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!

 

Obama Regime Submits ‘Substitute Language’ For Washington Post’s NSA Story

White House Submits ‘Substitute Language’ For Washington Post’s NSA Story – Twitchy

.

.

.
The Washington Post’s story about the NSA’s thousands of FISA violations, or “incidents,” is embarrassing enough to the administration, but the Post has revealed that the White House attempted to swap in its own prepared statement to replace an interview with John DeLong, the NSA’s director of compliance.
.

.
Reporter Barton Gellman says he agreed to let the NSA review the results of his interview with DeLong, but spokesmen for the White House and NSA instead scrapped the entire interview and sent along their own prepared statement for publication in its place.
.

.
Will Edward Snowden be getting some company?
.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Good news! Nancy Pelosi and Democrats to exploit Trayvon Martin’s death with far Left race pimps

UGH! Geee I wonder how this “open dialogue” on race and justice will go?

House Democrats will hold a hearing next week to weigh in on the controversy swirling around the recent verdict in the George Zimmerman trial.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced “A Conversation on Race and Justice” on July 30 on Capitol Hill.

According to a Pelosi aide, the hearing will not focus solely on the trial, which acquitted Zimmerman of murder charges in the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, but will be a “broader conversation.”

Pelosi will preside over the hearing, which will include Democrats from the party’s Steering and Policy Committee.

The scheduled panelists are Southern Poverty Law Center founder Morris Dees, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson and civil rights lawyer Maya Wiley, president of the Center for Social Inclusion.

Yep! The usual assortment of race-obsessed Leftists will bash America, Conservatives, gun owners and of course Whitey! Just another gimmick to keep Black Americans bitter and angry and voting Democrat. The sooner Blacks reject this type of nonsense, they better off they will be.

Any Senator that votes “yes” on this bill is not fit to serve

Any Senator voting on any bill that is too big for anyone to comprehend, or grasp, or even read ought to resign and allow a better American that truly understands the role of Congress to serve. Jeff Goldstein has the Hoeven-Corker amendment, which is, 1,200,pages long.It is supposed to “fix” our broken immigration system. Who wants to bet this massive bill will lead to more spending, even worse border security, more government waste, and fraud, and is loaded with language that is so vague no human being can understand it? Who wants to bet that this bill will, in fact make the problem it is supposed to fix worse?

Behold, the Hoeven-Corker amendment, up for vote Monday, coming in at 1,200 pages The Hoeven-Corker amendment to the Gang of Eight bill is essentially a new bill. It is almost 1,200 pages long. Some parts of it are identical to some of the provisions of the original Gang of Eight bill, some parts are very different, and some parts are slightly different in ways that could prove very important but difficult to understand in a hurry. But it has to be understood in a hurry. Given the length and complexity of this proposal, I think it is fair to say that not more than a handful of the senators voting on it on Monday—which is apparently when the vote is scheduled—will really understand it in any detail. There is almost no way any of the senators voting on it could have read it all, and it’s unlikely even their staff members could do so in a thorough and responsible way in that time. Only the people who wrote it will know what it says, and I imagine it was written in parts by numerous people from several Senate offices. That means there is probably no one who really knows what it says. It also seems likely that, if the amendment is adopted on Monday, the vote on the final bill would come too soon thereafter to allow CBO to re-score the much-amended bill, and so to offer some sense of how things have changed in terms of costs, economic effects, future immigration flows (legal and illegal) and other key issues. Is this any way to make such an important set of decisions about the country’s future? 

The worst part is that too many Americans have not yet grasped that there are very few of our “leaders: That obeys our even cares about the one thing they should place above all else-our Constitution! Goldstein has it right. Our leaders are NOTHING like our Founders! They write and pass bills that they do not even read, and our president has no better respect for our founding principles than Congress does. Even worse, anyone who stands up and defends the Constitution is attacked by Liberals, and many Republican leaders as a “wacko bird”

Why let something so trivial as Liberty or The Constitution stand in the way of Won’s wish list?

President Obama on Tuesday will lay out his long-awaited plan for second-term, executive-level actions to combat climate change.His speech is expected to include a pledge to curb carbon emissions from existing power plants, a top priority for environmentalists, according to a person briefed on the remarks and a Washington Post story Saturday.

His top climate adviser said last Wednesday that the plan would address energy efficiency, expanding clean energy on public lands, and using various “tools” – including the Clean Air Act – to address climate.

Climate advocates have long pressed the Environmental Protection Agency to begin writing rules to curb emissions from the nation’s existing fleet of power plants, in addition to rules floated in draft form last year that apply to new plants.

Mendacious Leftists accuse conservatives of wanting to turn back the clock to what they perceive is the repressive 1950′s.

But the Left-luddites want to go back to pre-industrial times.

Obama, in his short remarks released Saturday announcing the speech, called addressing climate a “serious challenge” but added it’s “one uniquely suited to America’s strengths.”He said the country would need scientists to design new fuels and farmers to grow them.

“We’ll need engineers to devise new sources of energy, and businesses to make and sell them,” Obama said.

This is science?

 

 

Kindergartener interrogated over cap gun then suspended 10 days

The anti-gun idoctrination continues

In the latest incident of anti-gun hysteria to erupt in a school setting, a kindergarten boy has been suspended from school for 10 days because he showed a friend his cowboy-style cap gun on the way to school.

The incident happened on Wednesday morning at about 8:30 a.m. on a school bus in Calvert County, Maryland, reports The Washington Post.

The suspended boy had acquired the menacing, plastic, orange-tipped weapon at Frontier Town, a western-themed campground with a water park, mini golf and the like.

School officials at Dowell Elementary School in the town of Lusby proceeded to question the five-year-old for over two hours before finally calling his mother, whom The Post also does not name.

The principal eventually called the boy’s mother at 10:50 a.m. By that time, the five-year-old had wet his pants (which the mother called highly unusual).

Interrogated? For two hours? Over a cap gun? I wonder what questions the Gestapo school officials posed to the child? Any doubt that he was asked if mommy and daddy had any guns? Of course, things could have been worse for the little boy

The Post explains that the principal — Jennifer L. Young, according to Dowell Elementary’s website — told the kindergartener’s mother that things would have been even worse had the toy gun been loaded with caps. In that case, the school would have regarded the plaything as an explosive and called the police.

Oh the police should have been called, and should have hauled the principal off in cuffs for abusing a child. What kind of sick bastard does that to a child of five? But I suppose that is the price we pay for allowing our educational system to indoctrinate America’s youth to hate guns, and make no mistake that is, in the end what this is about. The message that little boy got was that guns are bad and you will be punished for touching one, even a toy. Raising good little Stalinists has to start early you know.

Once again Democrats sticking their nose in where it does not belong

Via Weasel Zippers

Via WaPo:

A D.C. Council member is preparing to introduce a resolution calling on the Washington Redskins to change its name, perhaps to the Washington Redtails.

Council member David Grosso, an independent elected last year, said he plans to pursue his non-binding resolution because the current name is “a derogatory, racist name.”

“It’s been a long time that we’ve had this name associated with Washington, and I think its time we take a stand and change it,” Grosso said.

Grosso is circulating his resolution to other council members to try to get co-sponsors. So far, he said, council members Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4) and Kenyan McDuffie (D-Ward 5) have agreed to sign on to it.

Just think how much better we would all be if busy body legislators kept their focus on important mattes rather than trying to dictate every move we make.

 

Possibly the most inane, rambling, incoherent piece of writing I have ever suffered through

Charlotte and Harriet Childress have penned an article for the Washington Post that is so bad, so devoid of anything even approaching intelligent, that it makes columns by David Frum and David Brooks seem worthwhile. This screed is so bad that Meghan McCain would mock it. Here are some lowlights, as in very dim bulbs

White men have much to discuss about mass shootings

Imagine if African-American men and boys were committing mass shootings month after month, year after year. Articles and interviews would flood the media, and we’d have political debates demanding that African-Americans be “held accountable.”

Have these two ladies ever heard of Chicago? Black men and boys are slaughtering people, mainly other Black men and boys in Chicago. NO, most of the shootings are not “mass shootings” but the death toll is in the “mass” hundreds annually. And, the politicians, which these two nimrods think would be demanding accountability are silent. In fact most of the blame for “gun deaths” because being shot is somehow worse than being strangled or stabbed to death from politicians and the media is on law-abiding gun owners. Good grief, these two numb skulls disprove their entire theory in the first paragraph! No wonder the Washington Post could not wait to run it!

Oh and it gets worser and worser as these two buffoons keep digging in the Eternal Pit of Liberal Stupidity

If life were equitable, white male gun-rights advocates would face some serious questions to assess their degree of credibility and objectivity. We would expect them to explain:

What facets of white male culture create so many mass shootings?

So many? Seriously? There very, very few mass shootings in America. Of course the media sensationalizes them, and they are horrific but very rare. Far more common are Americans defending themselves with firearms, sorry I do not know the breakdown along racial lines, skin color is unimportant to me

Why are so many white men and boys producing and entertaining themselves with violent video games and other media?

Why do so many White men play violent video games? Well, because they are fun, certainly more fun than sloshing our way through the incoherent ramblings of the Childress sisters. Of course, to be fair, sawing your own thumbs off is likely more fun than reading what these two write.

Why do white men buy, sell and manufacture guns for profit; attend gun shows; and demonstrate for unrestricted gun access disproportionately more than people of other ethnicities or races?

Because there is a long tradition of gun ownership and self-defense here in America. Of course many women and many minorities also honor these traditions, and many White men oppose them, but the Childress Sisters of the Traveling Stupidity are too obsessed with skin color to note that obvious fact. Just yesterday, at the gun range, I was shooting next to two folks qualifying for the CHL’s. One was a young Black woman. Being a man, and therefore a sexist, just ask any Feminut, I noted that she was quite pretty. Two things stopped me from asking her out. First was that she is likely 15- 2o years younger than me. The second thing was that she is a better shot than me. And at some point I would likely make her angry, so….. I kid of course. I never feel threatened at the range. The young woman was entirely comfortable as well.  Imagine that, a White man A.K.A. The Source of All Evil according to the Childress sisters, flirting with a black woman at a gun range! I am sure the Childress sisters’ heads would explode!

Why are white male congressmen leading the fight against gun control?

Hmmm, Like Ted Cruz? Tim Scott? Marsha Blackburn? You can bet that Allen West would be fighting against this too, as would Mia Love, if they had been elected last November. The glaring fact is that MOST of Congress are White men, and MOST of those  fighting FOR gun control are White men too!

I guess that escaped the minds of the sisters too? Well of course

it did they are college faculty!

Harriet and Charlotte are consultants, authors, and college faculty who have researched, written, and spoken about issues related to social and political change for more than two decades. They have presented their work in person to thousands of people through more than fifty seminars or speeches in ten states. Charlotte and Harriet have published two books and eighteen articles.

Collectively, Charlotte and Harriet have:
• Earned eight college degrees, including one Ph.D. and four master’s degrees.
• Taught college for forty years: pharmacy, engineering, math, physics, chemistry.
• Received close to a million dollars in grants from the National Science Foundation to research math, science, 
   technology, and engineering education.
• Worked eleven years in R&D and manufacturing in Fortune 500 companies and NASA.

Charlotte and Harriet are identical twins who live near each other in Oregon. They are active in their communities, serving on boards of public and historic parks, schools, and neighborhood and community organizations. They enjoy long walks, camping, commuting by bicycle/walking/bus, organic gardening, cycling, dancing, reading, needlework, backpacking, and cuddling with beloved cats and dogs.

And, as children they fell out of the Stupid Tree, hitting every branch on the way down apparently! These two women are obviously highly educated, yet seem to be completely devoid of any common sense. Their “expertise” seems to be in engineering, math, physics, and chemistry. It certainly is not in the subject they are writing about here. Instead they feel, rather than think their way through what they write in the Post. It is like I say, they are educated beyond their hat size

Bob Woodward: Obama lied about the sequester

He seems to be able to lie with impunity and get a pass. He is slicker than Slick Willie

President Barack Obama and former White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew repeatedly lied by last year by claiming congressional Republicans were responsible for the looming $85 billion cut in the federal budget through sequestration, according to The Washington Post editor Bob Woodward.

Based on interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved in budget planning, Obama personally approved Lew’s plan to propose the mandatory trigger to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in July 2011.

A majority of Republicans ultimately voted for the Budget Control Act, which included the sequester.

Obama wanted this so he could play politics and further blame Republicans

 

Just call him the Executive Order President

Maybe President E.O. for short? Clearly, President Obama has no regard for the separation of powers, or the will of the people. It is the Legislative Branch that is supposed to write laws, clearly, this president prefers to rule by executive orders

Via WaPo:

President Obama is considering a series of new executive actions aimed at working around a recalcitrant Congress, including policies that could allow struggling homeowners to refinance their mortgages, provide new protections for gays and lesbians, make buildings more energy-efficient and toughen regulations for coal-fired power plants, according to people outside the White House involved in discussions on the issues.

One of the first orders is expected this week, when the Obama administration will call for the creation of new standards on what critical private-sector companies should do to protect their computer systems from hackers.

The moves underscore Obama’s increasingly aggressive use of executive authority, including 23 administrative actions on gun violence last month and previous orders that delayed deportations of young illegal immigrants and will lower student loan payments.

I have never been a fan of executive orders, and I never will.they place far too much power in the hands of one man. It seems that James Madison had similar concerns when he wrote this. “The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
–James Madison, Federalist 46

I am sure there is a valid place for such orders, but, those should be very specific and in my view rare.

What could be worse than Hillary 2016?

Smitty suggest Janet Napolitano might run if………

Via Drudge:

So, what happens if Hillary Clinton doesn’t run in 2016?
It is hard to imagine the presidential field without a woman contender, and here’s one to keep your eye on: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Napolitano is quietly making it known that she is considering the race, and there is reason to take her seriously.

Yeah, I can see the GOP, Tea Partiers, and basically anybody else with a functioning brain being more than a little motivated to work against Big Sis if she’s on the ticket.

Now, if she brings on Bill Maher as VP, would the double negative somehow work?

Napolitano/Maher 2016? Or maybe I should say Dumber than a Tree Stump/Ultimate Douche Nozzle 2o16? And the campaign slogan would have to be If you See Something Say Something

Hillary to testify on Benghazi

Zip of Weasel Zippers fame assumes, correctly I would think, that she does not want the issue hanging over the soon coming Hillary 2016 campaign. So, she will get the lying and denying over with now

Via Daily Mail:

Hillary Clinton will testify in front of Congress about the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya – despite receiving a concussion and being hospitalized for a blood clot, it was revealed on Thursday.

The Secretary of State cancelled appearances before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee after she fainted and hit her head on December 9.

She sent two aides to testify in her place.

Some conservatives initially claimed she was using the health issue to dodge testifying on the contentious issue.

The Washington Post reports that Clinton ‘remains committed’ to appearing in front of the Congressional committees, though no date has been set.

Of course, perhaps this is just a tactic to stall, hoping the issue goes away. 

 

Even after obama victory, MSNBS is still a Proctologists dream

MSNBS has become more of a comedy network than anything else. All a rational person can do is laugh at the bare naked bias. Newsbusters has the latest, this journey into bias provided by Martin Bashir

 

While speaking about the election with GQ’s Ana Marie Cox and the Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart, Bashir asked, “Do Republicans understand what has happened? Let’s listen to the great Charles Krauthammer.”

This evoked laughter from Cox and Capehart.

After playing a Fox News video clip of Krauthammer commenting about the election results Tuesday, Bashir said, “Now I need to apologize to any young viewers who may have been frightened by that face.”

This again evoked laughter from Cox.

Honestly, is this what MSNBC considers journalism today?

Pathetic, just what you would expect from the children at MSNBS. You know, I would love to watch Bashir debate Krauthammer, I would just love that epic smack down

And the Planned Parenthood provides mammograms lie rolls on

First, here is the lie, told by the Liar-in-Chief

Now the truth, from Planned Parenthood

The Planned Parenthood abortion business put out a statement in response to this week’s pushback against President Barack Obama for his misleading statement in the Tuesday night debate claiming it does mammograms.

“There are millions of women all across the country who rely on Planned Parenthood for mammograms, for cervical cancer screenings,” Obama claimed during the debate.

The statement goes on at length to talk about the referrals Planned Parenthood makes for women — referrals that women can obtain at any legitimate medical health provider that does not also destroy lives in abortions.

“In short, Planned Parenthood helps women nationwide get access to mammograms, as part of the range of health care Planned Parenthood health centers provide to nearly three million people a year. Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses do this like any other primary care provider or ob-gyn does,” it admits.

“Women rely on Planned Parenthood for referrals,” the abortion business admits. “Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses refer patients to other facilities for mammograms.”

Meanwhile, Factcheck.org confirms Planned Parenthood does not actually do mammograms.

At the second presidential debate, President Obama said that women “rely on” Planned Parenthood for mammograms. Actually, mammograms are not performed at the clinics; Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses conduct breast exams and refer patients to other facilities for mammograms.

Obama said: “When Governor Romney says that we should eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, there are millions of women all across the country who rely on Planned Parenthood for not just contraceptive care. They rely on it for mammograms, for cervical cancer screenings.”

Obama used a similar line again on Oct. 18, telling a Manchester, N.H., crowd: “Governor Romney said he’d end funding for Planned Parenthood, despite all the work it does to provide women with mammograms and breast cancer screenings.”

Women can’t walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic and get a mammogram on the spot. The clinics don’t have mammography equipment.

Yet the lie continues to be told, as if no woman could even get a mammogram unless hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars were funneled to Planned Parenthood. Weasel Zippers notes that even the Washington Post calls out Obama for this oft-repeated lie

via WaPo:

“You’ve got issues like Planned Parenthood, where that organization provides millions of women cervical-cancer screenings, mammograms, all kinds of basic health care.”

— President Obama during an interview on “The Tonight Show,” Oct. 24, 2012

President Obama appeared on “The Tonight Show” Wednesday, arguing his case for what’s at stake for women in the 2012 election after host Jay Leno prompted him to talk about a recent comment from Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock that pregnancies caused by rape are “something God intended.”

Obama suggested that Mitt Romney’s pledge to cut Planned Parenthood funding would deny women health services provided by the organization. But the incumbent’s reference to mammography prompted the Susan B. Anthony List antiabortion group to release a statement saying, “This oft-repeated myth has been repeatedly debunked, and it’s time the President stop misleading the American people in an effort to buoy his top political ally.”

We decided to investigate this issue to determine whether the president really stretched the truth about Planned Parenthood services.

Skipping to the conclusion:

The Pinocchio Test

The president has suggested time and again that Planned Parenthood directly provides mammograms, but the organization only offers referrals and helps women find financial resources for the exams. This suggests an intentional attempt to mislead voters about all the services that are at stake with decisions regarding federal funding for the controversial group.

Obama’s campaign points out that the incumbent was referring in each case to Planned Parenthood’s broader role as a health-care provider. But that doesn’t make his remarks any less inaccurate.

This is all about using multiple lies to convince voters that without Government funding, Planned Parenthood could not survive, and without Planned Parenthood, millions of women could not get mammograms, and so on. The fact is Planned Parenthood does not need federal funds to survive, further access to mammograms would not be restricted if the tax dollars given to Planned Parenthood were cut off, this is simply untrue

Your post-post debate wrap up! UPDATED! Obama camp worried about Ohio?

Here is my take, Obama was rude, condescending, looked petty, and rude with his consistent interruptions. Romney looked, and certainly acted far more presidential than Obama did. The best line Obama had, apparently was attacking Romney, and playing that tired class warfare card. To me, it is simple, Romney won, on both style and substance. The president glared at Romney, trying his angry face out I suppose. The most troubling aspect of the night was how brazenly Obama lied, flat out lied about Romney, it is truly pathetic, but this is the state of your modern Democratic Party. Others, of course weighed in, and here is a round up of what others are saying…….

Nice Deb, has a great round up herself, and a video of Krauthammer calling the debate decisively for Romney

The Lonely Conservative agrees with me that Obama got a whoopin she also saw the anger in Obama

I think Mitt Romney won tonight’s foreign policy debate. President Obama looked peeved and angry when he wasn’t laughing. He interrupted Romney numerous times. Romney seemed calm, cool and unflappable. He certainly didn’t come off as some sort of warmonger the Democrats want you to believe he is.

I was tweeting during the entire debate. You can read the tweets here, at least for a while. I also did a few posts on Sulia.

The Split Screen Was Not Obama’s Friend Tonight

Is Obama This Condescending To Foreign Leaders?

Obama Keeps Interrupting

Romney: Attacking Me Is Not Foreign Policy

Romney has momentum at this point, and I doubt tonight’s debate did anything to change that. I don’t care what theWashington Post says about Obama putting Romney on his heels. All anyone had to do was look at the split screen to see who was on his heels. It certainly wasn’t Romney, if it was he might have been the one doing all of the interrupting.

Weasel Zippers has a great line from Romney that made my ears perk up. Dennis Prager also mentioned this on his show today, although, I am not sure how many Americans will get the context

Despite what they say, Leftists think Romney won too, Twitchy has some of the death threats the tolerant Leftists Tweeted last night. And yes, some of the miscreants are still talking riots!

If those threatened riots happen, maybe we should blame Ohio, which Ace says is a state that Team Obama is fretting over

Via Instapundit, Obama’s firewall may be on fire.

[E]ven if Obama loses Ohio, his campaign sees another pathway to the presidency by nailing New Hampshire, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada and Colorado.

The first rule of Losing Ohio Club is you don’t talk about Losing Ohio Club.

By the way, it will be very hard for Obama to win three of those states (NH, IA, and CO). Colorado, especially, leans to Romney now.

The others are tossups… for now.

Why would Obama be talking about alternate routes to victory not including Ohio?

Obviously, I think, they don’t think Ohio is safe. And to talk about losing it… I think they think they’re behind.

And then there is North Carolina, which Team Obama might have given up on already

No debate coverage would be complete without checking in with The Other McCain who sums up how we all feel

Thank God, tonight’s debate is the last of this presidential campaign. Republicans endured 20 debates during the primary campaign, and we’re ready to stop debating and start stabbing out Chris Matthews’ eyeballs with sharp sticks voting.

Any way you slice it, Team Obama is deeply worried, and it is showing. Donald Douglas makes an important point about that here

That’s why Mitt Romney killed this debate. He’s optimistic and looking toward the future. He affirms America’s greatness, with no apologies. He’s hopeful and not stuck on bemoaning the “policies that got us into to this mess in the first place,” like a bleedin’ crybaby, unable to lead. Romney’s championing the policies that will get us out of it. The election can’t come to soon. The American people are going to send O on a long golfing retirement.

I have made the point in the past that Conservatives are far more optimistic than Liberals. And it shows on Obama’s face and rings out in his rhetoric, oh, yes, it shows in polls too and face it, when Obama loses Rob Schneider….. And Obama makes gaffes about bayonets… You see Mr. President, there these soldiers called Marines, and they use these things called bayonets

Last night Barack Obama mocked the use of horses and bayonets in the military.

Today Bayonet Inc. told Obama to “get educated.”
TMZ reported:

TMZ spoke with multiple people in the bayonet industry who tell us they were shocked and even offended when Obama brought up the weapon during last night’s debate.

According to the official U.S. Marine Corps website, every Marine is STILL required to complete a bayonet training program … because “the weapon becomes just as effective [as a rifle] in close combat situations.

We spoke with Dan Riker from Bayonet Inc. — a leading military surplus outlet that specializes in bayonets — who tells us he believes Obama’s comment was “ignorant … because our soldiers still use bayonets.”

He adds, “[Bayonets] are still distributed to the military all the time — he should get educated on it.”

OUCH! The biggest problem for Obama? He lies I will give Chris at Wyblog the last word

 

Halfway through last night’s debate I thought to myself, “I’m missing Monday Night Football for this?