A question for Democrats

Why would a president HIDE his agenda before an election?

This news from the Washington Post doesn’t come as any surprise. The White House delayed much of President Obama’s agenda until after the 2012 election. Heaven forbid they let the voters know what was really in store for them.

The White House systematically delayed enacting a series of rules on the environment, worker safety and health care to prevent them from becoming points of contention before the 2012 election, according to documents and interviews with current and former administration officials.

Some agency officials were instructed to hold off submitting proposals to the White House for up to a year to ensure that they would not be issued before voters went to the polls, the current and former officials said.

The delays meant that rules were postponed or never issued. The stalled regulations included crucial elements of the Affordable Care Act, what bodies of water deserved federal protection, pollution controls for industrial boilers and limits on dangerous silica exposure in the workplace.

What type of government hides its agenda from the people? Another question for Democrats, why are you still supporting this president?

 

Let’s send the Liberals at the Washington Post a message

Bearing Arms brings us the sad tale of the Washington Post’s attempt to push the “guns are bad” line

The facts are conclusive.

Gun ownership is up tremendously. Young, urban, and female shooters are the fastest growing segments, ensuring that the next generation of gun rights advocates is not only expanding in numbers, but in spreading in geography and influence. Shooting is now an increasingly popular recreational and social pastime among family and friends.

The most popular firearms? Semi-automatic pistols, particularly those models of pistols most useful for concealed carry, are the fastest growing handgun segment. Modern sporting rifles—which are now available in more calibers, configurations, and price points than ever before—are the most popular rifles in the market. The AR-15 is the most common and popular centerfire rifle sold in the United States, year after year.

As gun ownership grows and spreads, violence crimes are down across the board. Rape, murder, armed robbery, assault and other violent crimes are on a decades-long decline. Gun accidents are down as well. Despite the endless dramatizations from the citizen control groups, you’re twice as likely to be killed by Bambi than a mass shooter.

And so perhaps it is very, very telling that on the eve of the Sandy Hook tragedy, the desperate citizen control cultists of the Washington Post are reduced to casting about for sob stories instead of making a scientific, mathematical, economic, or otherwise rational argument for citizen disarmament.

Go share your story of how you, or  a friend used a gun to defend yourself, or how much fun you have at the range, let the Post have facts, they hate that!

 

And the push for full blown Socialized Medicine commences

Donald Douglas links an article in which a Communist lays out their oh, so enlightened solution to health care. I figured I would take a few minutes to parse, their arguments, and destroy them

Website delays – the most unwelcome news for computer acolytes since the tech boom crashed – are not the biggest problem with the ACA, as will become increasingly apparent long after the signup headaches are a distant memory.

So, we are to believe that a government that cannot even get a website to work, after spending $600,000,000 on said website, can somehow implement full blown national health care?

What prompted the ACA was a rapidly escalating healthcare nightmare, seen in 50 million uninsured, medical bills plunging millions into un-payable debt or bankruptcy, long delays in access to care, and record numbers skipping needed treatment due to cost.

50 million uninsured? I thought it was 30 million. Or was it 44 million? The Communist uses propaganda to sway opinion, and overly inflated numbers that are often simply made up serve that purpose. The strategy of a Communist is to create panic, and frighten people into empowering government to fix whatever the crisis is.

The main culprit was our profit-focused system, with rising profiteering by a massive health care industry, and an increasing number of employers dropping coverage or just dumping more costs onto workers.

But of course, profit, which is evil, is the culprit here, it always is with Communists isn’t it? Never mind that government programs always fail because there is no accountability, no bottom line. If an evil, profit-seeking insurance company does not perform, it will go belly up. Competition has always increased quality, and costumer service, and helped to make things more affordable. The answer in part, to our health care problems is to increase competition by allowing health insurance to be more easily sold across state lines. With a state run system, there is no option, no competition. And if you need to see where that leads, look at Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, which are all broke!

The ACA tackles some of the most egregious inequities: lack of access for many of the working poor who will now be eligible for Medicaid or subsidies to offset some of their costs for buying private insurance through the exchanges, a crackdown on several especially notorious insurance abuses, and encouragement of preventive care.

But the law actually further entrenches the insurance-based system through the requirement that uncovered individuals buy private insurance. It’s also chock full of loopholes.

Well, here we go, another self-defeating Communist argument. Obamacare, a government mandate has loopholes, it will fail. Given that, why would anyone support even more government run legislation?

Some consumers who have made it through the website labyrinth have found confusing choices among plans which vary widely in both premium and out of pocket costs even with the subsidies, a pass through of public funds to the private insurers.

Translation? You are just too stupid to handle having choices, you need a government agent handle all those icky details there comrade!

The minimum benefits are also somewhat illusory. Insurance companies have decades of experience at gaming the system and warehouses full of experts to design ways to limit coverage options.

The ACA allows insurers to cherry pick healthier enrollees by the way benefit packages are designed, and as a Washington Post article noted on 21 November, consumers are discovering insurers are restricting their choice of doctors and excluding many top ranked hospitals from their approved “network”. 

Again, insurance companies are EVIL! See they are limiting your choices, taking away you doctor, and restricting the hospitals you can use. Well, actually, it is the government, through Obama Care that is doing that, so, of course, the answer is to give that same government even greater control. Good Grief, how stupid are these folks?

Far less reported is what registered nurses increasingly see – financial incentives within the ACA for hospitals to prematurely push patients out of hospitals to cheaper, less regulated settings or back to their homes. It also encourages shifting more care delivery from nurses and doctors to robots and other technology that undermines individual patient care, and that may work no better than the dysfunctional ACA websites.

And we are to somehow delude ourselves into believing that an elimination of private insurance will ameliorate these problems?

Is there an alternative? Most other developed nations have discovered it, a single-payer or national healthcare system.

Of course it is, sure! Forget that the issues we are seeing with Obama Care clearly illustrate the consistent failures of central planners and their Statist schemes. Forget that every concern those opposed to national health care have expressed are proven by Obama Care. Forget history, forget all of it. Just push forward to total government control of our health care. Bring on the death panels, and the elimination of personal choice and autonomy. Just leave it all to people so incompetent they cannot even get a vastly over priced website to work. A website, by the way, they had  more than three years to get right. THREE YEARS!

A closing thought. Isn’t it odd that Leftists foam at the mouth if insurance companies deny a prescription, or treatment, but if the government does it, it is wonderful? It is not odd, it is simply that the Left see government as their god. Just as Christians see God, yes THE REAL GOD, as perfect, Leftists see their god, in this case Washington D.C. as perfect. Now you might say that is just a different view of the world until you consider that God created the universe, and all life in it. The Leftists’ god on the other hand cannot even get a website to work.

Why yes, Obama and his fellow Leftists do still hate your guns

Wayne LaPierre lays it out H’T Girls Just Wanna Have Guns

Barack Obama, the candidate who promised Americans in 2008 that “I will not take your guns away,” now, as President of the United States in 2013, has embraced the universal firearm confiscation of Australia and England—schemes that saw the destruction of hundreds of thousands of registered, legal firearms that had been outlawed and taken under threat of force from licensed gun owners by their governments.

Obama revealed his gun control endgame in a Sept. 22, 2013, political speech at a solemn memorial for the 12 Washington Navy Yard victims murdered by a deranged killer on Sept. 16, 2013.

Obama coldly used the madness of a delusional lone mass-murderer to claim that the rampage “ought to lead to some sort of transformation … it ought to obsess us.”

In the same breath, Obama defined his personal “obsession” and his notion of “transformation” for ordinary American gun owners:

“That’s what happened in other countries when they experienced similar tragedies. In the United Kingdom, in Australia … they mobilized and they changed.”

The Washington Post praised Obama’s demand for “transformation” to an Australia-style gun roundup and destruction as “commonsense.”

While the U.S. media either ignored or glossed over Obama’s embrace of the Aussie model for gun bans, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) on Sept. 23, 2013, led its coverage with this:

“The U.S. president, Barack Obama, says it’s time for America to follow the example of countries like Australia when it comes to gun control.”

With a Sept. 23, 2013, headline, “Obama hails Australian gun laws,” Sky News led its coverage with: “President Barack Obama has used Australia as a positive example of a country that tightened gun laws after a mass shooting.”

Go read the whole piece here

 

Those who do not understand history should really keep their mouths shut

Jefferson Davis, Präsident der CSA Deutsch: 18...

Jefferson Davis, Präsident der CSA Deutsch: 1861: Jefferson Davis (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

I could call this a defense of Jefferson Davis, one of the most misunderstood American historical giants, because RS McCain does a fine job setting some of the record straight on Davis. McCain starts out by quoting the inane ramblings of one Colby King

 

“A question settled by violence, or in disregard of law, must remain unsettled forever.”

– Jefferson Davis

What’s up with this trend, huh? A week ago, James Fallows decided to drag John C. Calhoun into the current argument, and this week we have another liberal foray into bizarre counterfactual rhetoric:

The Washington Post’s Colby King took another stab Saturday at impugning and discrediting the Tea Party as a bunch of racists who are little more than an extension of the Confederacy. In a column titled “The rise of the New Confederacy,” King, a regular on Inside Washington, argued: “Today there is a New Confederacy, an insurgent political force that has captured the Republican Party and is taking up where the Old Confederacy left off in its efforts to bring down the federal government.”
The former deputy editorial page editor, whose column appears every Saturday, paid a back-handed compliment to House conservatives as he charged: “The New Confederacy, as churlish toward President Obama as the Old Confederacy was to Lincoln, has accomplished what its predecessor could not: It has shut down the federal government, and without even firing a weapon or taking 620,000 lives, as did the Old Confederacy’s instigated Civil War.” . . .
He asserted “they respond, however, to the label ‘tea party.’ By thought, word and deed, they must be making Jefferson Davis proud today.”

 

The Left, of course uses the word Confederacy as a slur. Likely because they do not understand that part of our history. McCain, however, DOES understand that part of our history

 

Jefferson Davis was an American hero long before he became the unfairly demonized President of the Confederacy.

A native of Kentucky — born, ironically, not far from the birthplace of Abraham Lincoln — he was raised in Mississippi and, at age 16, appointed to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. After graduation, Davis served as a young lieutenant at the frontier outpost Fort Crawford in present-day Wisconsin. There, Davis fell in love with Sarah Knox Taylor, daughter of the fort’s commander, Col. Zachary Taylor. So in love was Davis, in fact, that he resigned from the army in order to marry Sarah (whose father wished to spare his daughter the difficult life of an Army officer’s wife), but tragedy soon struck: The newlyweds fell victim to an outbreak of malaria in 1835. Sarah died and her grief-stricken husband fell so ill that his survival was in doubt.

After recovering his health, Davis eventually entered politics, and campaigned for James K. Polk’s election as president in 1844. Davis was later elected to Congress, but when the Mexican-American War broke out in 1846, the West Point graduate and veteran officer resigned his House seat, raised a volunteer regiment, and became colonel of the famed “Mississippi Rifles.” His bravery at the battles of Monterrey and Buena Vista won Davis national distinction.

His commanding general in Mexico was his former father-in-law, now General Zachary Taylor. Recalling how he had opposed his late daughter’s marriage to the young officer, Taylor told Davis, “My daughter, sir, was a better judge of men than I was.”

Davis was appointed to the Senate in 1847, filling the seat of a senator who had died in office. He resigned that seat to run unsuccessfully for governor of Mississippi but, in 1853, was appointed Secretary of War by President Franklin Pierce. As Secretary, Davis supervised key work that helped prepare for the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad. Davis was then re-elected to the Senate, where he served until resigning after Mississippi seceded from the Union.

In his farewell speech to the Senate, Davis recalled when he had defended the right of secession — for Massachusetts:

I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before the bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife and to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave in Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit of egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because the case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar nor one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other States.

Such was his firmness of principle and, although his critics then and since have found fault with Davis, no man ever doubted his honesty or his courage. The name of this heroic American – a soldier and statesman, who earned praise for his service in war and in peace — deserves more honor than to be slung around ignorantly as a political epithet more than a century after his death.

 

One other fact about Davis that matters if you wish to understand him. He was sickened that anyone would think the South had seceded over, or was fighting for slavery. He also tried everything he knew to avoid secession, even though he supported the right of a State to commit to secession. Biographer Joseph McElroy sums up Davis, and his counterpart Lincoln this way. Lincoln was willing to sacrifice the Constitution to save the Union.Davis was willing to sacrifice the Union to save the Constitution. For those who would say “well without the union, what would the Constitution matter?” I ask this, without strict adherence to the Constitution, what type of Union will we have? I think my question is being answered today.

 

 

 

Evil really is everywhere isn’t it?

The Other McCain reports on one Karoli Kuns, who is, according to both RS McCain’s opinion AND her own words, EVIL! Of course, to be fair to Karoli Kuns, boy that name sounds evil doesn’t it? Well it sounds either like evil incarnate of some new kind of doughnut. Likely a doughnut filled with evil. Anyway back to being fair to Karoli, she likely thinks I am evil because I love the Constitution and oppose Obamacare, and also evil people who are named after evil donuts! Anyway, read on as McCain explains the evil that IS Karoli

Is there a more dishonest person in America than the vile lie peddler Karoli Kuns? Certainly, we cannot rule this out, considering that 66 million people voted to re-elect President Obama.

One might write an entire book about the perverse mind of Karoli Kuns, whose attitude toward Republicans can best be understood by studying Pol Pot’s attitude toward opponents of the Khmer Rouge. There is no standard of decency Karoli Kuns recognizes as limiting the falsehoods she writes about anyone who doesn’t vote Democrat. For her, the destruction of Republicans is an end that justifies any means.

Karoli Kuns wakes up every morning and eats a bowl of Evil Flakes for breakfast, with a hot cup of dishonesty. She then peddles vile lies all day and into the night, before going to sleep to dream of the despicably hateful falsehoods she’ll tell tomorrow. If we occasionally notice some heinous wrong she has done today, it doesn’t mean she didn’t do worse yesterday, and she’ll certainly try to do worse tomorrow.

OK, so the Wall Street Journal published an article this week about the Tea Party and the IRS scandal, and the Washington Post then paid Alex Seitz-Wald to retaliate by attacking the Tea Party — because attacking Obama’s Enemies List is Alex Seitz-Wald‘s entire ouevre — and then, on cue, here comes Karoli Kuns to claim that somehow everything is explained by the “Groundswell” conspiracy:

According to the Groundswell documents, meetings and message coordination was taking place on a daily basis via email groups and their weekly meeting. Key players included the Tea Party Patriots and True The Vote. Both of these organizations were among the first to step up and claim they had been ‘victimized.’ But before the IRS ‘news’ ever broke, activity had been going on behind the scenes.

ERMAGERD! Activity behind the scenes! Evil People Who Don’t Vote Democrat send emails and have weekly meetings!

These people have gone so far as to advocate free speech and the right to assemble and petition government for a redress of grievances — can’t Eric Holder do something to stop these extremists?

You see what I mean about Karoli Kuns? Her basic premise is the dishonest insinuation that there is something scandalous — something wrong, perhaps even criminal — about people opposing Obama’s policies.

Christians, gun owners, homeschoolers, small businessmen concerned about regulations — these people have no rights at all, according to Karoli Kuns, and so their political activism is illegitimate. Therefore the IRS scandal is not a scandal, because the Tea Party shouldn’t even exist, and anything that the IRS or any other agency of government can do to wipe these people out is justified, according to Karoli Kuns.

I am tempted to say what a bit@#, but that would be too easy. Karoli is evil, and it seems she is damned brazen about her evilness. Her sources for dismissing the fact that the IRS DID target Conservative groups are either fat Left, or farther Left, so Kuns claims are, at least easily rebutted. She is, in short just another typical Leftist, that is she is someone willing to lie, then lie about lying, then lie some more as long as she can smear, rather than debate, Conservatives and other “radicals” who actually believe in America’s founding principles. And, in my book that does indeed make her EVIL. So evil she has now ruined my desire to ever eat another doughnut lest I accidentally ingest a “Karoli Kuns”  evil-filled doughnut.

The dumbest thing I have ever read

Brian Beutler, writing lying profusely at Salon  illustrates how the left works. NO matter what the facts are, they ignore them if they do not match their agenda

You can read the whole thing, in which Beutler LIES not only about the Zimmerman case, but also about Conservatives and Black crime rates. Beutler claims that a “few Blacks are causing problems” when in fact young Black men commit 14 TIMES as many murders as young White men do. He also ignores the high violent crime rate among Black youths, and that the most common victims are also Black. But the most obvious lies are about the Zimmerman trial

So let’s review: George Zimmerman wouldn’t have shot Trayvon Martin if he hadn’t been profiling by race. And even if he had been, the shooting feasibly wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t been legally allowed to carry a handgun and didn’t think he was empowered by law to take matters into his own hands. The monstrous killing of Chris Lane has no such back story. The killers apparently had no motive whatsoever, were armed illegally, and certainly weren’t trailing Lane because they believed, based on his race, that he might be a criminal. They are, however, likely to face serious prison time for their crimes. Zimmerman walked.

Profiling? There is no evidence of that, except in the warped mind of fools like Beutler of course. And there is also NO evidence, did Beutler actually watch the Zimmerman trial, that Zimmerman took the law into his own hands. He defended himself, and no, again, Stand Your Ground was not his defense, but Beutler is loathe to ever admit that. Can’t let facts stand in the way of the agenda can you Beutler?

Put that all together, and it turns out these stories aren’t counter-parallel at all. And more to the point, the events don’t even anecdotally augur for policies the right supports. The kids in Oklahoma weren’t “standing their ground,” and a “stand your ground” law wouldn’t have saved Chris Lane. Neither would a stop-and-frisk regime — the killers were trailing him in a car. By contrast, a “stand your ground” environment and a stop-and-frisk mentality were instrumental in Trayvon Martin’s death. Take either away, and there’s a good chance he’d be alive today. Martin in fact personified the statistical folly of stop-and-frisk. If Zimmerman had yielded to real police, they would have, in absence of any suspicious behavior, stopped Martin, frisked him and found only the skittles and iced tea that made his death that much more tragically poignant.

How Stop and Frisk, of which I am not a fan of either, had a damn thing to do with Trayvon Martin is beyond me. Zimmerman did not stop him, or attempt to frisk him. AGAIN, the evidence in the trial clearly pointed to Martin attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman, fearing for his life, acting legally by defending himself. By the way, if Beutler ever did any research he would find that stand your ground laws, and concealed carry laws REDUCE violent crime rates, but, those are facts so Beutler has no interest in them. Stand your ground laws were not applicable in the Zimmerman case, yet Beutler continues to insist they did somehow. He is too busy trying to make some point. Maybe he might pause in his crusade for gun control for just a moment and ask himself one question. Why does he have to LIE to try to prove he is right?

H/T to That Mr. G Guy and The Other McCain, who also takes the foul stench of truthlessness to the ideological woodshed

Generally speaking, every word published by Salon is the exact opposite of truth, and they only employ writers so fanatically dishonest that even such infamous organs of mendacity as the New York Times and theWashington Post want nothing to do with them.

Anyone published by Salon is a wretched human stain, and they’re never going to get a link from me, but Brian Beutler’s deliberate dishonesty got him a Memeorandum thread yesterday

In short, Salon is like MSNBS, which is to say, a cesspool of Leftist lies and distortions. Beutler is just another turd floating around in said cesspool.

Also check out Donald Douglas’s tweet to Mr, Hanky

.@BrianBeutler This the lamest, most logically contorted piece I’ve read. The right’s black crime obsession http://www.salon.com/2013/08/23/the_rights_obsession_with_black_crime/ … #RACISM

BAM!