderately pro-Choice.  I confess it's a term I had never come across and I still can't make head or tail of it, except I assume it must apply to those women who are slightly pregnant.

College grads score YouTube hit with
'Obama That I Used to Know' parody



College grads playing the role of lovers scorned by President Obama have scored a smash YouTube hit with a parody of Gotye's "Somebody That I Used to Know."

The video, which was tracking toward 400,000 hits Friday morning, faithfully covers the original, only under the title, "Obama That I Used to Know."

The clever parody intersperses some of the president's more soaring lines from the 2008 campaign with laments about the current state of the economy for America's 20-somethings.

"Now and then I think of that Election Day November," the song begins. "When you won, I felt so happy I could die."

Hum along if you know the tune, but it continues:

"You can get addicted to a certain kind of message -- like this is change we can believe in, yes we can.

"But college ended had to pay my rent. At least you're the first gay president. But the change I got is that I moved in with my mother."

And the chorus: "Because you won and then you cut me off. Now your speeches never soar as high as unemployment. You took ObamaCare so far, but you left me like a dog strapped on Romney's car."

Co-creators Justin Monticello and Ryan Newbrough told Fox News they supported the president in 2008, but were reflecting the disillusionment some in their generation are experiencing.

"As the makers of a parody video on YouTube, it's a little tough to speak to everybody, but I think ... it wasn't unnatural to be kind of attracted to the message that he had," Monticello said.

"And I just think that there are some things he hadn't delivered on that he promised to do, and that's why some people are feeling disillusioned."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/10/college-grads-score-youtube-hit-with-obama-that-used-to-know-parody/#ixzz23N5EDJX9

How was the dust storm?

Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 12, 2012, 05:55:35 PM
How was the dust storm?

This monsoon season has been mostly duststorms with very little rain.  We had two duststorms last week here in Surprise which is the northwest part of Phoenix.  The one yesterday came up through the eastern side of Phoenix
so we saw very little of it.  It is amazing how fast they move.  By the way, it was 118 degrees outside on my patio today.


Here are some pictures of past duststorms:


(http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/assets/660/371/DustStorm.JPG)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8uO1URb2hm4/TnCIVfIGRyI/AAAAAAAABbs/y8DUdLhVkPo/s1600/Phoenix-dust-storm.jpg)

(http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/07/19/1226097/510878-110719arizona-dust-storm.jpg)

(http://www.scenicreflections.com/files/Phoenix_Fire_Blaze_Heat_Wallpaper_gm4ym.jpg)

Remember when Barack Insane Obuma said: "I don't want to run auto companies, and I don't want to run banks." He changed his mind.

Today, Obuma, speaking in the depressed city of Pueblo, Colorado, heaped praise upon himself for his uncanny ability to use other people's money to nationalize unproductive companies:

"I said, I believe in American workers, I believe in this this American industry, and now the American auto industry has come roaring back.  Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."

So partial nationalization of the entire manufacturing sector.  Hmmm....sounds like this plan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-Year_Plans_for_the_National_Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union

Quote from: Warph on August 12, 2012, 09:42:24 PM

Remember when Barack Insane Obuma said: "I don't want to run auto companies, and I don't want to run banks." He changed his mind.

Today, Obuma, speaking in the depressed city of Pueblo, Colorado, heaped praise upon himself for his uncanny ability to use other people's money to nationalize unproductive companies:

"I said, I believe in American workers, I believe in this this American industry, and now the American auto industry has come roaring back.  Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."

So partial nationalization of the entire manufacturing sector.  Hmmm....sounds like this plan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-Year_Plans_for_the_National_Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union

Fascism/statism at its finest.  would make hitler proud!

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_Kp5ELohk84/UCdl-suzZaI/AAAAAAAAb2g/_w38uwyGlZg/s1600/RushobamaRadicalBookJustBOOK.jpg)


Since the beginning of our current political and cultural environment during the term of Barrack Obama we've heard many references to his political mentor, Saul Alinsky. For years, people have described how profoundly Alinsky has influenced Obama and his team. I finally concluded that it was time to sacrifice myself on behalf of the readers of this column and buy Alinsky's book (Rules for Radicals), and then report back exactly what Alinsky has to say.

Though short, this book can be quite challenging. First, it was written in 1971, an era that evokes images of bad clothing and ill-kempt people (only partially redeemed by some mighty fine music). Second, as are most things leftist, it is relentlessly negative. God, these people are unhappy. Finally, much of the book is written in "leftist-ese," which means it contains rambling statements filled with the type of hollow thoughts that you get from college professors. They use multi-syllabic words to dress up their ignorance. While it may have been written for people taking LSD, it is, unfortunately, a deadly serious book.

If you are seeking to be offended, it won't take long. On the third page of the prologue, Alinsky states his belief in "...the realization that all values and factors are relative, fluid, and changing." Thus, he takes very little time to establish his faith in moral relativism – something you could have no doubt assumed -- but which he quickly confirms.

Alinsky divides the world into the Haves, the Have-nots, and the "Have some but want a lot more." He has very little respect for the Have-nots, a group of people in America that has produced tremendous business and political leaders because we have income mobility. He writes that "The Have-nots have a limited faith in their own judgment. They believe the Haves are more intelligent and more competent." He establishes the philosophy that you can lead the Have-nots wherever you want to take them.

Overall, Rules for Radicals is an effective primer on how to start a revolution. Alinsky defines the keywords you need to understand, and how best to communicate them. He dedicates an entire chapter to community organizers (sound familiar?), in which he emphasizes the key points necessary to effectively organize. Another chapter discusses whether the ends justify the means, and he ultimately rationalizes that accomplishing your objectives by virtually any means is acceptable (since by Alinsky's definition, others have done so in the past).

The heart of the book is the chapter on tactics, in which he enumerates and describes thirteen of them. Let me list the key ones:

1. Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. This was very effective in the beginning of Obama's campaign against Hillary Clinton in 2008. She held all the cards, but Obama's team used smoke and mirrors to make it look like he was her equal.

3. Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. In his words, you want to create confusion, fear, and retreat. This means that you want your opponent to have to deal with something outside his normal frame of reference. This is the tactic Obama is using to attack Romney's private sector experience – a history that has been universally applauded, but that he now has to defend from scurrilous charges as those made by Joe Soptic about the death of his wife somehow being the responsibility of Romney.

4. Make the enemy live up to their own rules. This is a common leftist tactic. Republicans cannot have a sexual affair because they are proponents of family values, but Democrats can because they are not. If you have no ethical standards, you can't be challenged on them.

8. Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purposes. If you think that what Obama has tried so far in this Presidential election has been nasty – you ain't seen nothing yet.

11. If you push a negative hard, it will break through into its counterside. This certainly is what the Obama team is trying to do. Axelrod and his henchmen repeatedly create scenarios about Romney; and, whether true or not, push them through their media allies, and then keep pushing until the voters believe it and accept it. An example is the coining of the term Romneyhood accusing Romney of wanting to raise taxes on the middle class and lower them for the more successful earners when Romney has asked for a 20% rate cut across the board.

12. The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. This means that if you don't want the opposition to turn the tables on you, concede that you are correct about a problem, and then demand your solution. Thus, Obama will offer no solutions to any problems facing America. He has not and will not. But he will turn this tactic on Romney every chance he gets, and he will hammer any solution that Romney offers. Therefore, if you were wondering why Romney has stayed away from specifics, now you know why. Because of the nature of the opposition, Romney is almost forced into criticizing Obama only on his (manifest) lack of performance.

13. Pick the target it, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. If you've been following this election at all, this is really self-evident. Chicago-style politics were used on Romney even before he became the nominee, and the Chicago gang reached a new low by accusing Romney of committing a felony. Then they went lower by tying him to the death of a woman.

There you go. If any of these rules seem familiar, it's because you're watching them in action. The reason people have cited Alinsky so often when speaking of Obama is that he has lived by this rule book from day one of his political career. Obama and his allies made sure that he was unopposed in his primary for the state senate in 1996 by challenging the signatures of every candidate, including the incumbent. This being Chicago, he had no Republican challenger in the general election.

Despite being unopposed, President Obama now includes anecdotes in his stump speech about how tough that initial election was for him. He states that when he and Mrs. Obama walked precincts, people said "Nobody can pronounce your name. How are you going to win?" If you ever doubted that Obama will say and do virtually anything, you should disabuse yourself of that idea immediately.

Saul Alinsky would be proud.

     (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xHRX1ADWAxA/UCicBlZw1MI/AAAAAAAAb8U/xjgYhF6_fHA/s1600/8-12-12%2B3.jpg)

Barack Obama -- A Transparent Fraud
By Lurita Doan
8/13/2012
http://townhall.com/columnists/luritadoan/2012/08/13/barack_obama__a_transparent_fraud/page/full/

Transparency -- President Obama has committed to making his administration the most open and transparent in history, and WhiteHouse.gov will play a major role in delivering on that promise. The President's executive orders and proclamations will be published for everyone to review, and that's just the beginning of our efforts to provide a window for all Americans into the business of the government. You can also learn about some of the senior leadership in the new administration and about the President's policy priorities.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/change_has_come_to_whitehouse-gov

In January of 2009, Barack Obama promised Americans an "unprecedented" level of transparency in his dealings with the American people and throughout his Administration. Almost four years have passed since that promise, during which time, Americans have witnessed an extraordinary level of deception and obfuscation, all designed to divert attention from the Obama Administration's failure to grow the economy, their failure to create jobs, their failure to curb out-of-control government spending, and their failure to maintain American prestige on the international level.

In fact, Team Obama is basing their entire reelection strategy on a single hope, that while it may not be possible to fool all the people all the time, Barack Obama only needs to fool 50% of the people for another 85 days.

Obama is highly skilled at obscuring the truth. Let's look at the record:

During his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama claimed that he would create 3.5 million jobs by 2012. 2012 is here and the country faces 8.3% unemployment, or so it would seem. However, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, at the request of the Obama Administration has skewed the numbers, artificially lowering the unemployment rate by changing the measurement metrics, re-categorizing some of the applicants for unemployment and dropping others from the jobless rolls if they have been unemployed for too long. Many estimate that the number is far closer to 13% than 8.3% . So, rather than the transparency promised, the Obama Administration has gone to extremes to obfuscate the true unemployment numbers.

The president has not been transparent about taxpayer investments from the Stimulus and other "special interest" programs. For example, the $574 million dollar investment in the failed, solar panel company, Solyndra, is just the tip of the iceberg. The White House has not revealed the true amount of the wasted dollars from failed "green" jobs programs, nor revealed the true extent of its involvement in these failures. This past week, emails revealed that Obama had direct knowledge of the problems with Solyndra, yet continued to tout the success of "green" enterprises and "green" jobs. Hardly the transparency promised.

The Obama Administration's lack of transparency is easily seen in its handling of Fast and Furious. Finding out who knew what and when has been the objective of the questions from Darrell Issa, the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee. But the Obama Administration, including the Attorney General and the president have stalled and equivocated, refusing to provide congress with the complete documents requested, preferring a contempt of congress charge rather than reveal their role in an ill thought, incompetently executed scheme that provided almost 2,000 guns to drug cartels in Mexico. What does that tell Americans about the Obama Administration's commitment to "transparency"?

Obama has not been transparent about the struggles of the small business community which is being crushed by his anti-business policies. Some might argue that the president is simply clueless when in June he proclaimed the "private sector is doing just fine." But how to explain the president's claim: "You didn't build that?"

As a small business owner for 15 years, who often worked 14 hour days, 6 days a week, I don't remember seeing Obama, or any of his ilk, working next to me at 2 a.m. on a Sunday morning, while I was working to grow my business. Obama's transparent scorn, condescension and ignorance are transparent evidence of his hostile attitude towards the American business community.

The Administration has refused to provide transparency into the true cost of Obamacare, and even now, is hiding behind puffery and falsified statistics regarding the cost of Obamacare and about the enforcement of mandatory birth control and abortion provisions triggered by the legislation.

Nor has there been transparency about the funding provided for Obama's "special" czars. Certainly, senate- confirmed czars have publicized budgets and are appropriated funds by congress. However, Obama has appointed a host of other czars, such as the Green Czar, the Education Czar, the Energy Czar. These czars have staffing and infrastructure costs associated with them that were unaccounted for in the FY10, FY11 and FY12 budgets. Little or no transparency exists regarding the total costs of these czars, nor is it clear that the American taxpayer is getting any value for the dollars spent.

There is also a lack of transparency in Obama's Office of Management and Budget. (OMB). Federal government accounting systems, while supposedly following GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles), in reality, have more off-balance sheet items than an ENRON wanna-be. Cleaning up these many and proliferating off-balance sheet budgetary inter-intra agency items is, perhaps, the single most important requirement and the biggest challenge to full transparency and shrinking the size of government. The annual budget reconciliation process, and the "passback" process, offer each federal agency a new chance for transparency, but that too has not been forthcoming.

Now, the president has signed the Sequestration and Transparency Act of 2012 which requires the president, within the next 30 days, to provide transparency into the federal functions that will be cut and the functions that will be exempted from cuts.

Barack Obama has resisted putting pen to paper and making any budgetary decisions over the last four years. No doubt, he will resist the calls and demands from Congress to specify what cuts he will make under the Sequestration Act. Not that it matters much. Anyone paying attention must already know that Obama will continue to expand unsustainable entitlements, and will, instead, push for even deeper cuts in defense.

Even the president's closest allies, such as Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, have expressed alarm with Obama's gambit. Others will be shocked to see just how far Obama will go to push an expansion of the welfare state. So, don't expect Barack Obama to follow the law and outline his sequestration plan; he cannot afford true transparency.

So what can we expect the president to do when he has contradicted, obstructed, or abandoned his promises for transparency at almost every opportunity? Give a speech on Transparency? Obama did just that this past June 2012.

My guess is that in the weeks ahead, instead of being honest and outlining his priorities, the president will continue to willfully mislead Americans by speaking frequently about how committed to "transparency" he is. Such has been the Obama Administration's pattern in the past--to talk about transparency while hiding actions and intentions from the American people.

Ask any successful leader and he or she will tell you that transparency, integrity and accountability are the three pillars of a highly successful, fully-functioning organization. How unfortunate that Barack Obama has none of that DNA.

There is, perhaps, only one area in which the president has been completely transparent. Despite his claims that he would be content to be a "one-term president":


Obama has made it crystal clear that he is willing to do anything:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-campaign-working-to-counter-new-voter-id-laws/2012/05/18/gIQAABVeZU_story.html

Promise anything:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/09/remarks-president-campaign-event-pueblo-colorado

Say anything to get elected to a second term:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/08/07/obama_ad_romney_is_a_murderer

[/font][/size]

(http://cdn.times247.com/media/pictures/50299872f2a8bd2b11002379/slide_obama.jpg?1344903282)

U.S. $25 billion in hole on auto bailout by Obama

The Detroit News
by: David Shepardson
Monday, August 13, 2012

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/treasury-u-s-to-lose-25-billion-on-auto-bailout#ixzz23UAD2GU0

The Treasury Department says in a new report the government expects to lose more than $25 billion on the $85 billion auto bailout. That's 15 percent higher than its previous forecast.

In a monthly report sent to Congress on Friday, the Obama administration boosted its forecast of expected losses by more than $3.3 billion to almost $25.1 billion, up from $21.7 billion in the last quarterly update.

The report may still underestimate the losses. The report covers predicted losses through May 31, when GM's stock price was $22.20 a share.

           (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--hFqdXy8ZFA/UCYFAYLT2GI/AAAAAAAAbu4/_4XkSpwJ220/s1600/5%2BChoking%2Bon%2BBullshit.jpg)

WHEN OBUMA said that nobody does anything on his own, I figured he had me in mind.  I could even hear that annoying voice of his in my ear, saying, "After all, you didn't invent the typewriter, the computer or television; and you sure didn't produce the inkjet or build the Internet highway.  You also didn't produce the food you eat or purify the water you drink.  You didn't even construct your own house."  The reason I could hear him so clearly is because I used to go to college, and those are the sorts of simplistic things that sophomores say when they are trying to be profound; usually after they've had more than a few beers.

Obuma is middle-aged and he hasn't been a college student for nearly 30 years.  But keep in mind that he is a far-left-winger, which is just another way of saying he will be a juvenile until the day he dies.  I would add that the reason he is so convinced that nobody does anything on his own is because he, himself, has done so little.  He is essentially a creature who could have been cobbled together in a cellar, but, unlike Dr. Frankenstein's creation, Igor didn't have to rob a local cemetery in order to supply his master with a brain; in Obama's case, it came vacuum-sealed right from a factory run by the likes of Frank Marshall, Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, George Soros, Valerie Jarrett and Karl Marx.

Or, as Rush Limbaugh put it, the choice in November is between Romney's "Bain Capital" and Obuma's "Das Kapital."

When Obuma said in his 7,849th speech that "We rise and fall as one nation," my face turned beet red and I began to cough so hard my wife nearly dialed 911.  When it comes to politicians, I generally cut them some slack because I understand, as they do, that roughly 50% of the voters are so dumb they'll generally believe the last lie they hear before entering the voting booth.  But even I couldn't give a pass to a guy who talks about one nation when he has devoted the past three years to erecting firewalls between blacks and whites; rich and poor; men and women; Democrats and Republicans; and between the federal government and several states, including Arizona, Texas and Indiana.

Obuma keeps accusing Mitt Romney of wishing to raise taxes on the poor, believing, as usual, that a lie repeated often enough will eventually be mistaken for the truth.  The fact is Romney wants taxes cut on everyone.  I'm the one who wants them raised on the poor.  Well, actually "raised" is the wrong verb.  Half the people in the country don't pay anything in income taxes, although that doesn't prevent the federal government from sending them bribes in the form of "refunds."

I know that the rationale is that even though the poor don't pay income taxes, they pay sales taxes and the like.  Whenever I hear liberals make that claim in defense of the status quo, my reaction is that the rest of us also pay all of those, in addition to having to write the IRS a check every April.

Inasmuch as we already have a progressive tax system, meaning that the top-earning five percent pay 65% of all income taxes, I see no reason why people making less than, say, $40,000- a-year can't be expected to pay one percent.  If they think that $400 is too much to pay for all those roads and bridges that Obama is always going on about, let them forego their voting rights.  If they want to have a say in the way things are run and in deciding which people should run them, I say, borrowing my words from Obuma, Pelosi, Biden, Reid and Wasserman-Schultz, they should pay their fair share.

                 (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zsjUFFmDWY4/UCk9mi6pySI/AAAAAAAAcFs/xnzUckbuduA/s400/7-14-12%2B3.jpg)

A fascinating sidebar to Obuma's war on Bain Capital is that Bain executives have contributed over $120,000 to his re-election campaign.  To me, that sounds an awful lot like chickens chipping in to buy a birthday present for Colonel Sanders, but, what the hell, it's their money.

Speaking of Bain, when watching Obama's TV ads attacking Romney, it's worth recalling that in 2008, slimey candidate Obuma said, "If you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."

At the time, it sounded like he was insulting John McCain, but we now realize that he was merely thinking out loud, hoping that David Axelrod would jot it down for future reference.

Quote from: Warph on August 13, 2012, 07:14:48 PM
Obama has not been transparent about the struggles of the small business community which is being crushed by his anti-business policies. Some might argue that the president is simply clueless when in June he proclaimed the "private sector is doing just fine." But how to explain the president's claim: "You didn't build that?"

While there are those who still argue Obama's actions are simply due to ignorance or inexperience, anyone who has been paying close attention, can easily recognize the clear results of a specific ideology in full gear.  Be it a lack of transparency, support for radicals, deceptions in policy making or end runs around Congress, I, for one, can no longer ignore the historical parallels to the USSR from the Worker's Revolution to the present.  

Obama is clearly operating on the side of the decades old Marxist war against the capitalist and is fully engaged in the very tactics employed in the post revolutionary USSR to move from capitalism through socialism marching toward communism in America.  What remains to be seen is into what final form that path to tyranny will morph.  Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao or Castro, or worse.  In any case, it won't be pretty for the masses in America.

If any one is to be labeled 'clueless' it would be the masses of American voters who have put the 'progressive' enemies of this country in positions of power at all levels of government from the late 1800's to the present.  Most of the fools in Washington started locally as commissioners, mayors or dog catchers and were promoted by the voters.  To those uninformed voters:  Wake up & do some study!  It is the electorate who have let this country get to the shape it's in, and there's little time left for the electorate to turn it around.

Remember three things:
1.  Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
2.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
3. All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

There's an old saying in business and it applies to America...
You're either growing or dying and there's no in between.
Which is it America?

     (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--EYafb7W5EI/UCoJB39hI2I/AAAAAAAAcLs/DvEwY_bEw-c/s1600/BestTail.jpg)

7 Things to Expect If Obama Is Elected to a Second TermBy John Hawkins
8/14/2012

"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." -- Barack Obama

So far, the message of the Obama campaign essentially seems to be, "I'm unable to effectively govern because Republicans won't do everything I want. Re-elect me so I can deliver more of the same. Oh, also Paul Ryan wants to push old people off a cliff while Mitt Romney will give you cancer." That doesn't tell you much about what Obama would try to do in his second term, but given that he appears to be largely indifferent to the law and the wishes of the American people, there's no reason to be hopeful. Furthermore, given how deferential the Supreme Court has been to Obama and the fact that the GOP would undoubtedly be more willing to go along to get along if it's defeated this year, the damage Obama could do in a second term would be incalculable.

1) America's credit rating slides further: Under Barack Obama's leadership, America lost its AAA credit rating for the first time since 1917. That means our country is now more of a gamble to loan money to than Microsoft. Given that Barack Obama has shown zero inclination to get spending under control or seriously tackle entitlement reform, our rating would be practically guaranteed to drop at least another notch. In other words, this country would soon have the same S&P rating as Qatar and the Czech Republic.

2)The middle class will see massive tax increases: Congress has been at an impasse because Republicans want to cut spending and Democrats want to raise taxes. Despite all the talk you hear about the "Buffet Rule," it would produce a comparatively small amount of actual revenue because the rich are close to tapped out. The real money is in the middle class. If we're not going to cut our escalating spending, then taxes on the middle class will have to soar like an eagle fired out of a cannon.

3)Gas and energy prices will be dramatically higher: Obama once said, "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." His Energy Secretary Steven Chu added, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." Is it any wonder that Obama won't drill ANWR, has blocked the Keystone Pipeline, and has slow-walked offshore drilling? Obama views sky high energy prices as a feature, not a bug and if he doesn't have to face the voters again, expect to see energy prices lift off like the manned space shuttles Obama permanently grounded.

4)Obamacare goes into effect: If the GOP controls the House, the Senate, and the White House, it should be able to gut Obamacare and keep it from ever going into effect. On the other hand if Obama is reelected, there's a better chance of the NAACP endorsing Mitt Romney than there is that health care reform will ever be repealed.

5)The Supreme Court moves to the left: Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 79, Antonin Scalia is 76, Anthony Kennedy is 75, and Stephen Breyer is 73. Replacing Ginsburg or Breyer with 50 year old liberals would be bad enough, but imagine Obama selecting a replacement for Scalia or Kennedy. If that happens, Obama would have five guaranteed votes on the Supreme Court for anything he wants to do. Once we get to that point, the Constitution might as well not even exist.

6)Get ready for open borders: Barack Obama has already bypassed Congress to implement the DREAM ACT by fiat, he's planning to break the law to hand out work permits to illegal aliens, he's openly proclaimed that ICE won't pick up many of the illegals detained by Arizona, and illegals are now being released by the border patrol sans proof if they claim they went to high school here. We're very close to having an open border policy right now for any illegal alien who hasn't committed a felony here and in an Obama second term, it's fair to assume that the primary qualification for citizenship would be the ability to sneak into the country.

7)Gun control will be a priority: Barack Obama filled out a "questionnaire in which he called for banning 'the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns'" and he let everyone know what he thought about gun owners even before he was elected with his notorious "bitter clingers" quip. His campaign website doesn't even have a section addressing 2nd Amendment issues, perhaps because Obama would have to admit that he's already calling for a reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban. Without an election to keep him in check, expect Barack Obama to "evolve" on gun control the same way he did on gay marriage.

 
        Hitler Finds Out Paul Ryan is the VP Pick

                     

                          (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ND8DSjV80SA/UCn-4YtgMWI/AAAAAAAAcJE/F_Dv59KnE38/s1600/DWS%2Bwith%2Bhands.jpg)

CNN's Wolf Blitzer Torches Debbie Wasserman-Schultz on Medicare Falsehoods
By Guy Benson
8/13/2012

         

Let me say this right up front: Congratulations to Wolf Blitzer for being a relentless, responsible journalist. If you value the truth, this interview is a pleasure to watch. If you have even an ounce of human compassion for the in-over-her-head target of Blitzer's inquisition, it's positively brutal:

Poor Debbie. She's totally out-gunned and has nowhere to hide. Her talking points are pitifully hollow and cannot withstand even basic questioning. She stubbornly rejects the (correct) premise that the Romney/Ryan Medicare reform plan exempts everyone over the age of 54, and plays fast and loose with numbers -- conflating 55 and 65 on several occasions. When she is brow-beaten into finally acknowledging -- if not admitting -- the truth around the 3:45 mark, she quickly realizes her "mistake" and reverts back into denialism. When Blitzer asks her to specify exactly how current or soon-to-be seniors would be impacted by the GOP plan, she cannot. Because they're not. The Left is intellectually bankrupt on the very subject they claim will allow them to crush Mitt Romney in November. They despise the bipartisan solution Republicans have offered, but they have no alternative of their own.

Dear Democrats, Medicare is slated to go bankrupt in 2024. You say it's wrong for future seniors to be denied Medicare as it currently exists. Okay, what's your plan, guys? We know that your actions have already cut Medicare by $700 Billion to pay for part of Obamacare. We also know that Obamacare establishes a government panel to ration care for the elderly. And yet the 2024 deadline is still coming. Again, what's your plan, Democrats? Mr. President? Anyone? I confronted Wasserman Schutlz on this very question last summer, and she gave an incoherent and inaccurate response. Also, here's video of Paul Ryan destroying DWS' talking point about seniors (read: future seniors) having to pay $6,000 more per year for healthcare. A debt crisis is on the near horizon. Entitlement programs are going under. Twenty-three million Americans are unemployed, underemployed or have given up home. GDP growth is slowing. The president and his allies have no plans, so they're forced to invent smears and argue against positions that their opponents don't hold.

I'll leave you with this clip of my debate with Sally Kohn on Fox News. The topic: Whether comparisons between Paul Ryan and Ronald Reagan are apt. Sally, like many liberals, must pretend that she adores Reagan -- arguing that he was far too liberal to win the GOP nomination these days. (Remember, every Republican is either dumber or more evil than the last). This assertion is laughable, and her characterization of Reagan's record is flat wrong. Kohn also offers some, um, creative "interpretations" of what the Romney/Ryan plan would do:

The Romney/Ryan plan does not raise taxes on anyone, let alone 95 percent of the country.

UPDATE - Just a reminder: I do not pick on DWS because she's an easy target. I hold her to account because she is Barack Obama's hand-picked leader of his party. She's not a fringe player. She's the DNC Chairwoman, installed at the request of the president of the United States. This seems like a good commercial for Mitt Romney: "I picked Paul Ryan. He picked Debbie and Joe. I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message."

      (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlDDQ-z1Lok/Tv6xdMVakqI/AAAAAAAASBM/fhL0NbI9H24/s1600/7-3-10%2B3.jpg)

"ROMNEY NOW MORE RIGHT-WING THAN BUSH II, REAGAN AND NIXON COMBINED"
....Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma

At least if you believe sleazy liar Insane-Hussein's latest crazy lies.

Insane-Hussein made one of his strongest pitches to date to rally the women's vote that is crucial to his re-election, telling a mostly female crowd estimated at 4,000 in the swing state of Colorado on Wednesday that "Republicans led by Mitt Romney would take them back to the policies of the 1950s."

So if I understand this correctly, Obuma is claiming that Mitt Romney would be the most right-wing Republican president in 60 years?

That's a pretty impressive claim.  Romney is going to do what Bush II, Reagan and Nixon who are suddenly liberal moderates, didn't do.  Romney, the most liberal nominee in decades, who was on record at one point as supporting abortion and who hardly mentions social issues, is going to take America back to the 1950's.

So there are two possibilities.  Either Mitt Romney is more right-wing than Reagan, Bush II and Nixon... or Obuma is just making up crazy lies and hope his supporters have the collective IQ of a turnip.

(http://wi40and8.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Bald_Eagle_Head_and_American_Flag.jpg)

President Reagan's: 1984 - Morning In America:

       



(http://www.carrot-top.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/f/i/fire_mourning_flag.jpg)

President Obama's: 2010 - Mourning In America:

        [/font][/size][/b]

In an appearance on Fox News Sunday morning, top Obuma advisor David Axelrod... last seen peeping out from under a rock and muttering that he's hardly even heard of "CNN employee" Hilary Rosen... delivered a stunning endorsement of Mitt Romney for President.

Axelrod told Fox host Chris Wallace: "The choice in this election is between an economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead and an economy that continues down the road we're on."

Wow....  Hope and Change, 2012 edition: Vote Mitt Romney!  And this is the guy who's normally in charge of getting people's divorce records leaked to the media so Obuma can win dirty!

Team Romney welcomed Axelrod on board by uploading video of his endorsement to YouTube:



Axelrod will also receive a welcome package of valuable Romney campaign merchandise, including a roof-mounted dog carrier, and a set of Ann Romney's signature limited-edition "Stay-at-Home Mom " bunny slippers.

Obviously this was an epic slip of the tongue, but the way it exposes the intellectual poverty of the Obuma 2012 campaign is fascinating.  Axelrod was trying to paint Obuma as the figure of "hope and change," as though the Oval Office has been vacant since 2009, and everything hasn't gotten horribly worse since George Bush left office.  They really are going to expect America to forget the last four years completely, and give this failed President a mulligan.

In other words, David Axelrod really did endorse Romney for President on Sunday.  His actual campaign strategy is even funnier than his gaffe.[/font][/size]

            (http://www.bank-cd-rates.net/images/Dumb-and-Dumber--46473.jpg)

Biden forgets what state he's in, tells voters Republicans want to 'put y'all back in chains'
By: John Hayward  
8/14/2012 03:12 PM

[Standard Joe Biden disclaimer: this man is the Vice President of the United States.  He was placed in that position by Barack Obama, who is fully accountable for making that decision.  It is not unreasonable to quote Biden just because everyone knows he's not playing with a full deck.  If he's not responsible for what he says and does, he doesn't belong anywhere near the White House.]

Joe Biden gave a rip-snorting campaign address in Virginia on Tuesday, in which he apparently forget what state he was in, telling Virginia voters that "with you – and I mean this – with your help, we can win North Carolina again."  Either he's terribly confused, or he's encouraging vote fraud.  

        (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3Vf3QC_Plm8/UCwAPkYvxFI/AAAAAAAAcRU/boSDh-ww0zg/s1600/8-15-12%2B4.jpg)

Biden also regaled his audience with a little slavery metaphor, saying of his Republican opponents: "Look at their budget, and what they are proposing.  Romney wants to let–he said in the first hundred days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules.  Unchain Wall Street.  They're going to put y'all back in chains."

     


       

You might have missed the part of Mitt Romney's campaign platform where he said he'd let banks write their own rules.  It's right next to the part where he says he wants to bring slavery back.

This is your campaign, Democrats?  This is your "new tone" of high-minded civility?  This is how you're going to deal with the economic and fiscal crisis Barack Obama has inflicted on this nation through his policies – by telling them Republicans want to "put y'all back in chains?"

When Barack Obama spoke in Arizona, after the awful shooting rampage that left so many innocent people dead, he said it was "important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds."  It was a big applause line, even though it was thin gruel, considering that Obama knew perfectly well liberals – all the way up to the New York Times – were openly blaming conservatives for inspiring that killing spree, merely by expressing their ideas.  The Obama campaign now seems dead-set on making a fool of everyone who applauded his hollow, meaningless rhetoric.[/font][/size]

Warph,
I still expect Odumbo to dump that idiot Biden before Nov and replace him with Hillary. I hope not. Really looking  forward to him and Ryan going at it in the VP debate. I still think Biden was formally Dick Martin of Rowan & Martin's Laugh In.

YOu know i got a question. Why is it that if we were to say the hell with obama and go up there and toss his ass out of the whitehouse by force, that it would be considered treasonous and anti-government.  Thinkingabout it, its not anti government nor is it treason. It is tossing a inept, bumbling fool, out of the office of president.  IT would not be attacking the office just the fool that occupies it. 

Same question with the thieves in congress. They have committed theft, extortion, embezzlement, many high crimes against this country.  I think it would be a good precedent to set to hold them accountable and toss their ass out too.  Put in some honest decent folks. Like 10% farmers, 10% blue collar, 10% service industry workers, 10% of each type of representation of the individuals in this country except for lawyers and only allow 1% lawyers or judges. 

IF we managed to do that, i think there would be a real change in this country for the better AND we could actually provide for those who cannot provide for themselves.  Just need some farmers sense in there.

                      (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9CrqLbZ_Y6E/UCv9mKU37ZI/AAAAAAAAcQ8/dMtydHeoceQ/s1600/8-14-12%2B4.jpg)

Obama Campaign Goes Racist, Anti-Semitic
By Ben Shapiro
8/15/2012

Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate has utterly unhinged the Obama campaign. Last week they were happily jabbering about Romney's record at Bain Capital, implying that he had killed a man's wife, stating that he was a tax cheat and blaming him for outsourcing jobs. This week they're stuck defending Barack Obama's $700 billion cuts to Medicare and spending addiction.

That leaves the Democrats with one solution: get ugly.

Joe Biden led off the festivities in Virginia this week, where he informed the population of 49-percent-black Danville that "he said in the first 100 days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules -- unchain Wall Street. They gonna put y'all back in chains." That last line is a direct transcription -- Biden lapsed into a heavy southern accent, clearly making a slavery reference. According to the Obama campaign, then, Romney's Wall Street plans are the same as placing Americans in chains. If that isn't insulting to black Americans, nothing will be.

But the Obama campaign wasn't done. The same day Biden unleashed his inner race-baiter, the Obama campaign's Julianna Smoot send out a mass email accusing Ryan of "making a pilgrimage" to Las Vegas to "kiss the ring" of Jewish mega donor Sheldon Adelson. This was an obvious attempt to drive a wedge between Ryan and blue-collar Catholics by invoking anti-Semitic imagery; the implication is that Ryan, instead of making a pilgrimage to Rome to kiss the ring of the Pope, was heading to Vegas to kiss the ring of a wealthy Jew. Ryan, the email implied, was a Judas willing to sacrifice religion for money in the Sodom and Gomorrah of Vegas.

This isn't just nasty campaigning. It's vile campaigning.

It wasn't surprising, of course -- not after the Obama campaign seemingly worked hand-in-glove with a super PAC to release an ad accusing Romney of murdering Joe Soptic's wife of cancer after Bain Capital fired Soptic and Soptic lost his health insurance. It wasn't surprising after the vulgarities that seem to spout daily from the Obama headquarters; their emails suggest that they must win the "damn" election and their staffers call Obamacare opponents "mother---ers." No hope and change to be found here -- just vulgarity and racism.

Just because the Obama campaign is running a disgusting campaign doesn't mean it will hurt them. Negative campaigns remain extraordinarily effective. But it won't work against the revitalized Romney-Ryan ticket. Ryan is simply too likeable -- 50 percent of Americans like him, as opposed to 32 percent who don't -- and he is highly intelligent and scrupulously honest. That means he'll be tough to categorize with the left's three favorite anti-conservative insults: stupid (Palin), corrupt (Nixon) and mean (Bush). Ryan isn't extreme; he's praised by people like ... Barack Obama and Erskine Bowles.

The question that remains for the American public is whether they can be polarized by the divide-and-conquer rhetoric of the Obama campaign.

If Obama can't convince Americans that Romney-Ryan will destroy America, he'll have to destroy America himself to ensure re-election by separating Americans by race, sexuality and religion. That's precisely what he's doing.

                (http://localtvwnep.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/voter-id-e1345046234496.jpg?w=402)


Pennsylvania judge refuses to block voter ID law
By: John Hayward
8/15/2012 09:37 AM

In another big victory against vote fraud, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson has refused to block a law requiring voters to show photo ID at the polls.

Check out the ridiculously biased lead paragraph from the Associated Press story:  "A Pennsylvania judge on Wednesday refused to stop a tough new voter identification law from going into effect, which Democrats say will suppress votes among President Barack Obama's supporters."


You don't hear anything about what supporters of the law say until a single sentence in the fourth paragraph, which is immediately countered: "Republicans defend the law as necessary to protect the integrity of the election. But Democrats say the law will make it harder for the elderly, minorities, the poor and college students to vote, as part of a partisan scheme to help the Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, beat Democratic Obama."

Way down at the end of the piece, readers learn that "the state is planning to begin issuing a special photo ID card for registered voters who are unable to get a PennDOT-issued ID and lack any other photo ID that is acceptable under the law, such as a passport or active-duty military ID," and also beginning a large-scale P.R. campaign to make sure citizens understand the law. Why, those scheming, disenfranchising monsters.

The remainder of the article is entirely concerned with relaying complaints from critics of the law. The only person quoted in the story is ACLU laywer Witold J. Walczak, who vowed, "We're not done, it's not over. It's why they make appeals courts."

Thus is the impression created that this judge must be some sort of blind fool or partisan operative, to allow such a patently obvious outrage to remain in effect. (In fact, the article makes a point of noting that Judge Simpson is a Republican.) Why, Pennsylvania is going to ask voters to show the same kind of ID they're expected to present when they purchase beer! Can't everyone see how that's racism?

Here's another howler from the AP story: "The original rationale in Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled Legislature for the law – to prevent election fraud – played little role in the case before Simpson since the state's lawyers acknowledged that they are 'not aware of any incidents of in person voter fraud.' Instead, they insisted that lawmakers properly exercised their latitude to make election-related laws when they chose to require voters to show widely available forms of photo identification."

In other words, our legal system does not cease to function simply because liberals don't like the results. It's the same old Catch-22 argument vote fraud defenders love to fall back on: we can't detect and punish fraudulent voters, because that's racism; and since we can't march any convicted fraudsters before the camera, we can't institute common-sense procedures to detect them.

At any rate, it looks like there will be no temporary injunction blocking the law, but appeals will be filed, and Eric Holder's Justice Department – which has been very active in blocking sensible voter identification laws – is still mulling over an intervention.

Update: Horace Cooper, adjunct fellow of the National Center for Public Policy Research, hailed the Pennsylvania decision: "Once again critics of Voter ID lost in court over a legal claim that they knew or should have known was invalid. Today the district court in PA ruled that opponents of Voter ID were wrong to claim that Pennsylvania's Voter ID law was unlawful and should be enjoined. The court recognized that Pennsylvania acted within its authority to prevent voter fraud and we're confident this fall the commonsense requirement for Voter ID will be in full effect on election day."

Cooper went on to say that "the argument put forward by the Left was so weak it didn't meet the lower threshold necessary even to grant an injunction."

"The Pennsylvania standard for an injunction is similar to the federal standard," Cooper explained. "The plaintiff 'must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits [i.e., win at trial], that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.' In this case, the arguments put forward by the ACLU and other critics of voter ID were not likely to prevail on the merits and demonstrated no irreparable harm, and so the judge recognized that granted relief was not in the public interest. This is a devastating critique of the arguments of the opponents of Voter ID in Pennsylvania."

Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma and team had
much to say about Mitt Romney placing a dog in a car top kennel.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YvY1cm1xRoY/T5FunpmOAeI/AAAAAAAAOas/vMyjfbdhHYQ/s640/dog+meat+dog,+obama+cartoons.jpg)

(http://media.gazettextra.com/img/photos/2012/04/19/eric_t700.jpg?)

There are numerous cartoons and mocking pieces
about it in the news and on the net.
This comes  from the man who munched on Indonesian Grilled Puppy.

(http://thehayride.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Obama-Doggy.jpg)

(http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama-explains-dog-eating-past-500x527.jpg)

(http://cdn.blogs.fredericksburg.com/toontalk/files/2012/04/cj042012_color.jpg)


The Presidential dog must live in constant fear in the
White House where Obuma salivates every time he see's him.

(http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/Y/X/4/Obama-Dog-Eating-Jokes.jpg)

(http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/run_bo_run.jpg)

(http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/obama-eat-dog-bo-dnc-bbq-trembling-spoof.jpg)

The campaign is getting stupid and vicious. The
White House does not have answers or real discussion,
they just like to attack.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9CrqLbZ_Y6E/UCv9mKU37ZI/AAAAAAAAcQ8/dMtydHeoceQ/s1600/8-14-12%2B4.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-D_1inEmzncY/UC1PbUo9d-I/AAAAAAAAcbg/OyJJjNc9Zws/s1600/8-16-12%2B1.jpg)

Joe Biden, who was shocked that a black man like Obuma could be clean and articulate and who said "You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.", declares to a room full of people that the Romney want to put  'y'al back into chains'.   He is known for making some outrageous comments based on race.  But racist and cruel comments are okay if you are an extremist on the left.





(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZmMK6zln0ts/UC1LdzRv5BI/AAAAAAAAcaU/FXEMk-sm-Wc/s1600/8-15-12%2B8.jpg)

This is not like the campaign of Jimmy Carter or John Kennedy or most Democrat candidates.   Those campaigns were not vicious  and cheesy like this.  The cheap shots are flying around quickly.

This is the old school Chicago thug style by this thug, Obuma in Capone's Hat:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-44vlXTu-VNc/UCxqufW1A7I/AAAAAAAAK9s/SWU3X_l7pdA/s1600/Caponey.jpg)

The campaign this thug waged against Hillary Clinton was dirty and desperate, probably the worst in modern politics.   I wondered at the personalities of those who saw what went on and still voted for Obuma.  I especially wondered at their view of women.  It is, as they say, Chicago style thug tactics.  

Issues lie by the side of the road in favor of smears and innuendo and lies.  This characterized other campaigns run by this crew as well.  That is on record.  And there are lies and distortions about what the other side says and believes and maintains.  Again, outrageous.

I would like to think that people would want better candidates than Obama and the thuggish men he brings along with him, but, I am not sure anymore.

Standards are so low today because of Chicago Style Thug Politics!

               (http://www.mulvaneyforcongress.com/images/obamacare_chart.png)

Obama's Medicare Fear Mongering Will Drown in the Facts
By David Limbaugh
8/17/2012

Analysts may be correct that the presidential election won't primarily turn on entitlements reform, but by choosing Paul Ryan as his running mate, Mitt Romney can, contrary to conventional wisdom, make it a winning issue and lay the foundation for a reform mandate when he wins.

Besides, the economy and entitlements are wholly integrated issues: We cannot ultimately fix the economy long term without entitlement reform, and we can't balance the budget or retire the debt without a growing economy.

Democrats appear jubilant about the Ryan pick, believing his close association with entitlement reform provides an opening for them to scare seniors into thinking they'll lose Medicare and Social Security benefits. But what they haven't factored in, or are pretending to deny, is that Ryan's presence on the ticket ensures that Romney and Ryan will tackle the entitlements issue head on and that Democrats will not have the luxury of merely fear mongering. They'll have to deal with the substance of these issues, and this is a battle they cannot win, because the facts are their foe. Let's examine these facts briefly.

No one can reasonably deny that Medicare is headed for insolvency, and that Medicare's insolvency, if not rectified, will lead to the federal government's insolvency. President Obama has admitted that Medicare is on an unsustainable course and that no amount of tax increases can fix it. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that Medicare spending has increased fivefold in the past 42 years, dramatically more than all other categories of federal spending.

Short of severe price controls ordered and enforced by Obamacare's Independent Payment Advisory Board, which common sense and the history of such controls demonstrate will not work to reduce costs absent rationing and radical reductions in access to care, Obama has no plan to restructure entitlements. Only a restructuring of the program can work.

The Ryan-Wyden plan (Sen. Ron Wyden is a Democrat), which Romney has essentially embraced, is a type of hybrid system that includes market reforms while guaranteeing comprehensive coverage for Medicare beneficiaries. That is, the law would provide guaranteed coverage, but the costs for such coverage would not be unilaterally determined by the government and thus open-ended, out of control and manageable only by rationing boards (resulting in reduced access to care), but by a competitive process.

Under the current system (and under Obamacare), the government sets the price (the reimbursement), and the absence of competition guarantees spiraling costs and/or rationing. Under Ryan-Wyden, a bidding process among insurance providers, including a federal insurance provider, would determine the government's premium-support payment to Medicare beneficiaries and would ensure that their out-of-pocket costs won't exceed those under the current system unless they choose a more expensive option. This bidding process -- competitive by definition -- would contain or reduce costs.

Recent studies have shown that such competition works. The Medicare Advantage program, which was far less ambitious than Ryan-Wyden, produced a 9 percent cost reduction. The savings under Ryan-Wyden should be substantially greater.

Team Obama has no plan of its own and no credible rebuttal for the Ryan-Wyden model, so they have begun a vigorous disinformation campaign to distort the Romney-endorsed plan.

They say his plan would end Medicare as we know it. To the contrary, it is the only plan on the table that has a chance of saving Medicare from insolvency. Those now 55 and older would receive Medicare benefits as they currently exist. As for all others, they would receive the same type of comprehensive coverage (though the costs of that coverage would be reduced through market forces), and the older, sicker and poorer would receive preferential treatment.

In fact, it is Obama, not the GOP, who has assaulted Medicare, robbing it of $716 billion to shore up Obamacare. Obama can't deny that he's pilfered this money from Medicare, but speciously argues that it is a cut to health care providers, not Medicare beneficiaries. But cuts to health care providers always result in a reduction to access. Indeed, Obama's own Medicare actuaries have warned that these cuts could result in providers discontinuing their participation in Medicare.  

Obama also fraudulently claims that Ryan's original plan didn't put Obamacare's stolen $716 billion back into the Medicare fund, either. But Ryan's plan never took that money out in the first place because it involved a full repeal of Obamacare. Romney, for his part, clearly doesn't contemplate robbing the Medicare fund. Obama doesn't believe in market reforms and so has no ideas other than to impose top-down cost controls, which cannot work. His re-election guarantees the insolvency of Medicare -- and ultimately of the entire federal government.

The Romney-Ryan plan preserves benefits for current and future seniors and would drive costs down through competition, thereby shoring up Medicare's solvency and averting the principal driver of national insolvency. This is a debate Obama can't win on the merits, so expect increasing demagoguery, fear and stridency. But the truth will prevail.

                      (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ODS-pIOBSPw/Swy5C_a0vJI/AAAAAAAACJk/l3V63rxODmE/s1600/Navy_SEALs_in_Afghanistan_prior_to_Red_Wing.jpg)


       U.S. Sen. Feinstein (D) says White House at least partially
              behind intelligence leaks
                         

A group of former U.S. Special Forces and intelligence operatives have created a non-profit social welfare organization named, Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund, Inc, to campaign against intelligence and military leaks.

                                                 http://www.opsecteam.org/index.html

The OPSEC group says it is not political and aims to save American lives. Its first public salvo is a 22-minute film that includes criticism of Obama and his administration. The film, to be released on Wednesday, was seen in advance by Reuters.

"Mr. President, you did not kill Osama bin Laden, America did. The work that the American military has done killed Osama bin Laden. You did not," Ben Smith, identified as a Navy SEAL, says in the film.

"As a citizen, it is my civic duty to tell the president to stop leaking information to the enemy," Smith continues. "It will get Americans killed."

An Obama campaign official said: "No one in this group is in a position to speak with any authority on these issues and on what impact these leaks might have, and it's clear they've resorted to making things up for purely political reasons."

                 (http://www.topnews.in/files/Navy-Seals.png)            

Navy SEAL on Obama: "They're Just Saying Things That Will Get Them Re-Elected But Will Get Us Killed"

Bill Vollono has the breakdown of the incredibly compelling Special Ops Against Obama video that was posted on YouTube only yesterday but has already received over 601,000 hits!!! Swift Boat 2.0?

Intelligence and Special Operations forces are furious and frustrated at how President Obama and those in positions of authority have exploited their service for political advantage. Countless leaks, interviews and decisions by the Obama Administration and other government officials have undermined the success of our Intelligence and Special Operations forces and put future missions and personnel at risk.

                     

The unwarranted and dangerous public disclosure of Special Forces Operations is so serious -- that for the first time ever -- former operators have agreed to risk their reputations and go 'on the record' in a special documentary titled "Dishonorable Disclosures." Its goal is to educate America about serious breaches of security and prevent them from ever happening again.

Use of military ranks, titles & photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement of the Dept of the Army or the Department of Defense. All individuals are no longer in active service with any federal agency or military service.[/font][/size][/b]

The star of the video, Benjamin Smith appeared with Megyn Kelly to add a few more swift kicks to the Obama Administration. This is a passionate guy. Love it.

                     

It is not noted whether or not the Obama campaign official took the time to watch the video. In light of that uncertainty, here is a list of those featured in the video, along with their credentials:

(I would consider them in a position to speak with some authority.)

Those featured in the video:

Debbie Lee – mother of Navy Seal Marc Alan Lee, the first Navy Seal killed in Iraq.

Dave Lamorte – CIA Officer (Ret.), US Army Special Forces (Ret.)

Anonymous – Retired, Classified, CIA Officer

Ben Smith – Former Navy SEAL, Operation Iraqi Freedom

Bill Cowan – Lt. Colonel, USMC (Ret.), Special Mission Unit Operator

Dave King – Major, Special Forces (Ret.), Wounded 9/11 at Pentagon

Brian Gould – Master Sergeant, Special Forces (Ret.)

Jamie Williamson – Colonel, Special Forces (Ret.)

Fred Rustmann – CIA Officer (Ret.), CLA

Scott Taylor – Former Navy SEAL

Paul Vallely – Major General, US Army (Ret.), Deputy Commanding General - PACIF

Those quoted in print:

Senator Dianne Feinstein - Chairman of Select Committee on Intelligence

Robert Mueller - FBI Director

Senator Bob Kerrey – Former Navy SEAL

              (http://www.easyonlinestudy.com/images/topten/armyimage/israil-army.jpg)

Israel ready for 30-day war after Iran strike: minister

JERUSALEM (AFP) Wednesday, August 15, 2012 5:12:19 AM

Israel is prepared for a 30-day war on multiple fronts should it decide to strike Iran, and is "ready as never before" for such a clash, the outgoing home front defence minister said Wednesday.

In an interview with the Maariv newspaper, Matan Vilnai said Israel was ready to face the consequences of a clash with Iran that could be sparked if the Jewish state decides to launch a strike against Tehran's nuclear programme.

But he warned that any military engagement should be weighed carefully, and cautioned that Israel should "always coordinate" with the United States

"The assessments are for a war that will last 30 days on a number of fronts," he said, repeating the predictions of other senior Israeli officials that the Jewish state would suffer around 500 deaths in such a clash.

"It could be that there will be less fatalities, but it could be there will be more, that is the scenario that we are preparing for according to the best experts."

Speculation has risen in recent weeks about the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear programme, which the Jewish state and much of the international community believes masks a weapons drive.

Tehran vehemently denies those accusations, saying the programme is for peaceful energy and medical purposes.

As the speculation grows, observers in Israel have raised concern about the country's preparedness for war.

But Vilnai brushed aside such concerns, saying there was "no reason for hysteria."


AFP (http://s.tt/1kSuB)

            (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5nUZCN_lJ9U/UC3vvf-DeBI/AAAAAAAAccw/pRMt_siFm8w/s1600/8-16-12%2B5.jpg)

In spite of all the alleged gaffes the left-wing press accused Mitt Romney of having made during his time abroad, I thought he was terrific.  First, he gave the Brits an honest answer when he was asked about the Olympics.  Who would have ever guessed that the folks who stood up to the Nazi blitz would fall completely apart over an honest assessment of the Games?

Even better was when Romney said the reason that Israel has a flourishing society and that the Palestinians are stuck in the Dark Ages is because different cultures emphasize different values.  If one group of people supports free speech, freedom of religion and the rights of women and, moreover, places a premium on education and hard work, while another fosters ignorance, intolerance and hate, stifles free enterprise and believes that all it takes to achieve Paradise is to blow up a busload of Jewish children, it's not too difficult to guess which society will prosper.

Speaking of Romney, when NBC news anchor Brian "Liberal Ragster" Williams asked him if it was true, as an unnamed source had told him, that he was considering an incredibly boring white guy to be his running mate, Romney quipped, "But you told me you weren't available."  Reagan couldn't have said it better.

And speaking of unnamed sources, you may have noticed that Obuma hasn't called Harry Reid on the carpet for first starting the rumor that Romney didn't pay his taxes for 10 years and then referring to himself as an unnamed source when spreading the lie on the floor of the Senate.  This is the same Obuma who lectured the rest of us about civil discourse not too long ago.

Now that Obuma's hair has begun turning gray, I think the folks at Grecian Formula are missing a good bet by not hiring him to do commercials for their product.  It's a natural connection.  After all, when it comes to our economy, this goof has spent the past three years employing the Grecian formula as his model.  As a result, we're nearly in the same dire financial straits as Greece.

It is also worth noting that, whether it's redistributing wealth or fomenting war between rich and poor, Obuma's first priority has been to create a classless society.  In one way, he has clearly succeeded. When you consider the likes of Joe Biden, Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Janet Napolitano, Jay Carney, David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs and Kathleen Sebelius, it would be nearly impossible to even imagine an administration so totally CLASS-LESS!

With Election Day looming in the near-future, I would like to point out to some of my fellow Republicans that they would do well to remove the term "Republicans in Name Only" (RINO) from their lexicon.  I understand that they wish that only hardcore, rock-ribbed, conservatives were ever ensconced in the Oval Office or Congress, but one might as well wish that unicorns were prancing in their garden.  For not only is America not a conservative nation, but, overall, it is barely right of center.  So while it is fortunate that some places can get away with electing true conservatives, most states won't and never will.

But does that mean that we should dismiss and demean the likes of Scott Brown, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe?  After all, they didn't defeat people like Jon Kyl, Saxby Chambliss and John Cornyn.  They defeated a bunch of nutty left-wingers, such as Martha Coakley, Joe Brennan, Tom Andrews and Jean Bright.  And what's more, if they hadn't won those elections in Massachusetts and Maine, the Democrats would have three additional seats in the Senate, and it is highly unlikely that we'd have any chance of unseating Harry "Liar Liar" Reid as majority leader in November.  So the next time you feel like calling someone a RINO, ask yourself who you'd really prefer to see in the U.S. Senate, Scott Brown or Elizabeth "Squaw Woman" Warren.

In conclusion, Kim Jung-un recently reminded people, via North Korea's state-run media, that his father, Kim Jung-il had 11 holes-in-one the first time he played golf.

In related news, the NY Times reported that Barack Insane-Hussein Obuma recently sank 1947 consecutive free throws.

                   (http://monsterfresh.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/obama-blue-tie-machine-gun.jpg)

The following deaths surrounding Obama and his Chicago, Union thug allies come into focus as a window into his reality not wild  "tinfoil" conspiracy notions!

In the meantime, between now and the election, 0bama will be busy pounding as many nails as he can into Uncle Sam's coffin.. Just in case!

http://www.teapartytribune.com/2012/03/20/bare-faced-brutal-power-grab-by-dictator-chicago-thug-obama-2/

THIRTY THREE UNUSUAL DEATHS connected to the Obama White House

1. Andrew Breitbart – Died of a massive heart attack, walking outside late at night, alone, in the dark approximately one week before he was to produce tapes of Obama's extremist activities in college.

More speculation?: Breitbart: "Wait" Till They See What Happens March 1st, Breitbart's Footage Shows Obama Palling Around With Terrorists.....

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I Spoke with Andrew Breitbart Shortly Before he Died ......An Eyewitness Speaks Out About Andrew Breitbart's Death Scene... Breitbart's skin color described as bright red. (Often an indication of cyanide poisoning! Who were the four "strangers" with whom he had drinks in a bar near his home shortly before this "heart attack"  happened?)

2. Steve Bridges Dies At 48 – Bush Impersonator Who Offended 0bama by also impersonating him using black face make-up... It appeared that he apparently died "prematurely" of (UNCLEAR) "natural causes".  Killing "President Bush" in effigy as a warning for others to back-off?

3. Kam Kuwata – was found dead inside his Venice home after friend  concerned that they had not heard from him for a few days  alerted police. Political consultant in California. Democratic insider. Possibly the Obama consultant referred to in the pointed, derogatory Ulsterman Report:

Alledgedly viewed bizarre drug induced behavior from Obama during the the 2008 campaign.: "The Troubling Timeline".... The Death of a Political Operative "The Troubling Timeline" (UPDATED)

4. Lieutenant Quarles Harris Jr.- A key witness in a federal probe into Obama and his mother's passport information stolen from the State Department, who was fatally shot in front of a District church

5. Christopher Kelly – Committed suicide, under pressure to testify against former Gov. Rod Blagojevich relative to Obama's senatorial election.

6. John Wheeler – former presidential and Pentagon aide John Wheeler III was found in a Delaware garbage dump. Wheeler's cell phone discovered – Cause of death released in Wheeler case, blunt force trauma – Wheeler's cell phone found in a taxi — His family wants information – John Wheeler was assassinated by a hitman in a targeted killing, his widow has claimed – Who killed Jack Wheeler?

7. Donald Young – Openly gay friend of Obama's Murdered at Trinity Church in Chicago -... Key Witness In Obama Passport Fraud Case – Video report: Obama-Donald Young murder (December 24, 2007)

8. Larry Bland and Nate Spencer: Two other black members of Trinity Church Murdered at the same time – Report: Mother Of Obama's Murdered Gay Lover Speaks Up  With Video

9. BEVERLY ECKERT - Continental Flight Victim, Was 9/11 Widow (VIDEO, SLIDESHOW), was at the White House with Barack Obama, part of a meeting this president had with relatives of those killed in the 2001 attacks

10. Michael Scott – Although Chicago school board president Michael Scott's death had been ruled a suicide by the Cook County medical examiner's office, Chicago police characterized the case as a death investigation, and have not concluded that Scott's death was a suicide – he was subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury looking into the admissions practices of Chicago's elite schools. – also was under scrutiny over Olympics-related real estate dealings (with Obama's chief advisor, Iranian born, Valerie Jarrett).

11. David Koschman -  Murdered in a Chicago Rush Street brawl by Richard J. R.J. Vanecko, a nephew of Mayor Daley and White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley - Homicide case involving Daley nephew closed without charges: Witness to Killing, Involving Daley Nephew: "Deceased Didn't Start It"

12. Ashley Turton - wife of the Obama administration's House of Representatives liaison, Dan Turton, was found dead in a burning car Monday morning, Roll Call and other news outlets are reporting. Fire officials said it appeared the car crashed as it was pulling in or out of the garage behind a rowhouse in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C., at about 5 a.m. Neighbors dialed 911 after spotting the fire.

The body was discovered after fire crews doused the blaze. The fire also charred part of the garage. Nobody in the house was injured, fire officials said. Ashley Turton worked as a lobbyist for the utility giant Progress Energy, according to Politico. She was a former staffer for U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. The Rahm Emanuel Connection to the Deceased Ashley Turton, — The ATF investigates – Ashley Turton Crashed "Under the Influence "

13. Dawn Sylvia-Stasiewicz - Obama's First Dog Trainer Dies At 52. Rumored to be salaried at over $102,000 per year at tax-payer expense

14. "SARAH BERKLEY – Author of  "The Jihad at the Ballot Box" – a book examining Obama's relationship with radical Islam. Died in a mysterious car crash in 2003.

15. RUSSELL MCDOUGAL – Former FBI operative, January 23rd, 2007. McDougal was known to hold sensitive information about meetings Barack Obama had with arms smugglers.

His wife was murdered March 2006 after he went public with his initial reports.

His father died July 8, 2006 four hours after McDougal presented his findings on the Savage Nation. Suffered administrative retaliation after reporting discussions by jihadist groups concerning Obama to his superiors.

16. RODRIGO VILLALOPEZ - a television news camera man who shot the footage of Obama PUBLICLY describing small town voters as "bitter" and "clinging" to their guns during the primary season and furious at being filmed doing this.

17. BRIAN GORING – A defense attorney for Obama patron Antoin Rezko during his trial for extortion and bribery. Died of apparent "natural causes".

18. MERCEDES HUGLEY - one of Obama's white, female conquests while at Harvard. Filed sexual assault charges against Obama for date rape in 1990.

Because "date rape" was not considered a crime like it is today, she ended up dropping the charges. Two years later, she was found dead of an apparent cocaine overdose.

19. TAMIKA HILL – A former secretary for Obama's office in Chicago was murdered July 6, 2005 at a rib shack in the south side. Hill had spoken off the record with a reporter from the Chicago Sun Times about meetings Obama had with black militants in the city. She was murdered before she could ever be properly interviewed.

20. HASAD AL SHAREEZ - FBI informant. Reported to his handler in January 2001 that he had a tape about of a person named simply "B. Hussein" meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammad Atta in Prague. Was found shot in the basement of a mosque in Dearborn, MI in October, 2001.

21. DARSANO RAHARDJO – Childhood classmate of Barack Obama when he attended an Islamic madrassa (school) in Indonesia.

Was found with his head cut off in a Jakarta alley way in 1970. Many children at the school attributed Rahardjo's murder to the young Barack Obama.

It was likely done as an initiation ritual, since Islam demands that a boy spill another's blood before the age of ten to prove their loyalty to Allah.

22. REVEREND DAVID MANNING – Former head of the Trinity Baptist Church in Chicago. Was murdered during the apparent robbery of a catfish restaurant in 1972.

Shortly afterwards, Rev. Jeremiah Wright took over as head of Trinity and a many parishioners (who later left the church) suspected Wright in having a hand in Reverend Mannings death.

Decades later, Manning's son JAMAL MANNING was found dead of an apparent crack overdose in 2004. It was rumored he was going to bring evidence of Wright's complicity in his father's death. His testimony was timed to coincide with Obama's first senate race.

23. CHRISTOPHER HARGROVE - A former same-sex lover of Larry Sinclair. Found dead in a hotel room of apparent auto-erotic asphyxiation in January 2001. Was said to have been enraged when he found out that Sinclair had cheated on Jackson with Obama in the back of a limousine. To get revenge, Jackson planned to release digital pictures Sinclair had taken of the Obama encounter on the Internet.

24. PAUL ROTHCHILD – Democrat National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Washington DC in 2003. A "friend and trusted advisor" to senatorial candidate Barack Obama. Dead of an apparent suicide.

25. CURTIS "POOKIE" JACKSON – Chicago drug dealer. Was the subject of a police investigation in which he was suspected of funneling money to Obama's many various community projects. Killed in 1998 in an apparent gang murder.

26. HARVEY KENYON – Head of Obama's senatorial security team in Chicago. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside of Grant Park in 2005. Kenyon's son said his father was building a dossier on Obama. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house

27. SHEILA BAUGH – A Washington DC madame. Died from a gunshot wound. Reported to have a black book of people containing names of influential people who visited the prostitutes in her brothel. One of those names was allegedly Barack Obama.

28. KEYSHAWN "SPOON" CALWORTH – Was found dead of an apparent heroin overdose May 18, 1997. Was reported to have ties to Obama's preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

29. LAWSHAWNA MARTIN – 26 year old mother of five, a Cabrini Green resident with a history of substance abuse. Told two of her co-workers at the Blue Peppermint Gentleman's Club that she would have to quit work because she was pregnant again. Strongly implied that the "baby daddy" was Barack Obama. The next week, she was reported missing.

No body was ever recovered, but Lawshana has not resurfaced since making those remarks.

30. BILL FERGUSON – Senior aide to Barack Obama. Found dead of an "apparent heart attack". (Caused by knowing too much?)

31. GANDY BAUGH – Attorney for Obama friend, convicted felon Antonin Rezko. Died by falling out an eightieth story window of the Hancock Tower, January, 2003. His client was a convicted Chinese spy. He also arranged special deal and documentation (still unclear if it was legal) for Obama's purchase of Obama's current Chicago home and a property extension!

   (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pHp4BeRxnEc/UC9Apj24WEI/AAAAAAAAck8/_7u6p6iK1Vo/s1600/8-6-12%2B1.jpg)

The Bucks Never Stop with President What's-His-Name
By John Ransom
8/17/2012
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/08/17/the_bucks_never_stop_with_obama


There's a millstone hanging around the neck of the US economy.
And his name is Barack Obama.

Blame Bush if you want, but post-9/11, Bush's policies got the country moving in the right direction after a hard right hook.

Blame Bush if you must, but the "blame Bush" mantra doesn't change some critical facts:

You see, George Bush isn't running for president of the United States. Barack Obama is; and voters seem to be aware of this fact, to the dismay, no doubt, of the White House.

The New York Times/CBS News poll "A released Thursday," wrote the Washington Times in April of this year, "didn't ask voters about blame for the economy, but whether they thought an Obama re-election would improve their financial situations. Thirty-eight percent said it would have no effect; 33 percent said it would make their situations worse. Only 26 percent said a second Obama term would improve their economic situations.
You know why they say this? Because while the buck is supposed to stop on the president's desk, the buck- and the bucks- never seems to stop with Obama.

Every time Obama blames Bush, he just reinforces how irrelevant President Scholarship has become.

President Invest-in-Clean-Energy has pretty much had it his own way since his coronation. He spent the money he asked for. If he wanted more, he had two years to ask for it, and Congress would have given it to him.

And despite brave talk from President High-Speed-Rail, he was better at writing books than he has been at being president. Or at least he hired better people to write books for him.

Ah, yes, this is just another thing Sarah Palin was right about that the mainstream media couldn't sniff out for themselves. I guess going to all those colleges worked out better for Palin than having say, one journalism degree from one school and working at one job- journalism- your whole life.

Betcha five bucks that one year under a Palin presidency- or a Bachmann, a Perry, a Romney, or a [shudder, shudder, shudder] (Hillary) Clinton presidency- that the unemployment arrow would be pointing the right way.
Only an ideologue, tied to academic leftist-dogma, could be proud of such a disastrous record as President-Eat-My-Peas-and-Like-it. And apparently he's pursued all these goals on purpose.

And here's the most damning thing about President Class-Warrior: The only people making money so far are the stock traders. Every time I turn around, the stock market is threatening to make new two year highs, companies are reporting record earnings and even evil banks are reporting profits. Things are going swimmingly on Wall Street thanks to zero interest rates and the certainty that the Federal Reserve will provide enough liquidity to make the seas rise along with commodity prices.

Oh, and did I tell you President Fundraiser broke a presidential fundraising record?
The man who claimed he'd raise a billion bucks for his reelection bid won't make that lofty figure, but he'll own the record for the number of fundraisers given by a president.

"In the first 12 days of June," reports ABCNews, "Obama has attended 21 fundraising events. All told, he has now attended 163 re-election fundraisers for his campaign and the Democratic Party – almost double the number George W. Bush attended in his entire first term (86) and more than any other president in history."

And why doesn't it surprise me that President Balanced-Budget raised $300 million and spent a record $204 million so far this cycle?

Spending money recklessly is the only thing President War on Women knows how to do. Imagine what Obama would do with himself if the bucks ever stopped.

The people who are left out in the cold are the vast middle-class, and it includes people who make more than $250,000 a year. People like that, under the right president, can create jobs for the rest of us better than President Tax-the-Rich can with the entire power of the federal government at his disposal.

Whether you're a Democrat, a Republican or a swing voter- I'm talking about voters here- President I-Killed-Osama-bin-Laden-Personally, either created this economy on purpose or created it by accident.

It's time to pick one.

And let the buck stop where it may.

          (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-scIceV5a_Cc/UC6ftuwqrvI/AAAAAAAAcg4/BREHb5KsWmc/s1600/8-18-12%2B1.jpg)


20 Inconvenient Truths About Politics In America
By John Hawkins
8/17/2012
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2012/08/17/20_inconvenient_truths_about_politics_in_america


1) Joseph Goebbels is often credited with saying, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe." Not only was Goebbels right, his comments are at the core of the Democratic Party's messaging strategy.

2) There's a reason why being right isn't enough in our political system. It's because as a general rule in politics, emotions > logic, soundbites > longer, better arguments, negative ads > positive ads, liars > honest politicians, and wrong and easy > right and hard.

3) The race-neutral "people should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin" model that white Americans have overwhelmingly accepted has been rejected by black and Hispanic Americans. Skin color matters to most black and Hispanic Americans and it matters a lot.

4) There is no practical way to balance the budget in the next decade without raising taxes and cutting defense, Social Security, and Medicare.

5) Neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party wants to solve our problem with illegal aliens. Democrats want as many illegal aliens here as possible because they believe they will eventually be able to turn them into poor, dependent American citizens who will vote for them overwhelmingly. Republicans have corrupt allies in the business community who are willing to give the GOP millions in return for cheap illegal labor. Additionally, some Republicans believe that coddling illegals will bring Republicans more Hispanic votes, although that hasn't been borne out by actual election results and it conflicts with the Democratic belief, which is likely correct, that they'll be the ones who'd benefit from illegals becoming citizens.

6) You cannot follow what's going on in D.C. just by listening to politicians talk. In fact, most Americans need a politically savvy translator to explain what's really going on because there is so little resemblance between what politicians say and what they do.

7) In presidential elections, the most indecisive, least informed, least deserving voters end up deciding the winner because they're the ones who are still undecided right before the election.

8 ) The vast majority of politicians in this country care much more about keeping their well-paying, prestigious jobs than they do about taking care of the country. Most of them would far rather back a popular proposal that's terrible for America than do the right thing if it makes it more likely that they won't be elected.

9) Except for the poorest Americans, everyone should have to pay in taxes what he gets back in government services -- along with a little extra to cover the poor. The fact that 47% of Americans aren't being asked to pay income tax and most of the Americans that do pay think they're being taxed far too much tells you that most people don't think they're getting their money's worth in services.

10) In national elections, liberal politicians usually promise to be moderates and later turn out to be lying if they're elected. On the other hand, Republicans usually promise to be conservatives and then break their promises to move to the middle.

11) Because of gerrymandering and the partisan lean of states, a majority of politicians in Congress don't ever have to worry about being beaten by anyone from the opposing party. Because of this, as long as they don't anger any powerful special interest groups from their party that could fund a primary against them, they might as well have a lifetime appointment to Congress.

12) If you don't vote, your opinion is so meaningless that there's no real point to even asking what you think.

13) America's debt crisis along with the rapidly escalating cost of popular programs like Social Security and Medicare practically guarantees that America's military is going to become considerably weaker in the coming decades.

14) The majority of politicians aren't going to appreciate the work you do for them, your small contribution, the signs you put up, or your help in getting them reelected. They will, however, pay a great deal of attention to you after they're elected if you provide them with a lot of money.

15) Americans claim to want politicians who are honest with them. However, in practice most Americans vote for politicians who tell them what they want to hear while calling it honesty.

16) This country is engaged in an unsustainable level of deficit spending. Yet we can't raise taxes on the rich to make a big dent in it, both parties claim to oppose middle class tax cuts, and making spending cuts is unpopular. So it's a lose/lose/lose/lose situation.

17) Politicians from both parties have proven that they can work together in a quick, bipartisan manner. Unfortunately, it only seems to happen when they're wasting extraordinary amounts of taxpayer money or when they're passing far-reaching, poorly-thought-out legislation in response to a crisis.

18) In the political sphere, most of the people who claim to be "victims" haven't been harmed. To the contrary, they're ecstatic about being "victims" because it gives them an opportunity to bask in public attention as the pretend-to-be aggrieved.

19) A majority of Americans have only the most rudimentary understanding of economics, history, budgeting, the way our system of government works, and the hottest political issues of the moment. That being said, these voters still often catch on when politicians are lying to them because the pols talk to them as if they know absolutely nothing instead of a little something about what's going on.

20) There's a simple reason a lot of politicians aren't nearly as concerned about the country going bankrupt as ordinary Americans: They have so much money and influence that they'll have the option of leaving if things get really bad.

                 (http://www.politicallore.com/blog/images/harry_reid_racist.jpg)


How Did Harry Reid Get Rich?  

His career in public service has ended up being remarkably lucrative.

By Betsy Woodruff

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314025/how-did-harry-reid-get-rich-betsy-woodruff

Try this thought experiment. Imagine that someone grows up in poverty, works his way through law school by holding the night shift as a Capitol Hill policeman, and spends all but two years of his career as a public servant. Now imagine that this person's current salary — and he's at the top of his game — is $193,400. You probably wouldn't expect him to have millions in stocks, bonds, and real estate.

But, surprise, he does, if he's our Senate majority leader, whose net worth is between 3 and 10 million dollars, according to OpenSecrets.org. When Harry Reid entered the Nevada legislature in 1982, his net worth was listed as between $1 million and $1.5 million "or more," according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. So, since inquiring minds inquire, let's try to figure out how Reid's career in public service ended up being so lucrative. He hasn't released his tax returns, which makes this an imperfect science, but looking at a few of his investments helps to show how he amassed his wealth.

In 2004, the senator made $700,000 off a land deal that was, to say the least, unorthodox. It started in 1998 when he bought a parcel of land with attorney Jay Brown, a close friend whose name has surfaced multiple times in organized-crime investigations and whom one retired FBI agent described as "always a person of interest." Three years after the purchase, Reid transferred his portion of the property to Patrick Lane LLC, a holding company Brown controlled. But Reid kept putting the property on his financial disclosures, and when the company sold it in 2004, he profited from the deal — a deal on land that he didn't technically own and that had nearly tripled in value in six years.

When his 2010 challenger Sharron Angle asked him in a debate how he had become so wealthy, he said, "I did a very good job investing." Did he ever. On December 20, 2005, he invested $50,000 to $100,000 in the Dow Jones U.S. Energy Sector Fund (IYE), which closed that day at $29.15. The companies whose shares it held included ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, and ConocoPhillips. When he made a partial sale of his shares on August 19, 2008, during congressional recess, IYE closed at $41.82. Just a month later, on September 17, Reid was working to bring to the floor a bill that the Joint Committee on Taxation said would cost oil companies — including those in the fund — billions of dollars in taxes and regulatory fees. The bill passed a few days later, and by October 10, IYE's shares had fallen by 42 percent, to $24.41, for a host of reasons. Savvy investing indeed.

Here's another example: The Los Angeles Times reported in November 2006 that when Reid became Senate majority leader he committed to making earmark reform a priority, saying he'd work to keep congressmen from using federal dollars for pet projects in their districts. It was a good idea but an odd one for the senator to espouse. He had managed to get $18 million set aside to build a bridge across the Colorado River between Laughlin, Nev., and Bullhead City, Ariz., a project that wasn't a priority for either state's transportation agency. His ownership of 160 acres of land nearby that stood to appreciate considerably from the project had nothing to do with the decision, according to one of his aides. The property's value has varied since then. On his financial-disclosure forms from 2006, it was valued at $250,000 to $500,000. Open Secrets now lists it as his most valuable asset, worth $1 million to $5 million as of 2010.

How Reid acquired that land is interesting, too. He put $10,000 into a pension fund his friend Clair Haycock controlled, to take over the 160-acre parcel at a price far below its assessed value. Six months later, Reid introduced legislation that would help Haycock's industry, a move many observers said appeared to be a quid pro quo, though Reid and Haycock denied that the legislation was the result of a property deal.

We don't know how much more money Reid has or how he made all of it. For that, we'd have to see his tax returns.
— Betsy Woodruff is a William F. Buckley Fellow at the National Review Institute.

Why Is There No Liberal Ayn Rand?
By Beverly Gage
(http://www.estatevaults.com/bol/Ann%20Rand%20poster.jpg)(http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002581289/221191013_ayn20rand20atlas20shrugged_xlarge.jpg)
American conservatives have a canon. Why don't American liberals?


Yale professor and political liberal Beverly Gage laments that conservatives have an intellectual tradition carried on in books, but liberals don't.  They used to and note what the key books were but don't any more, leaving them intellectually weak and poorly grounded.  Maybe this is why Liberals are so stupid.  .... Warph

Story at:   http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2012/08/paul_ryan_and_ayn_rand_why_don_t_america_liberals_have_their_own_canon_of_writers_and_thinkers_.single.html

               (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-exqTQ0HAL40/UDHDiSTAqXI/AAAAAAAAcrU/_n3wd9sMxd4/s1600/8-19-12%2B4.jpg)


Is There Anyone Obama Won't Betray?

By John Ransom
8/20/2012

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/08/20/is_there_anyone_obama_wont_betray/page/full/

Bravo to the boys and girls in the military/intelligence community who have stood toe-to-to with Obama for jeopardizing the sources and methods that took out Osama bin Laden.

While the liberal press tries to make hay out of the fact that the folks behind the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund Inc have...gotcha!..."Republican" ties, I'm thinking well thank God for Republicans in the military/intelligence community then. These are folks, well known to me, who have been at war since 2001, while the rest of America has been at the mall.

And why aren't heroes like, [cough, hack] John Kerry- largely a Gilbert and Sullivan sailor- who was so brave, that he spent four whole months in Vietnam; why aren't they speaking out on behalf of service members?

Oh, that's right. Democrats lost their moral compass while experimenting with LSD in the late 1960s.

So we should just give them a pass.

The OPSEC group has a serious point, however: It's bad enough that Democrats, like John Kerry, describe the Global War on Terror as a "bumper sticker." But when the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the United States plays politics with intelligence and the lives of our combat troops, you wonder if its not just LSD flashbacks from the 1960s, but perhaps LSD flash-forwards.

Of course, Obama has no need of drugs per se. When you are the Chosen One, all you need is yourself. Obama's self-love is much more powerful than LSD.

For example, the consternation we have seen between the U.S. and Pakistan for the past year signals the likelihood that at least some portion of the Pakistani government participated in the tip off that killed bin Laden.

The public row in the media between the U.S. and Pakistan was staged by the Pakistanis largely to cover up the fact that the Pakistani government turned on bin Laden. The fight was staged by us to help cover up the fact that they knew that we knew that they knew bin Laden was there for some time.

The average Pakistani revered bin Laden as a hero. So you can understand why the Pakistani government wouldn't want to own up to participating in the operation that took him out.

And the Obama administration has been happy to help advance the cover, even if it jeopardized American lives and the lives of our intelligence assets, by giving up a key person who helped us. Subsequently, Dr. Shakil Afridi, a covert agent operating for the United States, was sentenced to 33 years in prison in Pakistan for helping the CIA confirm the whereabouts of bin Laden.

The thought has hardly crossed Obama's mind that maybe it's time to stop supporting a country that supported America's public enemy number one for so long. And can you blame him? Dr. Afridi's Facebook page only has 38 members. Turning over Dr Afridi to thje Pakistanis was an easy call for Obama. When has Obama actually cared about 38 votes?

I guess there are just some things that the American people take lying down now- like betrayal of a friend.

Obama has made it quite clear that U.S. intelligence assets and U.S. military assets are just the chump change in a strategy of world conquest that largely only exists between the big ears of the One.

Think "Winning."

Likewise, Obama's sucked up to China and Russia as well.

A small insertion in a budget item passed last year bans scientific co-operation between the U.S and our largest creditor, the People's Republic of China. This information according to Congressman Frank Wolf.

China, Wolf charges, has also been involved in anti-American activities that have harmed national interests.

"Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA), a long-time critic of the Chinese government who chairs a House spending committee that oversees several science agencies," said Forbes "inserted the language into the spending legislation to prevent NASA or OSTP from using federal funds 'to ...collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company.'"

It's been an open secret that the Chinese have sponsored a series of cyber attacks on U.S. interests for the last five years, including DoD facilities, intelligence centers and even the White House.

Wolf's own office computers, which contain information about dissident Chinese, have also been hacked from inside China.

Some intelligence types think that in addition to targeting military secrets, China's trying dry runs aimed at taking out our command and control.

But like the Pakistani drama, the Obama administration's words of condemnation regarding Chinese spying are mostly meant to keep us citizens happy.

The Obama administration would never cut off their supply of money by quibbling with China about espionage and national security.

Why would they? They can't even stand up to Pakistan or Russia.

Or Syria.

Obama has decided to ignore the prohibition inserted into the budget by Wolf regarding collaboration with the Chinese.

It's business as usual with China.

There is a growing unease amongst national security types that foreign policy and national security decisions are being made by the administration with an eye towards re-election rather than with the best interest of the United States in mind.

While the same charge can be leveled at any administration, Obama's team, notably less than subtle in matters requiring executive ability, tend to fall back on campaign mode when faced with hard choices.

They pick what's politically expedient rather than what's smart, presidential or right.

Hence Robert Gates decision to exit stage right at the Department of Defense and Hillary Clinton's decision to exit stage left at the State Department after the end of the term.

Will there be anyone competent left in Obama's administration if he were to win a second term?

The operation that got bin Laden isn't helping the administration in the national security community, either.

Far from it.

Many in the community resent the emphatic "I" used by Obama when announcing the operation.

But that's not the worst of it.

By changing the story 26 times in a quest for personal glory, devoid of any personal responsibility, Obama has left the impression that Navy SEALs killed unarmed women and an unarmed, old man, while the One shot and killed bin Laden, personally.

No amount of face time with the commander-in-chief can repair that rift. The chain of command is supposed to support the troops who have followed their orders.

One can argue the merits of continuing the friendship with Pakistan and China and Russia, while ignoring their anti-American activities.

But leaving members of the military out to dry, well, that's just un-American.

Just ask the folks OPSEC.

They have the bumper stickers to prove it.

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide01.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide02.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide03.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide04.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide05.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide06.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide07.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide08.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide09.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide10.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide11.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide12.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide13.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide14.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide15.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide16.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide17.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide18.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide19.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide20.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide21.jpg)




(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide22.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide23.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide24.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide25.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide26.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide27.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide28.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide29.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide30.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide33C.jpg)

(http://opsecteam.org/images/slides/Slide34.jpg)

            (http://insidetheladieslockerroom.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/immigrationq-768063.jpg)

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/16/Arizona-Gov-Brewer-Issues-Executive-Order-Denying-Illegal-Immigrants-Benefits

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Wednesday issued an executive order instructing state agencies to deny benefits to illegal immigrants who get temporary work permits or amnesty under Barack Obama's executive action on illegal immigration.

Wednesday was the first day young illegal immigrants could apply for amnesty and thousands lined up to do so across the country. Brewer's order instructs state agencies to deny driver's licenses and other public benefits to those who get work permits under Obama's executive order.  Huh...  Executive Orders cut both ways, Obuma.

Our Idiot Vice President

By Derek Hunter
8/19/2012
http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2012/08/19/our_idiot_vice_president

(http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/joe-biden-idiot.jpg)
If Vice President Joe Biden didn't exist, you couldn't invent him. You couldn't invent him because no one would believe such a character possibly could exist. No Hollywood producer ever would believe someone that dumb could rise to that level without an "R" after his name.

But if someone did attempt to pitch a TV show with a character like Joe Biden, here is how it might go:

We've got this guy, and he's an idiot. But he's also vice president of the United States. Stay with me. He says things that are provably untrue, and he does it constantly. And not just untrue but outrageously so.

For example, he tells a crowd of black voters that his opponent is "going to put y'all back in chains" in the south. Then he mocks the woman doing sign language for the crowd with a bunch of hand gestures. But he's not done.

See, he's in Virginia, but like a member of Spinal Tap, he tells the crowd he's in North Carolina. And he does all of this not over the course of a campaign, but in one speech.

As background on his character, this sort of stupidity is nothing new for him. In fact, he's sort of legendary for gaffes like this. See, he's VP for the first black president, and when he was running for president himself he called the future president "clean and articulate." He could end it by saying something even dumber, such as, "That's a storybook, man." Even I admit that sounds a bit crazy, that no real human would say that, so maybe not that last bit. Still...

(http://www.proteanservices.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/biden_brain.jpg)

But anyway, we could make him saying dumb things on race a part of his history too. He could say something about going into a 7-Eleven or Dunkin' Donuts and needing a "slight Indian accent," or some other stereotypically stupid thing.

Obviously, we'd have to make it an absurdist farce so it would be believable, but that's doable.

As such, we could give him a full history of lies and saying dumb things.

(http://www.politifake.org/image/political/1105/liberal-intelligence-biden-quote-ignorance-political-poster-1306215322.jpg)

One option would be to have a scene, years earlier, where he chews out someone who asks him about how he did in college and law school. His answer could be like someone really worried his attempt to come off as intelligent could come crushing down, so he snaps at the guy.

He could say something absurd, such as "I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect." Then he could rattle off a list of academic scholarships he earned, how he didn't really care his first year of law school but then started to and graduated in the top half of his class, etc. Only it's all a lie. He eventually has to admit it was all a lie. His scholarship was based on need, not academics, he didn't graduate in the top half of his class – he was 76th out of 85 ... stuff like that.

Better yet, it's the New York Times that calls him out on it. Years later the Times will defend him when he's running for VP because Democrats must be protected, so they paint him as some sort of foreign policy genius. But actually, he will have advised against the raid that kill Osama bin Laden. Absurd, I know. But that's this character. That's what makes it a farce.

Just to make it so over the top, so no one would ever think this caricature is real, we can sprinkle in some plagiarism in law school that he'll pass off as not being sure how to cite things properly. For good measure, we'll even have him plagiarize a biographical passage from a speech of someone else, because who would believe that?

What do you say? Are we in business?

The producers would look at you and say, "No one's going to believe that character exists. There's no way someone with that baggage, that many gaffes, that stupid, could ever become vice president of the United States. But we like the idea, so here's what we suggest. We change his name to Quayle, make him a Republican and change it from a comedy to a drama."

That's about how it would go, but everything I've written about the fictional Joe Biden was said and done by the real one. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

So as you watch the media "vet" Rep. Paul Ryan, just remember how little vetting they did of Joe Biden in 2008. Yet what little vetting the media did of Biden was like a colonoscopy compared to the vetting they did of Barack Obama.

      (http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/3/31/129145609369699124.jpg)

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/20/from-hope-and-change-to-dope-a

From Hope and Change to Dope and Chains

By David Catron on 8.20.12 @ 6:08AM

How inspiration devolved into desperation in four short years.

As everyone in the galaxy has by now learned, our esteemed Vice President spoke before a group of Barack Obama's remaining supporters last week and included the following in his observations about Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan: "Look at what they value, and look at their budget. And look what they're proposing ... unchain Wall Street. They're gonna put y'all back in chains." This was no slip of the tongue. It was in a prepared speech delivered with the aid of a teleprompter, and it is part of the trifecta of fear on which he and his boss are betting in the hope that a majority of the electorate can be frightened into voting for them in November. Biden's slimy race-baiting is the inevitable complement to "Mediscare" and "the war on women."

How sad. Four years ago, then-Senator Obama was an inspirational figure for many. Millions of voters pulled the lever for him and watched with glistening eyes as he declared, "If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time ... tonight is your answer." Four years later, however, he is just another cynical pol. Thus, when his Vice President produced a disgusting minstrel drawl to conflate GOP victory with the return of slavery, he shrugged it off: "The truth is that during the course of these campaigns, folks like to get obsessed with how something was phrased even if everybody personally understands that's not how it was meant."

It would appear, however, that not everyone believes "that's not how it was meant." Douglas Wilder, the grandson of slaves who became the nation's first elected African-American governor when he won Virginia's gubernatorial election in 1989, isn't buying the President's excuses. Shortly after Biden's speech, Wilder said the reference to "chains" was an obvious appeal to race, and he went on to point out that the Vice President's comments revealed his own racism: "Biden separated himself from what he accused the people of doing. As a matter of fact what he said is, they are going to do something to y'all, not to me, not us. So he was still involved with that separate America. And I'm sick and tired of being considered something other than an American."

Wilder, who is a Democrat, went on to characterize Biden's remarks as offensively patronizing to his audience and to African-Americans in general. And the former Virginia governor is not buying the standard "crazy old Joe just committed another faux pas" excuse: "You can forgive people for gaffes, but there comes a time when you realize you're forgiving the same guy for making the same mistakes." Finally, Wilder delivered the unkindest cut of all by suggesting that President Obama would be much better off with a different running mate than Biden: "If Hillary were on that ticket today, based on the job she's done as secretary of state, I think there would be a clearer advantage the president would be seeing."

Wilder is right about Hillary's superiority to Biden. The Vice President is indeed a buffoon. And Ed Klein, author of The Amateur, says Hillary was actually offered the number two spot on the 2012 Obama ticket: "Up until just a couple of weeks ago the White House was putting out feelers to see if Hillary would accept the vice-presidential nod and replace Joe Biden.... But then Hillary had lunch in the White House a couple of weeks ago with Valerie Jarrett ... and she told Valerie that she would not accept the vice president's spot." But even had Hillary accepted, her presence on the ticket would not have obviated the real problem that has forced the White House to trade in the 2008 message of hope for a reelection campaign based on fear -- Obama's pathetic record.

Barack Obama's presidency has been a catalogue of clumsy failures. His domestic initiatives, particularly the "stimulus" package, ObamaCare and the financial "reform" law, have exacerbated the problems they were allegedly meant to solve. His foreign policy has been even more amateurish. Obama's mishandling of the "Arab Spring" has abetted extremists like the Muslim Brotherhood, the "Russian reset" is a dangerous joke, and his politicization of the Osama bin Laden killing has provoked former special operations officers to produce a documentary accusing him of taking undeserved credit for the raid and leaking sensitive secrets about U.S. covert operations to the news media. These and other failures have left the country demonstrably worse off than it was four years ago

Obviously, no President could hope to win reelection running on such an abysmal record. Thus, the Obama reelection crew decided to bet on their trifecta of fear. First, they fabricated the Republican "war on women" and launched it with a faux congressional hearing whose star witness was an upper middle class law student whining about the refusal of a Catholic university to pay for her birth control pills. The President then demonstrated his solidarity with this absurd creature by calling her on the telephone and thanking her for speaking out on his manufactured contraception issue. And, as if to erase any doubt that he actually believes such nonsense will win him votes, he recently made a campaign appearance with her in Denver.

Having thus demonstrated his determination to protect well-heeled law students from the necessity of respecting the religious beliefs that animate schools they voluntarily attend, Obama and his minions then embarked on a "scare the seniors" campaign, in which they accused Mitt Romney of choosing a running mate who wants to "end Medicare as we know it." Never mind that Obama and his accomplices siphoned more than $700 billion from Medicare to pay for Obamacare. Forget about the inconvenient fact that "Medicare as we know it" will begin collapsing under its own weight a mere decade from now, and that Obama has offered no credible plan for preventing this debacle. Just scare the hell out of the oldsters.

Which brings us back to the third horse on the Obama campaign's trifecta -- race baiting. Obama won in 2008 because he was able to turn out a lot of voters who don't always vote. This year, however, there is a noticeable decline in the enthusiasm of these same voters: "Black turnout is traditionally 11% of the total vote. In 2008, it rose to 14%, providing Obama with more than half of his margin of victory. Current polls suggest a reversion to the pre-2008 turnout level." This decline, combined with the disaffection of many independents who voted for him last time, will cost Obama the election. So, he has to scare these voters so badly that their fear drives them to the polls in November to vote against Romney and Ryan.

And that's where good old Joe comes in.

                 (http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/images/joe-biden-village-idiot.jpg)

Obama can't indulge in too much race-baiting himself without further damaging his personal favorability ratings. So, he sent Biden to Virginia to suggest to African Americans that a GOP victory will be the first step in their long march back to the cotton fields. This led Governor Wilder to ask, "Did he feel that these people were so dumb that he had to appeal to them with something like that?" The answer is obviously "yes," and the President clearly shares that view. They both believe that blacks, women, and seniors are so many cattle who can be stampeded with ridiculous lies about the evil genius Mitt Romney and his demonic running mate. No one this cynical should be rewarded with reelection.

                     (http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage_4.img.503.jpg/1345413183554.cached.jpg)

Shocking Newsweek Cover: 'Hit the Road, Barack - Why We Need a New President'
By Noel Sheppard | August 19, 2012


After some of the recent Obama-loving/Romney-bashing Newsweek covers, the one hitting newsstands Monday is guaranteed to turn some heads.

Under the picture of our dear leader are the words, "Hit the Road, Barack: Why We Need a New Leader."

The article is written by Niall Ferguson, a British historian and economist that backed John McCain in 2008.

After an introduction, Ferguson made his case:

In his inaugural address, Obama promised "not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth." He promised to "build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together." He promised to "restore science to its rightful place and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost." And he promised to "transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age." Unfortunately the president's scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

He continued:

The total number of private-sector jobs is still 4.3 million below the January 2008 peak. Meanwhile, since 2008, a staggering 3.6 million Americans have been added to Social Security's disability insurance program. This is one of many ways unemployment is being concealed.

In his fiscal year 2010 budget—the first he presented—the president envisaged growth of 3.2 percent in 2010, 4.0 percent in 2011, 4.6 percent in 2012. The actual numbers were 2.4 percent in 2010 and 1.8 percent in 2011; few forecasters now expect it to be much above 2.3 percent this year.

Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.

Welcome to Obama's America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.

And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.

Ferguson also took aim at the media's coverage of Obama:

Yet the public mistakes his administration's astonishingly uninhibited use of political assassination for a coherent strategy. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London, the civilian proportion of drone casualties was 16 percent last year. Ask yourself how the liberal media would have behaved if George W. Bush had used drones this way. Yet somehow it is only ever Republican secretaries of state who are accused of committing "war crimes."

Indeed. As we've seen in the past three and a half years, Obama can do virtually anything he wants and his media will either applaud or look the other away.

That said, after spending the bulk of his lengthy piece chronicling the current White House resident's missteps, Ferguson spoke glowingly about Paul Ryan:

He is one of only a handful of politicians in Washington who is truly sincere about addressing this country's fiscal crisis....But one thing is clear. Ryan psychs Obama out. This has been apparent ever since the White House went on the offensive against Ryan in the spring of last year. And the reason he psychs him out is that, unlike Obama, Ryan has a plan—as opposed to a narrative—for this country.

The voters now face a stark choice. They can let Barack Obama's rambling, solipsistic narrative continue until they find themselves living in some American version of Europe, with low growth, high unemployment, even higher debt—and real geopolitical decline.

Or they can opt for real change: the kind of change that will end four years of economic underperformance, stop the terrifying accumulation of debt, and reestablish a secure fiscal foundation for American national security.

And this is actually Newsweek's cover story this week making one ask a simple question: Why?

Since Tina Brown's Daily Beast took over the failing magazine, it has been one of the most left-leaning publications in the country.

So why with less than three months to go before Election Day would they publish a 3,200-word cover story severely criticizing Obama whilst basically endorsing his opponent?

Could it be the Daily Beast/Newsweek combination has not been attracting the kind of readership they expected, and they believe a little objectivity was in order?

Or is this just a tiny dose of conservatism before a deluge of the most biased Obama-loving/Romney-bashing imaginable?

As the late Ed Hart used to say, we will know in the fullness of time.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/19/shocking-newsweek-cover-hit-road-barack-why-we-need-new-president#ixzz244SJxc1q

(http://www.thedailybeast.com/etc/clientlibs/dailybeast/img/hd/in-newsweek-magazine.png)

Niall Ferguson: Obama's Gotta Go
Aug 19, 2012 1:00 AM EDT

Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it's clear that the GOP ticket's path to prosperity is our only hope.  

I was a good loser four years ago. "In the grand scheme of history," I wrote the day after Barack Obama's election as president, "four decades is not an especially long time. Yet in that brief period America has gone from the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. to the apotheosis of Barack Obama. You would not be human if you failed to acknowledge this as a cause for great rejoicing."

Despite having been—full disclosure—an adviser to John McCain, I acknowledged his opponent's remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.

Yet the question confronting the country nearly four years later is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.

In his inaugural address, Obama promised "not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth." He promised to "build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together." He promised to "restore science to its rightful place and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost." And he promised to "transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age." Unfortunately the president's scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

In an unguarded moment earlier this year, the president commented that the private sector of the economy was "doing fine." Certainly, the stock market is well up (by 74 percent) relative to the close on Inauguration Day 2009. But the total number of private-sector jobs is still 4.3 million below the January 2008 peak. Meanwhile, since 2008, a staggering 3.6 million Americans have been added to Social Security's disability insurance program. This is one of many ways unemployment is being concealed.

In his fiscal year 2010 budget—the first he presented—the president envisaged growth of 3.2 percent in 2010, 4.0 percent in 2011, 4.6 percent in 2012. The actual numbers were 2.4 percent in 2010 and 1.8 percent in 2011; few forecasters now expect it to be much above 2.3 percent this year.

Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.
Welcome to Obama's America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.


                   (http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage_5.img.503.png/1345408089149.cached.png)

And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.

Not only did the initial fiscal stimulus fade after the sugar rush of 2009, but the president has done absolutely nothing to close the long-term gap between spending and revenue.

His much-vaunted health-care reform will not prevent spending on health programs growing from more than 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent in 2037. Add the projected increase in the costs of Social Security and you are looking at a total bill of 16 percent of GDP 25 years from now. That is only slightly less than the average cost of all federal programs and activities, apart from net interest payments, over the past 40 years. Under this president's policies, the debt is on course to approach 200 percent of GDP in 2037—a mountain of debt that is bound to reduce growth even further.

            (http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage_2.img.503.png/1345323987269.cached.png)


             
            (http://www.thedailybeast.com/content/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage_3.img.503.png/1345324014586.cached.png)

Rest of story at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/08/19/niall-ferguson-on-why-barack-obama-needs-to-go.html

                              (http://rlv.zcache.com/good_bye_obama_speckcase-p176234193987837011vu1z1_400.jpg)

Barack Obama Runs On Empty And Toward Defeat  
By DOUGLAS MACKINNON

http://news.investors.com/article/620954/201208031733/barack-obama-heads-for-a-loss-in-november.htm

The social experiment that was Barack Obama's election and presidency is over. Way over.

As one who was born in the heart of Boston and worked the political world of Washington for 20 years, I know quite a few Democrats. Some are family, and many are close friends. Most voted for Obama in 2008. None at this point is inclined to vote for him in 2012.

Why? Because they view him as an abject failure across the board and have decided to put the welfare of their families and themselves before the empty rhetoric of the Obama campaign before it's too late.

Because of my time in Washington and past positions there, I also know and am friends with quite a few journalists. I speak with many on a regular basis, and it's safe to say that the majority of them lean left politically.

That said, in off-the-record conversations with my left-leaning journalistic friends, not one believes Obama is going to win re-election. Not one. While most believe Mitt Romney to be a weak candidate, they are still convinced that he will comfortably defeat Obama on Nov. 6.

These liberal and jaded journalists privately admit that Obama has been exposed for what he is: an overhyped, self-invented candidate with no real-world experience who has been frozen into inaction by the enormity of the office he holds.

Obama has no domestic policy to speak of. He has no foreign policy to speak of. He has no jobs program to speak of. His signature health care plan is driving doctors out of the field, crippling small businesses and putting thousands of Americans out of work.

The Obama of 2012 has nothing positive to run on. Nothing. And guess what? He, more than anyone else in his White House or campaign, knows it.

He knows his election and presidency were social engineering gone wrong. He knows his biography is unraveling faster than the baseball that Roy Hobbs crushed into the rain in the movie "The Natural." He knows that he has run out of all options but one: Go negative on Mitt Romney 24/7 and hope a heretofore compromised mainstream media will once again unethically act as his surrogate.

Unfortunately for Obama, two massive holes exist in his "demonize Romney with an assist from the media" campaign tactic.

First, most Americans who are paying attention to this contest have come to the conclusion that Romney is a very decent and moral person who does have a fairly impressive business background coupled with some other real-world experience.

Second, as mentioned above, more and more members of the Journalists In The Tank For Obama club seem to be having second thoughts. As one of my friends in that club said, "Hey, we have kids in school, have to pay mortgages and want to keep our jobs just like everyone else."

In 2008, Obama won a fairly impressive victory against an incredibly weak and inept Republican challenger. To pull off that victory, Obama had pull a significant number of Republican and independent voters away from John McCain. To his credit and to his ability to spin himself along with the American voters' sense of fairness and history, Obama did just that.

In 2008, Obama was an unformed piece of pottery clay molded into shape by his own false rhetoric combined with a media narrative that sought to canonize him in anticipation of having his face carved into Mount Rushmore.

Today, in 2012, Barack Obama stands on his own — an unqualified man who did not have the gifts to grow into the presidency.
While noble in many respects, the social experiment that was Barack Obama's election and presidency is coming to its natural and expected conclusion.

                (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jd98ajIMC8M/UDHK3ek6FlI/AAAAAAAAcsk/Eq--g5_fR7E/s400/8-17-12%2B1.jpg)

President Obama: The Democratic Ticket's Weak Link
By Aaron Goldstein on 8.21.12 @ 6:10AM

Joe Biden is absolved.

After Vice President Joe Biden suggested last week that Republicans would "put y'all back in chains," there were calls both public and private for President Obama to remove the former Delaware Senator from the Democratic ticket in favor of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The former First Lady is said not to be interested in playing second fiddle to Obama. It could be that Hillary doesn't want to step aboard a sinking ship.

Of course, there's no doubt that Biden has had a long history of embarrassing gaffes going back at least a quarter century when he plagiarized the biography of then British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock as his own. But even Biden has never written an autobiography with composite characters. From where I sit, Biden isn't the weak link on the Democratic ticket.

If a Republican presidential candidate had said he had visited 57 states with one to go, said candidate would have been branded by the liberal media as stupid. If a Republican presidential candidate had claimed 10,000 people had been killed by a tornado in Kansas, said candidate would have faced a whirlwind of negative coverage. If a Republican presidential candidate had said African Americans were a bitter people who clang to guns and religion there would be a hell to pay for said candidate.
But then Barack Obama isn't a Republican or, heaven forbid, a conservative. As such he was held to the lowest of expectations and the lowest of standards during the 2008 election.

Of course, things haven't changed much in three and a half years in the White House. Obama is still held to the lowest of expectations and the lowest of standards.

*It is why Obama can get away with referring to Coast Guard personnel as "corpsemen."

*It is why Obama can get away with seeing fallen soldiers in the audience.

*It is why Obama can get away with making a joke about the Special Olympics.

*It is why Obama can get away with speaking of the Austrian language.

*It is why Obama can get away with saying he's here in Asia while standing on American soil.

*It is why Obama can get away with offending the British when Mitt Romney can't. Not only can he refer to The Falkland Islands as The Malvinas, he can call them The Maldives if he darn well pleases.

*It is why Obama can get away with saying that the Supreme Court overturning Obamacare would be unprecedented despite more than 200 years of American jurisprudence to the contrary.
If a Republican President had said any of these things described above, the liberal media would declare the Commander-in-Chief public idiot number one. But since these things have been uttered by a Democratic President (and the first African-American President at that), the liberal media have been protecting Obama from himself.

But the liberal media can't protect President Obama forever. The liberal media can't protect Obama from Mitt Romney. Obama has to stand on his own two feet when he faces Romney one on one in three presidential debates this fall. With no teleprompter to guide him, Obama simply isn't intelligent enough to be in the same room with Romney let alone qualified to fill an entry level position in one of Romney's companies.

Now one could say that I am underestimating President Obama. Believe me, I am not. Obama clawed his way through the Clintons to win the Democratic Party nomination four years ago. He opted out of public financing and outspent, out-organized, and out-campaigned John McCain. Given his demagogic disposition, Obama views the Oval Office as an entitlement and as such he is a man who plays for keeps.

But when Obama and Romney go toe to toe, the American electorate will realize that Joe Biden isn't the problem. It will be at that moment the American electorate realizes that President Obama is the problem. It will be at that moment the American electorate realizes Obama is an albatross around America's neck. It will be at that moment the American electorate concludes Barack Obama is the weak link on the Democratic Party ticket and thus unworthy of a second term in office.[/font][/size]

(http://herohog.com/images/guns/ammo/9mmammo.jpg)

Social Security Administration To Purchase 174 Thousand Rounds Of Hollow Point Bullets

Preparing for civil unrest? Ammunition to be delivered to 41 locations across U.S.
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, August 15, 2012

UPDATE: DHS Now Covering Up Ammo Purchases?

http://www.infowars.com/dhs-classifies-ammo-purchase-following-controversy/

First it was the Department of Homeland Security:



http://www.infowars.com/dhs-and-ice-order-450-million-rounds-of-40-caliber-ammo/
(Two years later, in March 2012, came news that the Department of Homeland Security, a federal government agency that's largely focused on domestic operations, recently ordered 450 million rounds of hollow point ammunition, and has another bid out for 175 million rounds of . 223 rifle ammo. All this is on top of the 2 million rounds ordered in 2009. The DHS is refusing to answer requests for an explanation.)

....next Dept. of Education buys Shotguns:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/dept-of-education-buys-shotguns/

.....and the USDA orders 300,000 round of ammo:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/why-does-the-usda-need-300000-rounds-of-ammo/

....then it was the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
http://www.infowars.com/national-weather-service-follows-dhs-in-huge-ammo-purchase/

....and now the Social Security Administration is set to purchase 174,000 rounds of hollow point bullets that will be delivered to 41 locations across the country:
http://www.infowars.com/social-security-administration-to-purchase-174-thousand-rounds-of-hollow-point-bullets/

A solicitation posted by the SSA on the FedBizOpps website:
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=bfd95987a1ad9a6dfb22bca4a19150cb&_cview=0
.....asks for contractors to supply 174,000 rounds of ".357 Sig 125 grain bonded jacketed hollow point pistol ammunition."

An online ammunition retailer describes the bullets as suitable "for peak performance rivaling and sometimes surpassing handloads in many guns," noting that the ammo is "a great personal defense bullet."

The synopsis to the solicitation adds that the ammunition is to be shipped to 41 locations within 60 days of purchase. A separate spreadsheet lists those locations, which include the Social Security headquarters in Baltimore, Maryland as well as major cities across the country including Los Angeles, Detroit, Oklahoma City, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Denver, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Seattle.

Hollow point bullets are designed to expand as they enter the body, causing maximum damage by tearing apart internal organs.

It's not outlandish to suggest that the Social Security Administration is purchasing the bullets as part of preparations for civil unrest. Social security welfare is estimated to keep around 40 per cent of senior citizens out of poverty. Should the tap run dry in the aftermath of an economic collapse which the Federal Reserve has already told top banks to prepare for, domestic disorder could ensue if people are refused their benefits.

Indeed, earlier this year the Department of Homeland Security ran a drill called Operation Shield which included turning the entrance of a Florida Social Security office into a checkpoint manned by Federal Protective Service officers armed with semiautomatic rifles.

"With their blue and white SUVs circled around the Main Street office, at least one official was posted on the door with a semiautomatic rifle, randomly checking identifications. And other officers, some with K-9s, sifted through the building," reported the Daily Commercial.

A rash of solicitations by federal agencies for hollow point bullets in recent months has stoked fears that the government is preparing for civil unrest caused by a financial collapse on a scale similar or even larger to scenes already witnessed in Europe over the last two years.

As we reported yesterday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has put out a contract for 46,000 rounds of hollow point bullets along with 500 paper targets.

Despite initially asking the bullets to be delivered to the National Weather Service, NOAA claimed this was a "clerical error" and insisted the ammunition was being sent to the Fisheries Office of Law Enforcement. Why powerful hollow point bullets that are designed to tear apart internal organs are needed for practice shooting at paper targets has not been explained.

Back in March, Homeland Security purchased 450 million rounds of .40-caliber hollow point bullets that are designed to expand upon entry and cause maximum organ damage, prompting questions as to why the DHS needed such a large amount of powerful bullets merely for training purposes.

This was followed by another DHS solicitation asking for a further 750 million rounds of assorted bullets, including 357 mag rounds that are able to penetrate walls.

The DHS recently put out an order for riot gear in preparation for the upcoming DNC, RNC and presidential inauguration. The U.S. Army is also busy buying similar equipment.

The DHS also recently purchased a number of bullet-proof checkpoint booths that include 'stop and go' lights.

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

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.[/font][/size]

An article by Stella Paul is interesting and has been voiced by not just a few people over the last couple of years.  Rumors fly when people are nervous or upset I suppose.  I have never read anything like this one.

It alleges that Valerie Jarrett runs more than people know.

As with most things this dramatic I take these things with a grain of salt and wait and see... just reporting what is out there on Obuma.  Nothing else you can do really.

But the purchase of 147 thousand hollow point bullets by the Social Security Administration is weird to say the least.

Maybe senior citizens are expected to go on a  rampage!

By the way.. NOAA already ordered bullets too. .357 hollow points.

This is nuts.

Here is the article: Will Obama Keep Power 'by Any Means Necessary'....Warph

      (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_TwfI8LeUuM0/S9ruk6X2zFI/AAAAAAAAA0E/_iKDGsrU-rk/s1600/Orwell-Obama.jpg)

Will Obama Keep Power 'by Any Means Necessary'?

By Stella Paul August 21, 2012

Let's go there: if Obama thinks he's losing, will he allow safe and fair elections on November 6? And if he does lose, will he peacefully turn over power to Mitt Romney on January 20, 2013? Or will he cling to power "by any means necessary," as a highly placed insider alleges?

Now, I'm truly sorry to raise such disgusting, un-American, crazy-sounding questions, but, alas, they're not crazy, and I've got a disquieting amount of evidence. The Democrats have already accused Romney of murdering a woman with cancer, financial felonies, and not filing taxes for ten years -- the last charge delivered by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the Senate floor, on the basis of absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

By Democrat standards, I've got enough proof to put away Obama, et al. for life without parole.

Whatever chicanery Obama and his investors may be contemplating, it will probably unfold against some gargantuan crisis, manufactured or otherwise. So cast your mind back to September 11, 2001, the day of the New York mayoral primary.

In the chaos after the attacks, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who was term-limited from running, pleaded that his leadership was essential and that he should be granted an extra three months in office after his term ran out on January 1. Giuliani's unprecedented power-grab was rightfully scorned by his eventual successor, Michael Bloomberg. So what did Bloomberg do when he ran into term limits? He deployed his multi-billion-dollar fortune to manipulate the law and buy himself a quasi-legal third term, claiming that only he had the expertise to handle the 2008 financial crisis.

My point? Politicians a great deal more conventional than Obama have loathed giving up power, and they have used crises and unethical machinations to try to keep it.

Now, let's look at just some of the disturbing evidence that indicates that Obama and his investors are plotting something big:

Super-High-Level Trial Balloons

USA Today reported that on September 27, 2011, Governor Beverly Perdue, Democrat of North Carolina, told a Rotary Club audience, "I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won't hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover[.] ... You want people who don't worry about the next election." When outrage greeted her suggestion, she retreated to the standard defense: she was just joking. What a kidder!

Meanwhile, that same month, Peter Orszag, Obama's former director of the Office of Management and Budget, published an article in The New Republic titled "Too Much of A Good Thing: Why We Need Less Democracy." In it, he posited that the country was too polarized; hence, "radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic."

Please note that these suggestions to suspend elections and radically reduce democratic control did not come from basement-dwelling bloggers. They came from the governor of the very state in which the Democrats are holding their national convention and from one of Obama's most prominent Cabinet members. Their close timing suggests that these ideas were circulating at the highest levels of the Democrat power elite.

"Whom Does the Government Intend to Shoot?"
           
That's the question recently posed by retired Major General Jerry Curry in the Daily Caller, in light of horrifying reports that the Social Security Administration is buying 174,000 rounds of hollow-point bullets for distribution to 41 locations in the U.S.

According to Major General Curry, Social Security's ammo spree follows the purchase by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of 46,000 rounds of hollow-point ammunition. Will they be shooting fish in a barrel?

Most terrifying of all, Major General Curry reports that the Department of Homeland Security ordered 750 million rounds of hollow-point ammunition in March, then subsequently ordered an additional 750 million rounds, including bullets capable of penetrating walls.

"This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen," writes Major General Curry, who wonders what plan might require "so many dead Americans."

I strongly suggest that you read Major General Curry's article for yourself, so you can appreciate the full horror of what he describes. After pointing out that Congress has done nothing to investigate these weapon purchases, Major General Curry, a 40-year veteran, concludes with these chilling words:

This is a deadly serious business. I hope I'm wrong, but something smells rotten. And If the Congress isn't going to do its duty and investigate this matter fully, the military will have to protect the Constitution, the nation, and our citizens.

900-plus Executive Orders

Obama may not be fond of governing, but he certainly does enjoy issuing executive orders -- more than 900 so far. As American Thinker's Warren Beatty points out, these little-reported edicts reveal an all-too-predictable pattern: concentrating all national power and resources in Obama's hands, in case of "emergency."

So far, Obama has granted himself the right to control all transportation, including highways, airports, seaports, and railroads, and all modes of communication, storage facilities, electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.


Should you resist your work brigade assignment or relocation orders, rest assured that the U.S. government is now well supplied with bullets.

Openly War-Gaming against American Citizens

A recent issue of the well-respected Small Wars Journal featured an article titled "Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A 'Vision' of the Future." Written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert, the article helpfully game-played, in full operational detail, how the Army would destroy a local Tea Party insurrection.

The authors claim that should Tea Party rebels take over a City Hall, "Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas"; therefore, "the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment."

The brazenness of this scheme for the U.S. military to kill Americans created a small, temporary stir. The Washington Times editorialized, "This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying." The Washington Times also noted:

A professor at the Joint Forces Staff College was relieved of duty in June for uttering the heresy that the United States is at war with Islam. The Obama administration contended the professor had to be relieved because what he was teaching was not U.S. policy. Because there is no disclaimer attached to the Small Wars piece, it is fair to ask, at least in Col. Benson's case, whether his views reflect official policy regarding the use of U.S. military force against American citizens.

Active Partnership with America's Foreign Enemies

Many spectacles have enlivened presidential elections over the years, but 2012 marks the first time that high-level military personnel have felt compelled to publicly tell the president to stop leaking national security secrets.

A group of former U.S. intelligence and Special Forces operatives created a 22-minute video, "Dishonorable Disclosures," to shame Obama into shutting up about priceless intelligence related to bin Laden's death, British-Saudi penetration of al-Qaeda, and the Israeli-American Stuxnet virus attack on Iran's nuclear program.

     

Normally, presidents don't want to endanger American citizens and military personnel by leaking top-secret information -- but aiding and abetting the enemy is apparently all in a day's work for Obama.

And so, if he wants to stir up trouble before the election, either at home or abroad, he'll have plenty of enemy partners to help.

(http://www.comite-valmy.org/IMG/jpg/obama_s_CIA_Killer.jpg)

First, he's got the Russians, to whose president he was caught whispering on a hot mic about missile defense, "This is my last election[.] ... After my election, I have more flexibility."

Second, Obama is this close to the Muslim Brotherhood, who are world-class experts on unleashing political violence. Obama helped the Muslim Brotherhood ascend to power in Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, and Libya, and he's placed its operatives in the highest levels of the American government. Surely, such clever characters as Huma Abedin, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff, and Mohamed Elibiary, a Homeland Security Advisory committee member, can be trusted to think up some exciting turmoil to apply where needed.

And finally, close to home, Obama can rely on the Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico, whom he supplied with thousands of guns. Gratefully, they used their American taxpayer-funded AK-47s to wipe out rival drug gangs and to murder Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Attorney General Eric Holder is presently in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over documents on Operation Fast and Furious, and Obama ("President Transparency") has claimed executive privilege to withhold them.

Sending hordes of expensively armed drug gang members across our border should be a snap, now that Obama has crippled our Border Patrol. Just think of all the headline-grabbing distractions these energetic young men can unleash!

Active Partnership with Domestic Criminal Groups

When Louis Farrakhan met Ahmadinejad: now there's a romance made in the bowels of hell. Toss in the head of the New Black Panthers and fifty radical imams, and you've got the "Beast Axis" that was forged in a Manhattan hotel on September 27, 2010, according to The Blaze.

New Black Panther Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz boasted on Black Panther Radio that he "stands on solid ideological ground" with "His Excellency, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad," who understands "the dynamics and the politics of world revolution."

Apparently, Obama approves of these antics, because his attorney general, Eric Holder, dropped charges against the New Black Panthers, even though they were caught on tape allegedly intimidating Philadelphia voters in the 2008 elections. Naturally, Holder's Department of Justice then lied about its actions, covering up its political motivations.

Holder specifically protected King Samir Shabazz, who now serves as national field marshal for the New Black Panthers. Shabazz spearheads the Panthers' ambitious new plan to "create inner city militaries that would go into nurseries and kill white babies and murder white people in the street."

Let's hope this "inner city military" is not what candidate Obama mysteriously referred to in 2008 when he pledged, "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Imagine, for one monstrous moment, the destructive potential of this burgeoning alliance between the Obama-protected New Black Panthers, Obama's old Chicago associate Louis Farrakhan, and the genocidally obsessed Ahmadinejad. If your blood didn't run cold, you weren't imagining hard enough.

A Tsunami of Voter Fraud

On June 15, 2012, Obama bypassed Congress and issued de facto amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. Suddenly, whole new vistas of voter fraud opened up to the Democrats. Admittedly, they've got to ramp up quickly for November, but this gang should prove up to the challenge.

Helping matters along, Holder is busy suing states that require photo ID to vote and attempting to disenfranchise the military. Together, these well-coordinated efforts should provide Obama with the means to pull off staggering amounts of voter fraud.

"By Any Means Necessary"

If all else fails, Obama and his investors may be prepared to keep power "By Any Means Necessary." This information comes from an uncannily predictive website called The Ulsterman Report. Those who have followed its fascinating interviews over the last couple of years with two anonymous sources, Wall Street Insider and White House Insider, have seen its scoops confirmed again and again.

Well over a year ahead of any other media, The Ulsterman Report was informing readers that Valerie Jarrett ran the White House and that Obama was strangely disengaged from the actual tasks of governing. It predicted the emergence of obscure figures -- Kamala D. Harris, who's now attorney general of California, and her brother-in-law, Tony West, the newly named acting associate attorney general at the Department of Justice, who's being groomed as Holder's successor.

Most crucially, shortly after the bin Laden operation, the Ulsterman Report revealed that Valerie Jarrett had canceled three previous bin Laden raids. That information now has been confirmed by Richard Miniter in his book, Leading from Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him.

Recently, a source known as Military Insider (MI) met with Ulsterman (UM) at the urging of Wall Street Insider (WSI) to issue a warning. A section of their conversation follows below:

MI: Approximately two years ago...not quite two years ago...I received information pertaining to an election contingency plan. For 2012. After the 2010 elections there were particular operatives...specific to the Obama administration and Democratic Party leadership...indicating an overwhelming need to secure a second term for President Obama. That document's title was...(pauses)

WSI: He can be trusted - I give you my word. Please proceed.

MI: That document's title was "By Any Means Necessary". It was unofficial - but we know it came directly from channels specific to the administration. We confirmed that.

UM: What channels? Who are you talking about?

MI: We believe it to have been authored by Mr. Sunstein. Reviewed and approved by Valerie Jarrett. Preparations for implementation are being done in part by Mr. Leo Gerard coordinating with...with high ranking officials within the Department of Justice, Homeland Security...and...the U.S. military.

We could dismiss the anonymous Military Insider's warning as overheated, unsourced hysteria. Or we could examine it as one more piece of evidence to place alongside all the evidence I've described above.

The greatest asset of Obama and his investors has been their warp-speed audacity. We're too stunned to believe what's happening in front of our eyes, and too embarrassed to mention it. Who wants to speak up and be ridiculed as an unhinged paranoid, marching with the tinfoil hat brigade?

But our best bet -- perhaps our only bet -- is to frankly confront this ugly reality. As Iran prepares to go nuclear and the global economy teeters, any number of "national emergencies" can suddenly erupt, demanding unprecedented measures by Obama to "save" us. We must be prepared with skepticism, outrage, and defiance of any actions to deprive us of our Constitutional rights.

America remains the last best hope on earth. And We the People must keep our power, by any means necessary.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/08/will_obama_keep_power_by_any_means_necessary.html [/font] [/size]