Another Race Baiter Rushes to Defend Rantin’ Rangel

Here we go folks. Every time a race-baiter on the Left has an opportunity to be consistent and call down a Liberal who utters racist remarks, they instead make excuses. The latest example? Earl Ofari Hutchinson. Hutchinson defends Rangel calling the Tea Party racists and White Crackers

Rangel has history on his side to back up his broadside. During the 1960s, GOP ultra conservatives, libertarian groups, and the far right from the John Birch Society to the Young Americans for Freedom waged a prolonged and bitter fight against liberal Democrats and moderate Republicans to block civil rights legislation. It was always the same argument. Those civil rights and voting rights bills encroached on state’s rights, usurped the Constitution, and were a gross impediment to personal and commercial freedom.

Of course, one doesn’t have to go back to the 1960s to make the case that Rangel inelegantly made that many of those who back the Tea Party today would have opposed civil rights back in the day. There are a few notable Supreme Court judges that used virtually the same arguments as civil rights foes of the past to gut the Voting Rights Act, and any other civil rights strengthening measure that has been on the court docket. There are legions of Tea Party affiliated GOP House representatives that cloak themselves in their read of the Constitution and libertarianism to relentlessly flail Obama and the Democrats for spending on domestic programs that aid minorities and the poor. Ron Paul and son Rand are the two top guns for the GOP’s right-libertarian wing, and they have filled up a small directory with putdowns of past and present civil rights initiatives.

Of course, most people who benefit from programs like food stamps are White. And, I could point out that Conservatives and Libertarians criticize the WASTE and CORRUPTION in those programs, and no necessarily the programs intentions. But Hutchinson doe snot want facts

Then there’s the Tea Party’s well-documented silence when it comes to denouncing the overt bigots within the ranks of its various factions. This bunch unleashed a proliferation of Obama “Joker” posters — showing him as Batman’s ultimate nemesis — crude, racist scrawls on signs and banners, Confederate flags and Texas Lone Star flags, and racist digs at the president and first lady Michelle Obama for a time.

OK here we go. The Tea Party has been silent on the racist acts and remarks of Tea Party members because those events have largely been invented by Leftists like Hutchinson. In other words that “overt” racism never happened, and that IS well-documented, but, again, do not confuse Hutchinson with facts. 

As to the “Joker” posters, I would say so? How are they racist? In fact they are not, and Hutchinson, in  a moment of honesty, if he ever has one would admit that. Hutchinson also mentions the “crude, racist scrawls on signs and banners” at Tea Party rallies. Again, there is no there there. Mr. Hutchinson can continue making the baseless allegation all he wants, but he will still be lying. As to the presence of  “Confederate flags and Texas Lone Star flags, and racist digs at the president and first lady Michelle Obama for a time.” I will ask when the State Flag of Texas became racist? When was that exactly Mr. Hutchinson? The racist digs at the FLOTUS and the President? Care to cite specific genuine examples Mr. Hutchinson? If so bring them, if not please shut the Hell up.

Finally, the obligatory reference to the Confederate Flag that every Liberal makes as proof of racism. Mr. Hutchinson, you really ought to read a bit of history, your blatant ignorance is an embarrassment. My ancestors, and many other Southern men, of all colors, yes ALL colors and religions, defined the Confederate Battleflag on the battle fields from 1861 to 1865, and racism is not a part of that definition.

Lastly, you can go read the rest of the bilge Hutchinson spews if you wish. He can scream and rant about racism all he wants, but if he REALLY wants to look at racism, and hatefulness, and ignorance, I suggest he stop looking at the Tea Party and start looking in his closest mirror!

 

 

Ron Paul has lost every ounce of my respect

I have never fully agreed with Congressman Paul, although in some areas I respected and agreed with his positions. Even in those areas, including foreign policy, where I thought he was off base, I at least respected him. That respect, though, is now gone forever. And it is not coming back, not after Paul wrote this

 

Former Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul said Monday that the shooting death of a U.S. Navy Iraq War veteran was the consequence of his life as a one of the military’s most celebrated snipers.

In a message sent from his certified Twitter account, the former congressman from Texas said that ‘he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.’

Here is the Tweet

image

 

Obamacare individual mandate upheld by John Roberts and his four Left Wing buddies, the bloggers react!

I am what you might call angry, and so are many others. and here are some of their reactions.

Zion’s Trumpet links Ed’s post, and offers his own take

Also keep in mind that all this happened back when the GOP still had a shot at getting Obama’s health care monstrosity overruled by our nation’s highest court. Since that option is no longer on the table, we the people have no alternative but to rid our federal government of every parasitic leftist we possibly can, even if that means replacing some of them with – shall we say – less than hard-right Republicans. To do otherwise is to commit national suicide, and even some Ron Paul supporters are now beginning to recognize that fact.

Mitt – if I may be so bold as to address you by your nickname – all you have to do to win the White House at this point is refrain from saying anything truly stupid or offensive to conservatives, stick to the topics of the economy and ObamaCare, and try to pick a running mate who isn’t as big a RINO as you are. Might I suggest Marco Rubio… or Allen West?

As for you, Barack, you’re political death warrant has just been signed, sealed and delivered by five smarmy, activist lawyers in black robes, and the genuinely comical thing is that you’re too dumb to realize it. While I’m sure the Jurassic press will join you in declaring victory today, I’m equally as certain that the real victors in all this will be the people of this country once they throw your sorry butt out of office and begin the process of retaking their liberties from a degenerate and dictatorial federal government.

Chris at Wyblog warns that we better start saving up for that mandate, oh, sorry Mr. Roberts TAX that makes us buy a Volt!

The government is our master. We The People are powerless before it.

The Constitution means nothing. Limited government? Fuggedaboudit.

Someone needs to dig up Thomas Jefferson and have him beat Chief Justice Roberts over the head with the Declaration of Independence. Repeatedly.

Not that it would do any good. The damage is done.

The Obamacare abomination survives. Every American is compelled by the force of law to purchase health insurance. Because the individual mandate is in actuality a tax.

Welcome to the United States of Greece. Where our Socialist Overlords have big plans for us serfs. It’s been said that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

Liberty was destroyed today. We’ll probably never get it back.

UPDATE 28 Jun 2012 11:39:
The more I think about it, the madder I get.

Even if Obamacare gets repealed a terrible precedent has been set. Congress can tax our behavior. Get too fat? Pay the Obesity Tax. Don’t buy that Chevy Volt? Pay the Fossil Fuel Waster Tax. Homeschool your kids? Pay the Support Your Local Teachers Union Tax.

Nanny-state busybodies like Mike Bloomberg are having an orgasm right now.

Milton Wolf warned us yesterday that, in the end, we would have to kill this beast legislatively, he was right

Weasel Zippers reminds us that Romney lists job one as “Repeal Obamacare”

Charles Krauthammer offers his view on why Roberts did it

It’s the judiciary’s Nixon-to-China: Chief Justice John Roberts joins the liberal wing of the Supreme Court and upholds the constitutionality of Obamacare. How? By pulling off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time. He managed to uphold the central conservative argument against Obamacare, while at the same time finding a narrow definitional dodge to uphold the law — and thus prevented the court from being seen as having overturned, presumably on political grounds, the signature legislation of this administration.

Why did he do it? Because he carries two identities. Jurisprudentially, he is a constitutional conservative. Institutionally, he is chief justice and sees himself as uniquely entrusted with the custodianship of the court’s legitimacy, reputation and stature.

Go read it all, I think Krauthammer is exactly right, but I disagree on one point. Roberts has, in my view, discredited ANY standing he had as a constitutional conservative. He placed his principles and his duty on the back burner to help the “image” of the Court? If so, then he has forgotten what duty is, and is a disgrace!

The Right Scoop has Rush’s take

The Other McCain has Michelle Bachman’s response 

Jill has a great post up including this

The bottom line from the dissent:

Scalia/Kennedy/Thomas/Alito dissent calls decision “a vast judicial overreaching.”

John Hayward comments via Twitter (older tweets at bottom):

You are now the property of the State, which can levy a special tax against you, if you don’t spend your money as ordered.

Remember, Obama didn’t just lie about ObamaCare being a tax. He LAUGHED at the idea, on national TV.

Prognostication winners: those who said the ruling would be both a win and loss for Obama. His tax hike on the poor survived the Court.

Shouldn’t a law be judged on what it actually says – i.e. “mandate” – rather than being rewritten by justices to keep it alive?

So the Court just changed a law nobody read to tell the authors what they really meant.

Hey, Obama voters! Your boy just hit poor and middle class Americans with the biggest TAX in history!

So statists can claim anything isn’t a tax, to get it past voters, then the Court will change it to a tax later.

So basically, the Court rewrote a clearly unconstitutional law, in direct opposition to the statements of its authors, to keep it alive.

Yeah, pretty much what I thought. Goodbye, Constitution, it was nice knowing you.

So Obama lied, said O-care’s not a tax, but SCOTUS says it is. Thanks for voting for this guy, chumps.

Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom has this nugget

Thus, behold:

The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. Section 5000A would therefore be unconstitutional if read as a command. The Federal Government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance. Section 5000A is therefore constitutional, because it can reasonably be read as a tax.

I won’t have to unpack that for longtime readers of this site, but do allow me to unpack it — as I’ve done with similar linguistically incoherent statements in the past — for those who will spend today bemoaning a ruling that, when viewed from their own intepretative perspective (rather than their policy desires), they can’t honestly fault.

To wit:  “Section 5000A is therefore constitutional, because it can reasonably be read as a tax.”

Fine.  How is this the case?  Because, per Roberts,  the mandate looks something like a tax might look and could look — much in the way a cloud formation may look like a randy sheep three way, if you’re inclined to see it that way.  But unless you believe God or Nature intended to paint a sheep orgy in the gas and water vapor floating above Peoria, the clouds aren’t actually a sheep orgy save your intent to see it as such.

Intentionalism just is.

But, you argue, it clearly wasn’t intended as a tax (or if it was, there’s no way of ever knowing that, given that it was presented as a penalty and not a tax) — because the President publicly denied that it was a tax, and it was passed expressly as a penalty.  Therefore, it was signified into being — at the point of passage — as a penalty.  And a penalty is not a tax.

Or is it?

Intentionalism just is.

According to the CJ, a penalty is indeed a tax when it can be viewed as a tax for purposes of a ruling.  Meaning, a penalty is a tax when a Justice decides to rewrite the law to turn a penalty into a tax.  Which he justifies because the way the penalty looks to him suggests that “reasonable”  people (or philosopher kings) can, if they squint — and if they ignore the intent that turned the law into law in the first place, and turned a set of marks into a set of signs, into language — see a tax.  How that is “reasonable” is anyone’s guess:   we know in no uncertain terms that Obama and the Dems who passed the law didn’t devise the mandate as a tax (despite what they later argued); for one to conclude that it is reasonably possible to “read” a penalty as a tax,  therefore, what c0mes to count as “reasonable” must be redefined as “ignoring what we know to be true”.  And that seems antithetical to “reason.”

Erick Erickson throws his back out, trying to defend Roberts

Having gone through the opinion, I am not going to beat up on John Roberts. I am disappointed, but I want to make a few points.

First, I get the strong sense from a few anecdotal stories about Roberts over the past few months and the way he has written this opinion that he very, very much was concerned about keeping the Supreme Court above the partisan fray and damaging the reputation of the Court long term. It seems to me the left was smart to make a full frontal assault on the Court as it persuaded Roberts.

Good Freaking Grief! Tell me Erickson is not this stupid. If Roberts was swayed by public opinion, or by what he perceived MIGHT be a negative spin the certain people, then he is unfit for the highest court! He is there to rule on the CONSTITUTIONALITY of laws, not make his decisions to impress anyone!

Second, in writing his case, Roberts forces everyone to deal with the issue as a political, not a legal issue.

Oh, so the constitutionality of a law is “political” now, and not legal? Good Lord who is this buffoon posing as Erickson? I am with BC on this

What is sad is that a conservative republican blogger is dumb enough put this stupidity out for review — and think he making an intelligent point.

The reality is that John Roberts have just given his stamp of approval on the biggest governmental encroachment on American liberty in our country’s history. This is not just about the individual mandate.

The supreme court has just set a legal precedent saying that it is okay for the federal government to force you to buy a service and penalize you if you don’t.

Now, thanks to John Roberts, if they decide it is in your best interest to buy a workout machine, a house alarm system, a book,  a Communist government indoctrination video — or anything else for that matter — they can do it and it will be simple labeled as a tax.

Someone needs to tell this fat bastard to think, or to shut up!

Dear Erick, your head called, it is stuck in your ass, sorry, but I am done having patience for these “thoughtful” Republicans who excuse cowards like Roberts!

Nancy Pelosi credits a former fat, drunk disgrace for this, and Doug Powers skewers her!

Gag.

Mary Jo Kopechne unavailable for comment.

“Ted can now rest. He’s finally f*#%ed everybody in the country.”

Actually, stamping Ted Kennedy’s name on what will eventually amount to a massive tax increase for increasing numbers of Americans as companies dump out of insuring their employees privately isn’t entirely inappropriate.

Maybe Ted’s been reincarnated. If John Roberts is spotted drinking Chivas tonight and chasing tail at Au Bar it’ll be confirmed.

I might be updating later, so please check back. I do hope this fires everyone up, and keeps them that way. REMEMBER in NOVEMBER!

Super Tuesday: The Results Are In!

……………………….
Well, the favorite GOP candidate of Washington DC insiders and party elites, Mitt Romney, won his home state of Taxachusetts Tuesday night, as well as the People’s Republic of Vermont. He even managed to triumph in Virginia over the hapless Ron Paul – who was his only opponent in that state – and then eeked out a razor-thin victory in Ohio due largely to the fact that he outspent runner-up Rick Santorum by a 4 to 1 margin there. He then walked away with Idaho and Alaska to round out the evening.
Total delegates won to date: 421 – Bound delegates: 339

.
……………………….
Rick Santorum took Oklahoma and then handily won Tennessee, much to the chagrin of Newt Gingrich who was counting on the south to finally lift his campaign out of third-place. He then picked up North Dakota for good measure.
Total delegates won to date: 181 – Bound delegates: 95

.
……………………….
The Newtster won his home state of Georgia by the largest delegate landslide of the evening, but could not manage to pull off another victory all night, effectively placing his troubled campaign on life-support.
Total delegates won to date: 107 – Bound delegates: 107

.
……………………….
As expected, Ron (I hope Mitt picks my son as his running mate) Paul won no states, giving rise to a whole new crop of conspiracy theories by his small but fanatical band of supporters.
Total delegates won to date: 47 – Bound delegates: 22

.

*VIDEO* Love Is In The Air At The GOP Debate – Featuring John Paul Young

*LIVE STREAMING* Arizona Republican Primary Debate (CNN) – February 22, 2012 – 8pm EST

….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO

.
….

….

.
….Debate Live Stream – Link 1

….Debate Live Stream – Link 2

….Debate Live Stream – Link 3

….Debate Live Stream – Link 4

….Debate Live Stream – Link 5

….Debate Live Stream – Link 6

….Debate Live Stream – Link 7

.
….For more information, visit the 2012 Election Central and CNN websites.

.

*VIDEOS* Entire Florida Republican Primary Debate (CNN) – 01/26/12

….PART 1

….PART 2

….PART 3

….PART 4

….PART 5

….PART 6

….PART 7

….PART 8

*LIVE STREAMING* Florida Republican Primary Debate (CNN) – January 26, 2012 – 8pm EST

….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO.

.
….

….

.
….Debate Live Stream – Link 1

….Debate Live Stream – Link 2

….Debate Live Stream – Link 3

….Debate Live Stream – Link 4

….Debate Live Stream – Link 5

….Debate Live Stream – Link 6

….Debate Live Stream – Link 7

….Debate Live Stream – Link 8

….Debate Live Stream – Link 9

.
….For more information, visit the 2012 Election Central and CNN websites.

.

*VIDEOS* Entire Florida Republican Primary Debate (NBC)


….PART 1

….PART 2

….PART 3

….PART 4

….PART 5

….PART 6

….PART 7

….PART 8

.

TSA VS Rand Paul

I listened to Paul getting interviewed by Hannity on the drive home today. Smitty weighs in

How do you work in an airport adjacent to Kentucky, where CNN blares 24/7, and not know the junior U.S. Senator from the neighbor state?

The White House is standing by the Transportation Security Administration in its standoff with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his father, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).
The elder Paul called the TSA a “police state” Monday after Rand Paul was reportedly detained by TSA after he refused to take a pat-down from TSA officials at the Nashville International Airport.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that he didn’t have any reaction to Paul’s “police state” comments.
But Carney sided with the TSA saying, “I think it is absolutely essential that we take necessary actions to ensure that air travel is safe.”

Stuck on Stoopit! Typical government incompetence. It is not the fault of the TSA agents. They are simply following orders. Dafly, their orders come from morons. This stupidity could ONLY come from DC!

*LIVE STREAMING* Florida Republican Primary Debate (NBC) – January 23, 2012 – 9pm EST


….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO.

.
….

….

.
….Debate Live Stream – Link 1

….Debate Live Stream – Link 2

….Debate Live Stream – Link 3

….Debate Live Stream – Link 4

….Debate Live Stream – Link 5

….Debate Live Stream – Link 6

….Debate Live Stream – Link 7

….Debate Live Stream – Link 8

….Debate Live Stream – Link 9

….Debate Live Stream – Link 10

.
….For more information, visit the 2012 Election Central, MSNBC and National Journal
….websites.

.

*LIVE STREAMING* South Carolina Republican Primary Debate (CNN / SRLC) – January 19, 2012 – 8pm EST


….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO.

.
….

….

.
….Debate Live Stream – Link 1

….Debate Live Stream – Link 2

….Debate Live Stream – Link 3

….Debate Live Stream – Link 4

.
….For more information, visit the 2012 Election Central, CNN and Southern Republican
….Leadership Conference websites.

.

Last night’s debate

The highlights for me were Perry and Newt making a pinata out of Juan Williams, good grief does Williams not possess the ability to ask any serious questions? Perry was VERY GOOD but, apparently the talking heads only noticed Newt. Yep, Newt was very good, but so was Perry! I saw a comment today on one blog. The commentor said that if Perry could only articulate his views better, like Newt, he would win in a landslide. Sorry, I do not see a damned thing wrong with Rick Perry delivering his message. I wonder how many people think that is the case because the “analysts” ignore Perry too often, or put such a negative spin on Perry.

I think everyone agrees, well, everyone except Ann Coulter and the establishment types, that Romney looked bad, unpresidential, pathetic last night.

Ron Paul, oh who cares about him.

Santorum looked OK, maybe a tad petulant at times. I did not like his answer about why he wishes to tax some businesses at higher rates than others though. That is nothing but big government playing favorites. His defense of his vote AGAINST right to work was gutless frankly. Just what I would expect from a guy wearing a sweater vest.

For more great analysis that you will NEVER get from the “political experts” head over to Jill’s place!

Also look over at Wyblog, Chris raises some great thoughts

Professor Jacobsonsums up my impression of the trainwreck that is Mitt Romney’s impending nomination.

We are on a path to nominate someone who campaigned against Reagan, campaigned against the Contract with America, campaigned against those who are pro-Life, campaigned against 2d Amendment rights, campaigned against conservatism, and designed and enacted the precursor to Obamacare from which he will not back away.

Meanwhile the only guy who’s never actually lost an election on the merits can’t get any traction, because ostensible “conservatives” are enamored by Rick Santorum’s sweater vests and Newt Gingrich’s adverbial allegories.

Again, I am as amazed as Chris. Perry has a record the others cannot touch, yet too many of us are obsessing over a big government guy, in a sweater vest no less, who wants the government in our bedrooms, has issues with “unrestrained individualism”  and wants to use the tax code to favor some businesses over others? Good freaking grief!

*VIDEO* Full South Carolina / Fox News GOP Primary Debate


.
H/T The Right Scoop

.

Daily Benefactor News – Ron Paul Denies Saying He Wouldn’t Have Ordered Bin Laden Raid In Pakistan… But Here’s The Video

……………

—————————————— CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE DAILY BENEFACTOR ——————————————–

—————————————————————————– TOP STORY ——————————————————————————

Ron Paul Denies Saying He Wouldn’t Have Ordered Bin Laden Raid In Pakistan… But Here’s The Video – The Blaze

Last night’s GOP debate in South Carolina may be one that causes Ron Paul serious problems in the “honesty” department.

Mr. Paul’s truthfulness is being questioned after he told Fox News’ Brett Baier that he never said that he would not have given the order to go into Pakistan and kill Osama bin Laden.

.

.
There’s just one small problem with Paul’s denial, he did say it, several times.

Back in May of 2011, and featured here on The Blaze, Ron Paul said three times in a two minute discussion of the topic, that as President of the United States, he would not have ordered bin Laden killed in the manner that President Obama did.

Simon Conway was quite clear in his questions, first asking;

So President Ron Paul would therefore not have ordered the kill of bin Laden, which could have only have taken place by entering another sovereign nation?

And Dr. Paul was equally clear in his response:

I don’t think it was necessary. No.

Less than a minute later, Conway attempted to further clarify by again asking the congressman.

So President Ron Paul would not have ordered the kill of bin Laden, to take place, as it took place in Pakistan?

Ron Paul’s response was consistent with his two previous answers.

Not the way it took place, no. I mean he was unarmed, you know… and all these other arguments.

Watch the two minute excerpt as Simon Conway of WHO Radio in Iowa repeatedly asks the Texas Congressman whether he would have given the order to kill Osama bin Laden.

.

.
That clip from WHO Newsradio 1040 appeared on The Blaze on May 11th.

(H/T: Simon Conway of WHO)

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

——————————————————————– NOTE TO READERS ———————————————————————

THE DAILY BENEFACTOR now provides you with a large selection of NEWS WIDGETS containing RSS feeds from the most comprehensive news sources on the internet, such as THE DRUDGE REPORT, GATEWAY PUNDIT, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, WORLDNETDAILY, POLITICO, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, CNS, MICHELLE MALKIN, BREITBART, and THE JERUSALEM POST. Check them out!

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

*LIVE STREAMING* South Carolina Republican Primary Debate (Fox News) – January 16, 2012 – 9pm EST


….LIVE STREAMING FOR THIS EVENT HAS ENDED.

….CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE ENTIRE DEBATE ON VIDEO.

.
….

….

.
….Debate Live Stream – Link 1

….Debate Live Stream – Link 2

….Debate Live Stream – Link 3

….Debate Live Stream – Link 4

.
….For more information, visit the 2012 Election Central and Fox News websites.

.

The newest evidence of RAAAAACISM?

The GOP holding a debate on MLK Day! Only on Al “Pimp My Hair” Sharpton’s show could such an inanity be uttered! The Pit of Eternal Race Pimping gets deeper and deeper.

Seriously, I could not contain my laughter watching this. Are these three idiots REALLY this stupid? This demented? Of course not! They are, however, this desperate! This is all they have. They cannot talk about economics, or any other issue of any substance. All they can do is race bait, and throw the term Jim Crow around, and OF COURSE, accuse the GOP of trying to stop Black folks from voting! Pathetic! Absolutely pathetic!

Seriously, if you are still a Democrat, let me ask you this. WHY? Why do you still support this type of assbackwardsness?

*PICTURE* Just Plain Creepy

………………….