The verdict in the Zimmerman case was celebrated by a class of folks in this country that may surprise the ordinary citizen. Race Hucksters.
The last thing these people wanted was for Zimmerman to go to jail. That would have ruined their payday, both monetarily and politically.
These are people who make a living out of bitching about how racist America is. They are out front and center in front of any camera or microphone they can find, spouting out imagined outrages and fermenting racial discord and anger. They live for these moments, for they make themselves relevant ... and rich.
You know the names - Jesse Jackson ... Al Sharpton ... Barack Obama ... Eric Holder ... Cynthia McKinney ... Sheila Jackson Lee ... and hundreds of other douchebags that insult our intelligence and our country with their vile crap.
They don't want an end to racism. That would end their rein as supreme leaders of the race war. That would end their time on the throne as leaders of 'their people' (in the words of Eric Holder).
This is not a new issue. People have been doing this for a long time, exploiting fear and anger in minorities for their own gain.
A famous person once said;
"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well."
This was not a KKK member (who would have been a Democrat in those days). This was not a vile Republican. It wasn't Rush Limbaugh.
This quotation was made by Booker T. Washington in 1911 - a black man of some note in our country's history.
Update - Sanford, FL police officials have confirmed that last Wednesday, Zimmerman helped rescue 4 members of a family who were trapped in their overturned SUV. After his heroic actions, he spoke with the officers on scene, and then left to go about his business. He didn't call reporters, didn't hold a news conference, didn't in any way try to bring attention to what he had done.
I can't wait to see the hucksters come out of the woodwork, claiming he set the whole thing up!
Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Friday, July 12, 2013
Numbers That Should Shock You, Numbers That Should Piss You Off
I've heard some numbers recently, numbers that the normal person should find very disturbing:
47%
The percentage of jobs held by adult Americans that are considered 'Full Time', or career positions.
43%
The percentage of jobs that will be 'Full Time' after Obamacare is fully implemented.
110 Million
The number of adult Americans who are receiving some form of financial assistance from the Federal Government.
3.3
The number of workers who are paying Social Security taxes needed to furnish SS benefits to a single retiree drawing SS benefits.
100 Million plus
The cost, in dollars, of Obama's recent African vacation. It was called a state visit, but in reality it was just another stop on the Obama world vacation tour.
250%
The amount of premium increase a healthy adult American will see their privately purchased health insurance policy increase as a result of Obamacare's implementation.
46 Million
The number of Americans (and non-Americans) drawing Food Stamp benefits (an all time high, up from about 27 million at the end of the Bush Administration).
50%
The percentage of children in America who are projected to receive food stamp benefits at some point in their childhood.
90%
The percentage of black children in America who are projected to receive food stamp benefits at some point in their childhood.
178
The number of rounds of golf Obama has played during his 4.5 years in office. This equates to taking off every fifth day, with pay, and charging all the costs to the taxpayer.
1 Million plus
The number of abortions Planned Parenthood has performed over the past three years.
0.0
The number of mammograms Planned Parenthood performed during that same three year period - despite the group's claims that it provides important women's 'health services'.
542.4 Million
The number of taxpayer dollars Planned Parenthood was given by the Federal Government in 2011 and 2012.
47%
The percentage of jobs held by adult Americans that are considered 'Full Time', or career positions.
43%
The percentage of jobs that will be 'Full Time' after Obamacare is fully implemented.
110 Million
The number of adult Americans who are receiving some form of financial assistance from the Federal Government.
3.3
The number of workers who are paying Social Security taxes needed to furnish SS benefits to a single retiree drawing SS benefits.
100 Million plus
The cost, in dollars, of Obama's recent African vacation. It was called a state visit, but in reality it was just another stop on the Obama world vacation tour.
250%
The amount of premium increase a healthy adult American will see their privately purchased health insurance policy increase as a result of Obamacare's implementation.
46 Million
The number of Americans (and non-Americans) drawing Food Stamp benefits (an all time high, up from about 27 million at the end of the Bush Administration).
50%
The percentage of children in America who are projected to receive food stamp benefits at some point in their childhood.
90%
The percentage of black children in America who are projected to receive food stamp benefits at some point in their childhood.
178
The number of rounds of golf Obama has played during his 4.5 years in office. This equates to taking off every fifth day, with pay, and charging all the costs to the taxpayer.
1 Million plus
The number of abortions Planned Parenthood has performed over the past three years.
0.0
The number of mammograms Planned Parenthood performed during that same three year period - despite the group's claims that it provides important women's 'health services'.
542.4 Million
The number of taxpayer dollars Planned Parenthood was given by the Federal Government in 2011 and 2012.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
These People Just Have No Shame ...
The tornado that ripped through Moore, OK yesterday had been off the ground barely an hour before Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) took to the floor of the US Senate to blame Global Warming for the disaster. She was not alone. Left wing moonbats all over the place were spouting out to anyone who would listen that this was caused by man made global climate change.
Sen. Boxer, in particular, was despicable. She used her time in front of the Senate chamber to push for passage of her Carbon Tax Bill:
"This is climate change. This is climate change. We were warned about extreme weather: Not just hot weather, but extreme weather. When I had my hearings, when I had the gavel years ago — it’s been a while — the scientists all agreed that what we’d start to see was extreme weather.”
“Carbon could cost us the planet. The least we could do is put a little charge on it so people move to clean energy.”
Her legislation, co-sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sander (Idiot-VT), penalizes with a 'tax' companies and individuals that actually use coal and oil. The tax is designed to do nothing but hurt citizens and put money into the government's pocket.
Senator Boxer, may I ask you a question?
First - Moore, OK has been hit 3 times by F4 tornados. 1999, 2003, and yesterday. If your incredibly important hearings were correct, and we would begin seeing terrible storms after the hearings, then the 1999 and 2003 events didn't actually happen and must be figments of a far right wing conspiracy, right?
Additionally, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) made a complete fool of himself on the Senate floor by blaming the lack of belief in global warming by the people of Oklahoma for bringing the disaster down upon themselves.
These people are United States Senators. Even though they are far left wing moonbats, you would think that they'd at least wait until the bodies of the victims cool before spouting their stupid, ignorant, partisan bullshit.
Sen. Boxer, in particular, was despicable. She used her time in front of the Senate chamber to push for passage of her Carbon Tax Bill:
"This is climate change. This is climate change. We were warned about extreme weather: Not just hot weather, but extreme weather. When I had my hearings, when I had the gavel years ago — it’s been a while — the scientists all agreed that what we’d start to see was extreme weather.”
“Carbon could cost us the planet. The least we could do is put a little charge on it so people move to clean energy.”
Her legislation, co-sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sander (Idiot-VT), penalizes with a 'tax' companies and individuals that actually use coal and oil. The tax is designed to do nothing but hurt citizens and put money into the government's pocket.
Senator Boxer, may I ask you a question?
First - Moore, OK has been hit 3 times by F4 tornados. 1999, 2003, and yesterday. If your incredibly important hearings were correct, and we would begin seeing terrible storms after the hearings, then the 1999 and 2003 events didn't actually happen and must be figments of a far right wing conspiracy, right?
Additionally, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) made a complete fool of himself on the Senate floor by blaming the lack of belief in global warming by the people of Oklahoma for bringing the disaster down upon themselves.
These people are United States Senators. Even though they are far left wing moonbats, you would think that they'd at least wait until the bodies of the victims cool before spouting their stupid, ignorant, partisan bullshit.
Sunday, May 19, 2013
A Lesson On Racism
It seems like forever that I've heard the term 'Jim Crow', or 'Jim Crow Laws'. It is almost always used (these days) to describe Republicans and/or Conservatives, and is meant as a demeaning attack - essentially calling Republicans racist.
I honestly didn't know who Jim Crow was until recently. When I heard a sound bite of a black, Democrat Congressman ranting about how Republicans wanted to return us to the days of 'Jim Crow', my curiosity got to me.
It's easy to find out - a Google search, or Wikipedia, and its right there. There was no person named 'Jim Crow'. Jim Crow wasn't some racist Republican Senator or Congressman who passed despicable laws meant to keep the black man down.
The term 'Jim Crow' was originated to describe the song and dance caricature of black folk by a white actor, Thomas D. Rice, who performed mockery of President Andrew Jackson's policies during the 1830s. Don't ask me why, but that's what the history books say.
'Jim Crow' morphed over the years to generally refer to any law passed that led to or enforced segregation policies. It was a particularly popular phrase during Reconstruction (1865-1877, a period some historians refer to as the Second Civil War). It was during the 1870s when Southern Democrats, thrown from power immediately after their defeat in the Civil War, regained power in every Southern state - either by lawful voting, voter intimidation, fraud, or violence. Southern Democrats formed the KKK during the early 1870s, where it functioned as the paramilitary arm of the Democrat Party, and openly fought Federal troops and murdered thousands of blacks and Republican whites. It was also popular in the early 1900s, to describe the efforts of President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, to pass far reaching segregation enforcement laws.
'Jim Crow' is thrown around a lot these days. I will bet that almost every one who uses it has no idea where it comes from. I heard a national TV interview with a black Democrat Congresswoman about a year ago, where she wondered aloud who was going to be the Republican's next Jim Crow - clearly she believed that Mr. Crow was some hateful, racist Republican from past years.
The term describes something that is disgusting. I wish that those who were using it would take the time to learn where it came from, who was responsible for its origin, and who was responsible for the heinous laws and policies it is used to describe during our country's history (DEMOCRATS).
The period of Reconstruction, the 12 years after the Civil War, was anything but reconstructive. It was a time of massive violence - essentially the Southern Democrat Party and its army, the KKK, continued the Civil War. There were thousands of people killed, with pitched battles between Federal troops and the KKK - it really was a continuation of the war. It is a fascinating period of our country's history, one that is sorely ignored in the history books and classes. No wonder - do you think liberal academia is going to teach our young about the horrific origins of their precious Democrat Party?
I honestly didn't know who Jim Crow was until recently. When I heard a sound bite of a black, Democrat Congressman ranting about how Republicans wanted to return us to the days of 'Jim Crow', my curiosity got to me.
It's easy to find out - a Google search, or Wikipedia, and its right there. There was no person named 'Jim Crow'. Jim Crow wasn't some racist Republican Senator or Congressman who passed despicable laws meant to keep the black man down.
The term 'Jim Crow' was originated to describe the song and dance caricature of black folk by a white actor, Thomas D. Rice, who performed mockery of President Andrew Jackson's policies during the 1830s. Don't ask me why, but that's what the history books say.
'Jim Crow' morphed over the years to generally refer to any law passed that led to or enforced segregation policies. It was a particularly popular phrase during Reconstruction (1865-1877, a period some historians refer to as the Second Civil War). It was during the 1870s when Southern Democrats, thrown from power immediately after their defeat in the Civil War, regained power in every Southern state - either by lawful voting, voter intimidation, fraud, or violence. Southern Democrats formed the KKK during the early 1870s, where it functioned as the paramilitary arm of the Democrat Party, and openly fought Federal troops and murdered thousands of blacks and Republican whites. It was also popular in the early 1900s, to describe the efforts of President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, to pass far reaching segregation enforcement laws.
'Jim Crow' is thrown around a lot these days. I will bet that almost every one who uses it has no idea where it comes from. I heard a national TV interview with a black Democrat Congresswoman about a year ago, where she wondered aloud who was going to be the Republican's next Jim Crow - clearly she believed that Mr. Crow was some hateful, racist Republican from past years.
The term describes something that is disgusting. I wish that those who were using it would take the time to learn where it came from, who was responsible for its origin, and who was responsible for the heinous laws and policies it is used to describe during our country's history (DEMOCRATS).
The period of Reconstruction, the 12 years after the Civil War, was anything but reconstructive. It was a time of massive violence - essentially the Southern Democrat Party and its army, the KKK, continued the Civil War. There were thousands of people killed, with pitched battles between Federal troops and the KKK - it really was a continuation of the war. It is a fascinating period of our country's history, one that is sorely ignored in the history books and classes. No wonder - do you think liberal academia is going to teach our young about the horrific origins of their precious Democrat Party?
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Obama Coming To Dallas For Cash
His Highness is visiting Dallas this Thursday, April 25th. The 'official' reasons for this are to attend the opening of the George W. Bush Library at SMU on Thursday morning, along with all the other living Presidents (this is customary for ANY Presidential Library's opening), and to attend a memorial service in West, Texas in the afternoon. OK, both of those are understandable, and laudable.
However, a third event to be held Thursday evening is the prime attraction, the biggest reason His Highness would lower himself to set foot in the Republic of Texas.
A Democrat fundraiser, held in Obama's honor, will be held at the house of Naomi Aberly and Larry Lebowitz. Those two are married, though you wouldn't know it by looking at the names. Aberly is a big time Democrat fundraising 'bundler', responsible for over a million dollars for Obama's two White House runs. Lebowitz is a very rich hedge fund manager. Both are sympathetic donors to various Democrat causes, including Planned Parenthood.
The home the dinner will be held at is valued at over 10 million. It has over 12,000 square feet, 5 full baths, 3 half baths, two fireplaces, and a pool. It is in the most exclusive area of Dallas, home of the ultra rich.
Sixty lucky donors will be allowed the honor of being under the same roof as the Royal Couple. Over a million dollars is expected to be raised for Democrat coffers at the event, which is closed to the media.
Now, there's nothing illegal about this under our current system. Obama can come to Dallas, or go to Hollywood, and walk away with huge bags of cash from the liberal elite. I don't even consider it immoral ... EXCEPT for the liberal hypocrisy of it.
Here is Obama schmoozing for dollars from the evil, rich, lily white 1% he so publicly despises. Here are rich liberals, eagerly handing over piles of their own money to this guy who professes to hate them and what they stand for. Here is a hedge fund manager - the epitomy of evil capitalism that Obama's Administration had pledged to eradicate, turning over gobs of cash to help that Administration.
A sane person just has to ask 'why'? Not just conservatives, but liberals as well, ought to be questioning the hypocrisy of this. The '99%'s' ought to be wondering what the hell is going on, when their Lord and Savior is hobnobbing with the very people he has told them to hate.
Do you think Aberly, Lebowitz, and the other 60 or so fools in attendance give a damn about poor black people? Do you think they lose sleep over the plight of the poor, innocent, hard working undocumented workers from our south? Are they concerned over the lack of adequate healthcare for the victims of virtual slavery imprisoned in our inner cities? Oh, hell no ...
If they were sincere, they would be turning over all of their money and possessions, giving them to either the government, or to charity. Of course they could keep a little, say $50K each, to help them until they could pick up a job flipping burgers. But once they are settled in that job, they should be perfectly happy with their circumstance, thrilled that the government is providing them with so much, and internally comfortable knowing that they 'made a difference'.
Instead, they sit behind armies of lawyers and accountants, pulling every trick legal and illegal, to skirt the tax system in order to keep as much of their money as possible. They look down their noses at the very people they profess to idolize.
It's not about social justice - its about control and power. These fundraisers are all about buying influence, and the time old tradition of trying to be seen with the 'in crowd'. Hypocrites ...
However, a third event to be held Thursday evening is the prime attraction, the biggest reason His Highness would lower himself to set foot in the Republic of Texas.
A Democrat fundraiser, held in Obama's honor, will be held at the house of Naomi Aberly and Larry Lebowitz. Those two are married, though you wouldn't know it by looking at the names. Aberly is a big time Democrat fundraising 'bundler', responsible for over a million dollars for Obama's two White House runs. Lebowitz is a very rich hedge fund manager. Both are sympathetic donors to various Democrat causes, including Planned Parenthood.
The home the dinner will be held at is valued at over 10 million. It has over 12,000 square feet, 5 full baths, 3 half baths, two fireplaces, and a pool. It is in the most exclusive area of Dallas, home of the ultra rich.
Sixty lucky donors will be allowed the honor of being under the same roof as the Royal Couple. Over a million dollars is expected to be raised for Democrat coffers at the event, which is closed to the media.
Now, there's nothing illegal about this under our current system. Obama can come to Dallas, or go to Hollywood, and walk away with huge bags of cash from the liberal elite. I don't even consider it immoral ... EXCEPT for the liberal hypocrisy of it.
Here is Obama schmoozing for dollars from the evil, rich, lily white 1% he so publicly despises. Here are rich liberals, eagerly handing over piles of their own money to this guy who professes to hate them and what they stand for. Here is a hedge fund manager - the epitomy of evil capitalism that Obama's Administration had pledged to eradicate, turning over gobs of cash to help that Administration.
A sane person just has to ask 'why'? Not just conservatives, but liberals as well, ought to be questioning the hypocrisy of this. The '99%'s' ought to be wondering what the hell is going on, when their Lord and Savior is hobnobbing with the very people he has told them to hate.
Do you think Aberly, Lebowitz, and the other 60 or so fools in attendance give a damn about poor black people? Do you think they lose sleep over the plight of the poor, innocent, hard working undocumented workers from our south? Are they concerned over the lack of adequate healthcare for the victims of virtual slavery imprisoned in our inner cities? Oh, hell no ...
If they were sincere, they would be turning over all of their money and possessions, giving them to either the government, or to charity. Of course they could keep a little, say $50K each, to help them until they could pick up a job flipping burgers. But once they are settled in that job, they should be perfectly happy with their circumstance, thrilled that the government is providing them with so much, and internally comfortable knowing that they 'made a difference'.
Instead, they sit behind armies of lawyers and accountants, pulling every trick legal and illegal, to skirt the tax system in order to keep as much of their money as possible. They look down their noses at the very people they profess to idolize.
It's not about social justice - its about control and power. These fundraisers are all about buying influence, and the time old tradition of trying to be seen with the 'in crowd'. Hypocrites ...
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
National Gun Registry - It's On Its Way
As I've been telling you here for some time, one of the biggest things Democrats are trying to push through under the guise of gun control is a National Gun Registry. This is pure, unadulterated, liberalism out of control.
Well, according to Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), language in the bi-partisan 'background check' compromise bill that Dems and Repubs are so proud of will allow Eric Holder and his boss to create such a registry. They can do it without Congressional approval, without Congressional oversight, without any vote by Congress or the people, and with whatever rules and regulations they wish.
Republicans - don't get fooled by Democrats complaining that they are giving up too much in this 'compromise' bill. It is a ruse. The biggest thing they want is buried in there. Contact your Representatives and Senators and demand language in any bill that will specifically forbid the establishment of any kind of registry for gun owners anywhere in this country! (And then watch the Democrats howl bloody murder!)
Update - Even more is coming to the surface about what's buried in this bill. Doctors will be authorized to declare someone a mental health threat unilaterally - no hearings, no independent verification. If they do so, the doctor will be required to report such a person to the government as mentally ill. At that point, such a person is blacklisted for many things, not only gun ownership. There is no limit as to how far such information would spread.
What if the doctor is mistaken? What if the doctor is having a bad day and makes a rash judgement? What happens if the doctor doesn't like the patient, or is having an affair with a patient's spouse?
Under this bill, you can be declared mentally ill, have it reported to the government, and not even know it!
Well, according to Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), language in the bi-partisan 'background check' compromise bill that Dems and Repubs are so proud of will allow Eric Holder and his boss to create such a registry. They can do it without Congressional approval, without Congressional oversight, without any vote by Congress or the people, and with whatever rules and regulations they wish.
Republicans - don't get fooled by Democrats complaining that they are giving up too much in this 'compromise' bill. It is a ruse. The biggest thing they want is buried in there. Contact your Representatives and Senators and demand language in any bill that will specifically forbid the establishment of any kind of registry for gun owners anywhere in this country! (And then watch the Democrats howl bloody murder!)
Update - Even more is coming to the surface about what's buried in this bill. Doctors will be authorized to declare someone a mental health threat unilaterally - no hearings, no independent verification. If they do so, the doctor will be required to report such a person to the government as mentally ill. At that point, such a person is blacklisted for many things, not only gun ownership. There is no limit as to how far such information would spread.
What if the doctor is mistaken? What if the doctor is having a bad day and makes a rash judgement? What happens if the doctor doesn't like the patient, or is having an affair with a patient's spouse?
Under this bill, you can be declared mentally ill, have it reported to the government, and not even know it!
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Democrat Bait and Switch On Immigration
I tried to watch Chuck Schumer (D-NY) this past weekend on the Sunday talking head programs, discussing his participation in the 'Gang of Eight' Senate effort to come up with an Immigration Reform Bill. I couldn't stand it, and turned the channel - I don't like some snake oil salesman lying through his teeth.
To listen to Schumer, and other Democrats, all they are doing is common sense things that no one should oppose, because they are common sense and have overwhelming bi-partisan support of the American People. Notice the key buzz words ...
They are not common sense, bi-partisan, harmless, or supported by the vast majority of Americans. No way ...
In a nutshell, the Democrat plan is to issue blanket amnesty to all illegal immigrants, phrasing it 'probationary'. Then, the Feds will consider border enforcement, using new 'metrics' to measure how secure the borders are. (Interestingly enough, he specifically refused to discuss what those metrics are.) Once the Feds declare the borders secure, then a path to citizenship will be established for all those on probation.
Three parts, to be done in a very specific order. Why?
First, 'probationary'. There was no definition offered of what probationary means, other than 'the poor victims will not have to be constantly be watching over their shoulders'. No offer of what could revoke such probation. No explanation of what rights and benefits those under probation would receive. (We already know that HHS has determined that Obamacare will cover illegal immigrants - what other Federal, State, and local benefits will they receive? Will they be allowed to vote, even though they aren't citizens? None of this was disclosed.)
Second, Border Security 'metrics'. Schumer specifically mentioned 'metrics' several times. This is code - all it means is that the bill will establish a method (or methods) for measuring border security. There is nothing in the bill that will actually have any effect on border security. You may have noticed in the past couple of months that whenever Napalitano or any other Administration official is in front of Congress (or a camera), they are quick to tout that the border is more secure now that at any time in the past. That is no accident. They are laying the groundwork for those 'metrics'. All Obama and his minions will have to say is 'look, border security meets the metrics, we are secure'. No action, no procedural change, no tightening of the borders at all.
Third, a Path to Citizenship. Anyone who passes their probationary period (which will be all of them) will be given a quick path to become full citizens, with all the benefits and rights that accompany that status.
There is a very specific reason that Democrats are pushing for the 3 steps in this order. They must confer status on the illegals BEFORE the sham of their metrics becomes common knowledge. When the general public finds out what they are trying to pull, the outrage is going to be overwhelming. Remember 2007, when they tried to ram something like this down our throats? Remember how it got shut down almost immediately due to the flood of public outcry? They know that could happen again - and that is the reason that Dems will not allow Border Security to be addressed first.
Democrats do not want the borders secured. They see illegals as a free flowing spigot of manufactured voters - and there is no way they want to see that windfall dry up. Once they pass their version (if it passes), they very much hope that masses of fools from south of our border will flock here to get their free citizenship and free shit from the government. Every one will be indoctrinated into becoming a Democrat voter - for Dems are their saviors.
For those who would argue that point, I cite 1986 as precedent. President Reagan allowed 3,000,000 illegals to become citizens/residents, based upon a promise from Democrats in Congress that Border Security would be fixed in exchange. It never was - there was never an effort to fix it. Shame on Republicans for not pressing that issue when they had control of Congress - they were fools to ignore the issue when they could have done something about it. Fast forward to 2013 - Dems stand to gain anywhere from 11 to 20 million new voters if they can shove this through. Why would they allow anything to be passed that would dry up that source of future votes? Pass amnesty, block any tightening of the borders, and a few years down the road reap another sizable catch of votes.
The three steps are probably a given. We're going to end up with 11 to 20 million new Democrats, that's almost certain. The only thing that is really in play is the order of the first two steps. Will Republicans fight for Border Security first, to turn off the faucet. Or, will they cave in, hoping somehow that their timidity will con a bunch of Hispanics into voting for them? It's a loss either way. The only question is whether they stand up and stop the bleeding now, or just bend over and continue to take it.
Oh, and as a side bar - none of this will have any effect on those law abiding immigrants who are going through the full, legal path to becoming American Citizens. They will not be offered probation, or a fast path. What Bullshit!
To listen to Schumer, and other Democrats, all they are doing is common sense things that no one should oppose, because they are common sense and have overwhelming bi-partisan support of the American People. Notice the key buzz words ...
They are not common sense, bi-partisan, harmless, or supported by the vast majority of Americans. No way ...
In a nutshell, the Democrat plan is to issue blanket amnesty to all illegal immigrants, phrasing it 'probationary'. Then, the Feds will consider border enforcement, using new 'metrics' to measure how secure the borders are. (Interestingly enough, he specifically refused to discuss what those metrics are.) Once the Feds declare the borders secure, then a path to citizenship will be established for all those on probation.
Three parts, to be done in a very specific order. Why?
First, 'probationary'. There was no definition offered of what probationary means, other than 'the poor victims will not have to be constantly be watching over their shoulders'. No offer of what could revoke such probation. No explanation of what rights and benefits those under probation would receive. (We already know that HHS has determined that Obamacare will cover illegal immigrants - what other Federal, State, and local benefits will they receive? Will they be allowed to vote, even though they aren't citizens? None of this was disclosed.)
Second, Border Security 'metrics'. Schumer specifically mentioned 'metrics' several times. This is code - all it means is that the bill will establish a method (or methods) for measuring border security. There is nothing in the bill that will actually have any effect on border security. You may have noticed in the past couple of months that whenever Napalitano or any other Administration official is in front of Congress (or a camera), they are quick to tout that the border is more secure now that at any time in the past. That is no accident. They are laying the groundwork for those 'metrics'. All Obama and his minions will have to say is 'look, border security meets the metrics, we are secure'. No action, no procedural change, no tightening of the borders at all.
Third, a Path to Citizenship. Anyone who passes their probationary period (which will be all of them) will be given a quick path to become full citizens, with all the benefits and rights that accompany that status.
There is a very specific reason that Democrats are pushing for the 3 steps in this order. They must confer status on the illegals BEFORE the sham of their metrics becomes common knowledge. When the general public finds out what they are trying to pull, the outrage is going to be overwhelming. Remember 2007, when they tried to ram something like this down our throats? Remember how it got shut down almost immediately due to the flood of public outcry? They know that could happen again - and that is the reason that Dems will not allow Border Security to be addressed first.
Democrats do not want the borders secured. They see illegals as a free flowing spigot of manufactured voters - and there is no way they want to see that windfall dry up. Once they pass their version (if it passes), they very much hope that masses of fools from south of our border will flock here to get their free citizenship and free shit from the government. Every one will be indoctrinated into becoming a Democrat voter - for Dems are their saviors.
For those who would argue that point, I cite 1986 as precedent. President Reagan allowed 3,000,000 illegals to become citizens/residents, based upon a promise from Democrats in Congress that Border Security would be fixed in exchange. It never was - there was never an effort to fix it. Shame on Republicans for not pressing that issue when they had control of Congress - they were fools to ignore the issue when they could have done something about it. Fast forward to 2013 - Dems stand to gain anywhere from 11 to 20 million new voters if they can shove this through. Why would they allow anything to be passed that would dry up that source of future votes? Pass amnesty, block any tightening of the borders, and a few years down the road reap another sizable catch of votes.
The three steps are probably a given. We're going to end up with 11 to 20 million new Democrats, that's almost certain. The only thing that is really in play is the order of the first two steps. Will Republicans fight for Border Security first, to turn off the faucet. Or, will they cave in, hoping somehow that their timidity will con a bunch of Hispanics into voting for them? It's a loss either way. The only question is whether they stand up and stop the bleeding now, or just bend over and continue to take it.
Oh, and as a side bar - none of this will have any effect on those law abiding immigrants who are going through the full, legal path to becoming American Citizens. They will not be offered probation, or a fast path. What Bullshit!
Monday, March 25, 2013
Is There Anything Obama Says That Isn't A Lie?
No, I really don't think so. If he stood up there and said the sun will rise tomorrow, I'm going to go out and party like its the end of the world tonight!
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Please ... Don't Confuse Her With Facts
Meet Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL). She was elected to the United States Congress to represent the people of Florida's 5th Congressional District.
Here is Ms. Brown at a recent town hall meeting, where she is questioned by a constituent about the Medicare cuts being used to fund Obamacare. You may have to turn up the volume a bit - the hideous, fake caucasian-woman wig she has propped up on her head kind of deadens her response ...
Sorry, I was unable to get the embed feature to work on this one, it isn't on youtube. If you want to see it (and you really should if you want a laugh), take this link over to CNSNews.com and watch it there.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-corrine-brown-don-t-confuse-me-any-facts
Yes, that's right. She actually says 'Don't confuse me with facts." At the end of this clip, she tells an outright lie - that no Medicare cuts were made to support Obamacare. Well, Ms. Brown ... $716 Billion worth of cuts to Medicare, shifted into Obamacare, would beg to differ.
Question - What do you call a liberal Democrat who lies straight through her teeth directly to the people who elected her?
Answer - A liberal Democrat ...
For those of you who might think that Rep. Brown was just confused, or was having a bad day ... go to youtube and search on her. You will find that she's been a source of ludicrous statements and racial hatred for a long time! Prepare to be entertained ...
By The Way ... here is Florida's Fifth District ... an obscene snake that stretches from Jacksonville in the north to Orlando in the south. You might ask why such an odd shape - simple, the district was drawn to guarantee that a Democrat minority representative would get elected.
One last item, a respectfully submitted suggestion for Rep. Brown - damn, lady, get a new wig!
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Conclusive Evidence That Strict Gun Control Works
News from Obama's home stomping grounds of Chicago should become more ammunition (pun intended) for him to use for his War on Guns.
Chicago, with some of the toughest gun control laws in the country (including a ban on 'assault weapons') this past Saturday experienced 7 dead and 6 wounded IN ONE DAY. Over 40 people have lost their lives in gun violence in Boss Rahm's territory since Jan. 1.
Yesterday, a 15 year old girl, a majorette who had performed for Obama at a couple of inaugural events, was gunned down.
Given the overwhelming success of Democrat generated gun control in Chicago, why wouldn't the rest of the country want to jump on board? Why is Obama flying all the way to Nevada to hold a campaign rally (at taxpayer expense) to announce his gun control edicts, rather than to his home turf of Chicago?
(Chicago has been controlled by the Democrat political machine, well, forever. It is a sterling example of 'when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns')
Chicago, with some of the toughest gun control laws in the country (including a ban on 'assault weapons') this past Saturday experienced 7 dead and 6 wounded IN ONE DAY. Over 40 people have lost their lives in gun violence in Boss Rahm's territory since Jan. 1.
Yesterday, a 15 year old girl, a majorette who had performed for Obama at a couple of inaugural events, was gunned down.
Given the overwhelming success of Democrat generated gun control in Chicago, why wouldn't the rest of the country want to jump on board? Why is Obama flying all the way to Nevada to hold a campaign rally (at taxpayer expense) to announce his gun control edicts, rather than to his home turf of Chicago?
(Chicago has been controlled by the Democrat political machine, well, forever. It is a sterling example of 'when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns')
Sunday, January 20, 2013
New York's Governor Is Insane
NY Governor Andrew Cuomo has made no secret of his Presidential ambitions. He has taken a series of steps since his ascension to NY's top seat, all formulated to build his far left kook base. His recent popularity numbers (over the past 6 months) are around 70% (which tells you everything you need to know about the general population of New York).
He's passed through gay marriage legistlation. He's pushed through the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation (more on that a little later). He's now trying to endear himself to the far left kooks who believe abortions are a 'women's health issue'.
His latest bill, called 'The Reproductive Health Care Act', allows unrestricted, elective abortions all the way until the moment of birth. Currently, third trimester abortions are only allowed if the woman's life is in danger. Now, a woman and her child killing partner can terminate the life of an unborn child up to the point where the child's last toes leave the womb.
The bill goes further, making illegal any legislation that in any way restricts abortion or anything to do with abortion. His goal is to turn NY State into the world's abortion capital. I guess he thinks that will help their pathetic economy.
This hypocritical bastard also just rammed through an attack on the 2nd Amendment Rights of NY citizens, in the name of 'protecting the children'. What a piece of shit Cuomo is. With him and Mayor Doomburg in NYC being the faces of the state and city, its no wonder people from New York are fleeing to the sunbelt in record numbers.
NY State Rep. Steve McLaughlin (R) has brought to light the extent of what Cuomo and his Dem minions in the NY State House were trying to push through as parts of the NY SAFE Act (otherwise known as the Adolph Hitler Memorial Gun Confiscation Act). 15 proposals were cut from the final voted on bill, apparently because Democrats knew they were so heinous that public outcry would prevent the bill from passing into law. Democrats then tried like hell to keep these 15 proposals from becoming public knowledge - they know that the release of this information will piss a lot of New Yorkers off;
1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
2. Confiscation of ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be released to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons
Rep. McClaughlin tried to bring this information up in session, but was prevented - and then his Democrat counterpart begged him not to make the information public. Very instructive ... NY has learned how to pass legislation from Obama - in the dark of night, out of view of the public they are supposed to serve ...
Thank you, Rep. McLaughlin, for bringing this out into the public eye. Note the discomfort the Democrat keeps showing as he tries to explain the unexplainable. Exposing these left wing creeps will make them scurry for the cover of a rock to hide under.
He's passed through gay marriage legistlation. He's pushed through the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation (more on that a little later). He's now trying to endear himself to the far left kooks who believe abortions are a 'women's health issue'.
His latest bill, called 'The Reproductive Health Care Act', allows unrestricted, elective abortions all the way until the moment of birth. Currently, third trimester abortions are only allowed if the woman's life is in danger. Now, a woman and her child killing partner can terminate the life of an unborn child up to the point where the child's last toes leave the womb.
The bill goes further, making illegal any legislation that in any way restricts abortion or anything to do with abortion. His goal is to turn NY State into the world's abortion capital. I guess he thinks that will help their pathetic economy.
This hypocritical bastard also just rammed through an attack on the 2nd Amendment Rights of NY citizens, in the name of 'protecting the children'. What a piece of shit Cuomo is. With him and Mayor Doomburg in NYC being the faces of the state and city, its no wonder people from New York are fleeing to the sunbelt in record numbers.
NY State Rep. Steve McLaughlin (R) has brought to light the extent of what Cuomo and his Dem minions in the NY State House were trying to push through as parts of the NY SAFE Act (otherwise known as the Adolph Hitler Memorial Gun Confiscation Act). 15 proposals were cut from the final voted on bill, apparently because Democrats knew they were so heinous that public outcry would prevent the bill from passing into law. Democrats then tried like hell to keep these 15 proposals from becoming public knowledge - they know that the release of this information will piss a lot of New Yorkers off;
1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
2. Confiscation of ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be released to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons
Rep. McClaughlin tried to bring this information up in session, but was prevented - and then his Democrat counterpart begged him not to make the information public. Very instructive ... NY has learned how to pass legislation from Obama - in the dark of night, out of view of the public they are supposed to serve ...
Thank you, Rep. McLaughlin, for bringing this out into the public eye. Note the discomfort the Democrat keeps showing as he tries to explain the unexplainable. Exposing these left wing creeps will make them scurry for the cover of a rock to hide under.
Monday, December 17, 2012
How Will The Left Spin This Into GOP Racism?
South Carolina Governor Haley appointed Rep. Tim Scott as replacement for Jim Demint, who resigned his US Senate seat after winning reelection. Rep. Scott was elected to the US House of Representatives as part of the 2010 GOP landslide. Rep. Scott is considered by Republicans as a conservative that can be counted on to uphold conservative values while in Congress.
Those on the left will immediately label this as another example of right wing extremist racism. Why not? Eveything that Republicans do is labeled as racist.
Governor Nikki Haley is female. She was born Nimrata Nikki Randhawa, to Sikh parents who immigrated legally to this country from India. A rising star in the GOP, she is a conservative - and a female - and a minority. You would think that this would make her a darling to the liberal left. Not so ... her politics aren't liberal, so her sex and heritage are irrelevant - she is still an evil, racist, rich, fat cat toy of the rich whities who make up the Republican Party.
Rep., now Senator, Tim Scott is an African-American male. He is a staunch conservative who was swept into the US House by the Tea Party wave in 2010. He will be the only black US Senator in the upcoming Congress. He is the seventh black US Senator in the history of our country. You would think that the Democrats would be praising Obama (or God) for such a progressive moment. Not so ... Scott has been labeled Uncle Tom, racist (for abandoning liberal principles), token, irrelevant, and worse. He is a target for the left, not an accomplishment.
7 black Senators in our history. Why? If African-American accomplishment is so important to the Democrat Party, if they are the champions of the minorities, why haven't they put forth more black Senatorial candidates? You figure that at any given time, there are an average of 50 Senate seats owned by Democrats. How many of those seats should be held by blacks, or Hispanics, Native Americans, or Eskimos, etc ... during any specific Congressional session - if you listen to the Democrat line of equal, fair, racially proper representation?
By the way - here are those 7 Senators, their states, their terms, and their parties ...
Tim Scott, South Carolina, 2013-2014, Republican
Roland Burris, Illinios, 2009-2010 ( Obama's replacement, as designated by Rod Blagojevich), Democrat
Barack Obama, Illinios, 2006-2008 (resigned to take the office of President), Democrat
Carol Mosely Braun, Illinios, 1993-1999, Democrat
Edward William Brooke, Massachusetts, 1967-1979, Republican
Blanche Kelso Bruce, Mississippi, 1875-1881, Republican
Hiram Rhodes Revels, Mississippi, 1870-1871, Republican
You will notice that the only three Democrats on this list all held the SAME Senate seat, one after the other. Where are all the other blacks that should have been in the Senate representing the Democrat Party over the past 200+ years? According to the Democrat mantra, there should have been at least two black Democrat Senators in each and every session of Congress - that is if Democrats actually considered black Americans as anything other than a captive voting block.
And Republicans are the racists ... seriously?
Senator Scott - Congratulations. I wish you all the success in the world as you represent your state and conservative ideals. I mean this with all the respect in the world ... I don't care what color your skin is.
Those on the left will immediately label this as another example of right wing extremist racism. Why not? Eveything that Republicans do is labeled as racist.
Governor Nikki Haley is female. She was born Nimrata Nikki Randhawa, to Sikh parents who immigrated legally to this country from India. A rising star in the GOP, she is a conservative - and a female - and a minority. You would think that this would make her a darling to the liberal left. Not so ... her politics aren't liberal, so her sex and heritage are irrelevant - she is still an evil, racist, rich, fat cat toy of the rich whities who make up the Republican Party.
Rep., now Senator, Tim Scott is an African-American male. He is a staunch conservative who was swept into the US House by the Tea Party wave in 2010. He will be the only black US Senator in the upcoming Congress. He is the seventh black US Senator in the history of our country. You would think that the Democrats would be praising Obama (or God) for such a progressive moment. Not so ... Scott has been labeled Uncle Tom, racist (for abandoning liberal principles), token, irrelevant, and worse. He is a target for the left, not an accomplishment.
7 black Senators in our history. Why? If African-American accomplishment is so important to the Democrat Party, if they are the champions of the minorities, why haven't they put forth more black Senatorial candidates? You figure that at any given time, there are an average of 50 Senate seats owned by Democrats. How many of those seats should be held by blacks, or Hispanics, Native Americans, or Eskimos, etc ... during any specific Congressional session - if you listen to the Democrat line of equal, fair, racially proper representation?
By the way - here are those 7 Senators, their states, their terms, and their parties ...
Tim Scott, South Carolina, 2013-2014, Republican
Roland Burris, Illinios, 2009-2010 ( Obama's replacement, as designated by Rod Blagojevich), Democrat
Barack Obama, Illinios, 2006-2008 (resigned to take the office of President), Democrat
Carol Mosely Braun, Illinios, 1993-1999, Democrat
Edward William Brooke, Massachusetts, 1967-1979, Republican
Blanche Kelso Bruce, Mississippi, 1875-1881, Republican
Hiram Rhodes Revels, Mississippi, 1870-1871, Republican
You will notice that the only three Democrats on this list all held the SAME Senate seat, one after the other. Where are all the other blacks that should have been in the Senate representing the Democrat Party over the past 200+ years? According to the Democrat mantra, there should have been at least two black Democrat Senators in each and every session of Congress - that is if Democrats actually considered black Americans as anything other than a captive voting block.
And Republicans are the racists ... seriously?
Senator Scott - Congratulations. I wish you all the success in the world as you represent your state and conservative ideals. I mean this with all the respect in the world ... I don't care what color your skin is.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Fiscal Cliff - We're Being Lied To
The fiscal cliff approaching us is on pretty much everyone's mind (except for the free shit generation). We're getting close to the deadline for legislation to avoid the myriad of tax hikes and automatic budget cuts that are supposed to trigger on Jan. 2.
You would think that Congress and Obama would be hard at work trying to head off the impending disaster. That isn't necessarily the case ...
Obama just this week appointed Tim Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury and tax cheater, to be his representative in negotiations with Republicans on the issue. JUST NOW!!!!!!
(This same Tim Geithner, the person who is supposed to the be fiscal guide for the country, the expert on fiscal policy, came out early this week and stated that the Debt Ceiling Limit should be abolished - so the government can spend how ever much money it wants, and drive us as deep into debt as it wants, with no legal restraint. How's that for responsible fiscal policy?)
Democrat leaders in both the House and Senate have been blurting out their talking points on the subject to any camera they can find. Budget cuts are off the table, unless they are Defense. Social Security reform can't even be talked about. Obamacare is unapproachable.
HIs Highness, instead of being right in the thick of negotiations, is out blowing a lot of taxpayer money on a campaign tour to prop up his 'soak the rich' message.
Geithner had his first meeting with John Boehner, Speaker of the House, today on the emergency. Boehner came out of the meeting frustrated and angry that Geithner had presented absolutely nothing in the way of proposals except for their months old line of 'raise taxes on the rich' ... no reform, no budget cuts, no tax code changes - nothing.
Here are the facts of what Democrats are proposing at this point to come up with the required 1.2 Trillion dollar amount of cuts/revenue required to keep the automatic Jan.2 cuts from happeneing;
1) Raise the tax rate on the rich from 35% to 39%.
2) Count on savings from Medicare and Medicaid, that will supposedly provide savings ... BUT in no way can be allowed to impact any amount of benefits delivered to anyone. (How this is supposed to happen is beyond me. Obamacare already counts on robbing 761 billion dollars from these two program in order to fund 'free Obamacare shit'. How in the hell are they going to find more than 761 billion in waste and fraud in those programs, and if they do, how much is that going to be?)
That's it.
Those are the only things Democrats have been willing to consider. Someone who knows 'liberal math' needs to explain to me how raising the tax rate (which will result in slightly less than 80 billion in additional revenue per year) is supposed to solve a 1.2 trillion dollar requirement. Anyone have that answer for me?
Someone who understands liberal economics need to explain how this tiny drop in the deficit bucket is supposed to outweigh the devastating effect the higher tax rate will have on small business (the largest employer in the country), cause hundreds of thousands more people to lose their jobs (the layoffs have already begun), and push the country further down into a general recession. Someone please explain the logic of that tradeoff.
Given the facts of what Democrats are (or are not would be a better portrayal) proposing, you would think the public outcry would be massive. Well, most of the public doesn't know about it, for the mainstream media is busy portraying Republicans as the roadblock to an agreement.
Now, here's a little secret ...
Congress passed the law that will trigger the automatic cuts. Congress passed the laws that will cause the automatic tax increases and the same time.
Congress can just as easily pass a law negating those earlier laws. There is no such thing as a permanent, untouchable law (even though Democrats tried to write that provision into Obamacare, in order to keep any future Congress from repealing it - that effort failed).
Congress can also pass laws undoing the fiscal damage after the fact, if they want to.
So why all the hubbub, why all the outrage? Because 'Fiscal Cliff' is a headline, and it is an issue that Democrats are using to bash Republicans over the head. Dems and the manistream media are barraging the public constantly with 'rich, white Republicans hate you, and they're only interested in keeping their money'. It is effective. For their target audience, it is like chumming the shark infested waters.
A side benefit to Democrats is IF the automatic cuts are triggered, the Defense Department gets eviscerated - and that makes liberals orgasmic in anticipation.
The Fiscal Cliff is a win/win for Democrats. It is a lose/lose for Republicans, for no matter what bad option happens, mainstream media will blame the GOP for it.
Update - Geithner's meeting with Congressional Republican leadership went less than well, that's for certain. Not unexpected, I guess.
Geithner brought the President's proposal and laid it out - 85 billion in increased revenue per year by allowing the Bush tax cuts for 'the rich' to expire (which is a tax increase). 1.6 trillion in unspecified new taxes over the next 10 years. Hopefully some additional savings can be found in Medicare, but no cuts, no commitments. AND, Obama takes complete control of the debt ceiling, raising it whenever he wants to - not when Congress (which has the Constitutional authority) approves.
Not a single budget cut or reduction in the proposal - nothing but tax increases - plus an unprecedented power grab.
Unbelievable that a President, who is out there right now campaigning on how bad the Republicans are, and how they are preventing any kind of deal, has the gall to roll out such a pile of bullshit, and then get indignant when Republicans go WTF?
Update II - More details of Obama's 'opening offer', presented by Geithner. It included INCREASED spending in the form of another stimulus bill. The amount, 85 billion dollars, is more than the expected revenue gain from their raising the tax rates on 'the rich'.
If this doesn't expose their attack on the rich as what it is - an attack based on FAIRNESS ... uh, I mean HATRED, made to please Obama's base. That's all it is - it isn't about the money at all.
Obama has decided to punt and make the Republicans come up with a plan. Then he can sit back and shoot it down, without ever having to put forward anything serious himself. Lazy, calculating f**k ...
And, please don't believe that he's going to be hard at work trying to find aq compromise right down to the wire. No, Dear Leader is spending the time between Dec. 17th and Jan. 6th in Hawaii, on an all expense paid (by the taxpayer) 5 Star beadch front vacation for him, family, and several dozen of their friends. I wonder how the 99% feel about paying for that? Being in Hawaii keeps him away form Washington, and away from any actual work on this issue.
Obama is hell bent on driving us over the cliff, and all he will do is blame Republicans.
Update - Figures released by the CBO indicate that Obama is lying. Wow ... how surprising.
Obama states that those rich white bastards have to be soaked for more taxes, in order to cut the deficit and pay down the debt. He's stated that he MUST havbe 1.6 trillion in new tax revenue in order to do it. 1.6 trillion ... our debt is 16 trillion. Seems like there is a synergy there, doesn't it? The normal, brain dead idiot who voted for him will believe him when he says he's going to cut spending and fix our fiscal problems with all this money taken from the evil rich.
Well, guess what? The vast majrotiy of that 1.6 trillion is earmarked by Obama towards NEW spending, above and beyond what he's already burning through;
75% of what Obama is demanding, 1.2 trillion dollars, will go towards NEW spending. Not exactly the public message he's spitting out, is it?
You would think that Congress and Obama would be hard at work trying to head off the impending disaster. That isn't necessarily the case ...
Obama just this week appointed Tim Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury and tax cheater, to be his representative in negotiations with Republicans on the issue. JUST NOW!!!!!!
(This same Tim Geithner, the person who is supposed to the be fiscal guide for the country, the expert on fiscal policy, came out early this week and stated that the Debt Ceiling Limit should be abolished - so the government can spend how ever much money it wants, and drive us as deep into debt as it wants, with no legal restraint. How's that for responsible fiscal policy?)
Democrat leaders in both the House and Senate have been blurting out their talking points on the subject to any camera they can find. Budget cuts are off the table, unless they are Defense. Social Security reform can't even be talked about. Obamacare is unapproachable.
HIs Highness, instead of being right in the thick of negotiations, is out blowing a lot of taxpayer money on a campaign tour to prop up his 'soak the rich' message.
Geithner had his first meeting with John Boehner, Speaker of the House, today on the emergency. Boehner came out of the meeting frustrated and angry that Geithner had presented absolutely nothing in the way of proposals except for their months old line of 'raise taxes on the rich' ... no reform, no budget cuts, no tax code changes - nothing.
Here are the facts of what Democrats are proposing at this point to come up with the required 1.2 Trillion dollar amount of cuts/revenue required to keep the automatic Jan.2 cuts from happeneing;
1) Raise the tax rate on the rich from 35% to 39%.
2) Count on savings from Medicare and Medicaid, that will supposedly provide savings ... BUT in no way can be allowed to impact any amount of benefits delivered to anyone. (How this is supposed to happen is beyond me. Obamacare already counts on robbing 761 billion dollars from these two program in order to fund 'free Obamacare shit'. How in the hell are they going to find more than 761 billion in waste and fraud in those programs, and if they do, how much is that going to be?)
That's it.
Those are the only things Democrats have been willing to consider. Someone who knows 'liberal math' needs to explain to me how raising the tax rate (which will result in slightly less than 80 billion in additional revenue per year) is supposed to solve a 1.2 trillion dollar requirement. Anyone have that answer for me?
Someone who understands liberal economics need to explain how this tiny drop in the deficit bucket is supposed to outweigh the devastating effect the higher tax rate will have on small business (the largest employer in the country), cause hundreds of thousands more people to lose their jobs (the layoffs have already begun), and push the country further down into a general recession. Someone please explain the logic of that tradeoff.
Given the facts of what Democrats are (or are not would be a better portrayal) proposing, you would think the public outcry would be massive. Well, most of the public doesn't know about it, for the mainstream media is busy portraying Republicans as the roadblock to an agreement.
Now, here's a little secret ...
Congress passed the law that will trigger the automatic cuts. Congress passed the laws that will cause the automatic tax increases and the same time.
Congress can just as easily pass a law negating those earlier laws. There is no such thing as a permanent, untouchable law (even though Democrats tried to write that provision into Obamacare, in order to keep any future Congress from repealing it - that effort failed).
Congress can also pass laws undoing the fiscal damage after the fact, if they want to.
So why all the hubbub, why all the outrage? Because 'Fiscal Cliff' is a headline, and it is an issue that Democrats are using to bash Republicans over the head. Dems and the manistream media are barraging the public constantly with 'rich, white Republicans hate you, and they're only interested in keeping their money'. It is effective. For their target audience, it is like chumming the shark infested waters.
A side benefit to Democrats is IF the automatic cuts are triggered, the Defense Department gets eviscerated - and that makes liberals orgasmic in anticipation.
The Fiscal Cliff is a win/win for Democrats. It is a lose/lose for Republicans, for no matter what bad option happens, mainstream media will blame the GOP for it.
Update - Geithner's meeting with Congressional Republican leadership went less than well, that's for certain. Not unexpected, I guess.
Geithner brought the President's proposal and laid it out - 85 billion in increased revenue per year by allowing the Bush tax cuts for 'the rich' to expire (which is a tax increase). 1.6 trillion in unspecified new taxes over the next 10 years. Hopefully some additional savings can be found in Medicare, but no cuts, no commitments. AND, Obama takes complete control of the debt ceiling, raising it whenever he wants to - not when Congress (which has the Constitutional authority) approves.
Not a single budget cut or reduction in the proposal - nothing but tax increases - plus an unprecedented power grab.
Unbelievable that a President, who is out there right now campaigning on how bad the Republicans are, and how they are preventing any kind of deal, has the gall to roll out such a pile of bullshit, and then get indignant when Republicans go WTF?
Update II - More details of Obama's 'opening offer', presented by Geithner. It included INCREASED spending in the form of another stimulus bill. The amount, 85 billion dollars, is more than the expected revenue gain from their raising the tax rates on 'the rich'.
If this doesn't expose their attack on the rich as what it is - an attack based on FAIRNESS ... uh, I mean HATRED, made to please Obama's base. That's all it is - it isn't about the money at all.
Obama has decided to punt and make the Republicans come up with a plan. Then he can sit back and shoot it down, without ever having to put forward anything serious himself. Lazy, calculating f**k ...
And, please don't believe that he's going to be hard at work trying to find aq compromise right down to the wire. No, Dear Leader is spending the time between Dec. 17th and Jan. 6th in Hawaii, on an all expense paid (by the taxpayer) 5 Star beadch front vacation for him, family, and several dozen of their friends. I wonder how the 99% feel about paying for that? Being in Hawaii keeps him away form Washington, and away from any actual work on this issue.
Obama is hell bent on driving us over the cliff, and all he will do is blame Republicans.
Update - Figures released by the CBO indicate that Obama is lying. Wow ... how surprising.
Obama states that those rich white bastards have to be soaked for more taxes, in order to cut the deficit and pay down the debt. He's stated that he MUST havbe 1.6 trillion in new tax revenue in order to do it. 1.6 trillion ... our debt is 16 trillion. Seems like there is a synergy there, doesn't it? The normal, brain dead idiot who voted for him will believe him when he says he's going to cut spending and fix our fiscal problems with all this money taken from the evil rich.
Well, guess what? The vast majrotiy of that 1.6 trillion is earmarked by Obama towards NEW spending, above and beyond what he's already burning through;
75% of what Obama is demanding, 1.2 trillion dollars, will go towards NEW spending. Not exactly the public message he's spitting out, is it?
Monday, November 19, 2012
What Do They Have In Common?
I've seen this collage making the rounds of liberal talk. The not very well hidden insinuation is that all Republicans are racist for daring to oppose His Higness and His minions.
For all of you liberals out there, I will tell you what these four people have in common ...
For all of you liberals out there, I will tell you what these four people have in common ...
They Are All Incompetent Idiots!
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Senator Feinstein, We're Watching ...
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is chairperson of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Her committee will begin hearings this week on what happened in Libya. The first meeting is scheduled for Thursday. She has just announced that her inquiry will expand to include why the FBI did not notify her committee that it was investigating David Patreus' affair.
There are some practical problems to this inquiry. Patreus' resignation means he will not have to testify as head of the CIA, unless he choses to, or is subpoened by the committee. Hillary Clinton is conveniently out of the country during the first days of the hearing, and has informed the committee that she is unavailable to testify.
We will find out in short order if the Senator is going to hold a real investigation, or just participate in the Obama Administration's coverup. If Patreus does not chose to testify, she MUST compel him to do so. Him being allowed not to participate gives the Administration a huge curtain to hide behind. Since he is no longer in a position to defend himself, Democrats will blame him for anything they want to.
If she concludes the hearings without hearing testimony from Clinton, we will know it's just a smokescreen for Obama. Clinton, under oath, would have to be very careful to tell the truth - if she commits perjury and is found out, her future political goals will be toast.
Senator, at times in the past you have shown that you take your responsibilities as head of this committee seriously, to the point of asking sometimes embarrassing questions of your Dear Leader's Administration. I sincerely hope you do that this time - we deserve the truth. Even though you've managed to put this off until after the election (so there are no ramifications for Obama himself, no matter the outcome), the truth must come out.
As a control, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, headed by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) will also begin its own investigation, also commencing on Thursday. Lets see if the committees come up with the same results.
There are some practical problems to this inquiry. Patreus' resignation means he will not have to testify as head of the CIA, unless he choses to, or is subpoened by the committee. Hillary Clinton is conveniently out of the country during the first days of the hearing, and has informed the committee that she is unavailable to testify.
We will find out in short order if the Senator is going to hold a real investigation, or just participate in the Obama Administration's coverup. If Patreus does not chose to testify, she MUST compel him to do so. Him being allowed not to participate gives the Administration a huge curtain to hide behind. Since he is no longer in a position to defend himself, Democrats will blame him for anything they want to.
If she concludes the hearings without hearing testimony from Clinton, we will know it's just a smokescreen for Obama. Clinton, under oath, would have to be very careful to tell the truth - if she commits perjury and is found out, her future political goals will be toast.
Senator, at times in the past you have shown that you take your responsibilities as head of this committee seriously, to the point of asking sometimes embarrassing questions of your Dear Leader's Administration. I sincerely hope you do that this time - we deserve the truth. Even though you've managed to put this off until after the election (so there are no ramifications for Obama himself, no matter the outcome), the truth must come out.
As a control, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, headed by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) will also begin its own investigation, also commencing on Thursday. Lets see if the committees come up with the same results.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Obama Wants To Destroy 'The Rich'
Obama again declared that any deal to pull back from the financial cliff must include raising taxes on the 'rich'. Citing his reelection as a mandate, he has warned Rublicans in Congress that thsy will have to accept that 'small' adjustment to the upper tax bracket, all in the name of fairness.
Listening to Obama, and Reid, and all the idiot left wing talking heads, you would think that soaking the 'rich' for their fair share will fix our financial woes. All we have to do is get them to pay a little bit more, and our debt will go away, financial woes will disappear, and everyone will get all the free shit they've been promised.
Simple math exposes this as the pile of steaming cow crap that it really is.
Our Federal Government burns through over $1.4 trillion dollars per year, under Obama's watch.
The CBO has estimated that Obama's goal, of letting the Bush tax cuts for the 'rich' expire, will result in an additional $52 billion per year additional revenue for the government to spend. That is enough money to allow the government to run for 13.4 days.
Yes, 13.4 days.
So, all of the harm this tax increase will do to small business, and the negative impact on employment and economic growth will gain us 13.4 days worth of money for Obama to squander.
And squander he will. Will that $52 billion be used to pay down the debt? Will it be used to cut our yearly deficit? Hell no - that's $52 billion more that Obama can give out to his green energy donors, union thugs, campaign contributors, etc.
If the $52 billion was going to be used for something that would actually help our financial disaster, that would be one thing. However, you know it's just going to pad Obama's slush fund ...
By The Way - the Bush era tax cut expiration for the rich is only one of several tax attacks Obama is mounting on the 'rich'. The tax rate for couples making $250,000 or more will increase 3.5% due to Bush expiration, but will also go up 3.8% for a surcharge to support Obamacare. That's a 7.3% increase on Jan.1, just in Federal income tax rates, in addition to SS, Medicare, and all the other tax increases that are due to hit.
7.3% doesn't sound like much, though. Surely that's fair? 7.3% of 250,000 is over 18 thousand dollars.
Folks who earn over 250,000 in areas like New York, where taxes are sky high already, will see their effective tax rates rise to between 55-60% next year.
As usual, the Obama telepromoter delivered story line sounds reasonable, especially to those who aren't affected. However, when you look at the details and what is not said, the truth is there to see.
I'd like to see the tax returns for next year of uberrich left wingers like John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, George Soros, and that hateball Bill Maher. Lets see how their teams of accountants figure out how to sidestep Obama's rules.
Listening to Obama, and Reid, and all the idiot left wing talking heads, you would think that soaking the 'rich' for their fair share will fix our financial woes. All we have to do is get them to pay a little bit more, and our debt will go away, financial woes will disappear, and everyone will get all the free shit they've been promised.
Simple math exposes this as the pile of steaming cow crap that it really is.
Our Federal Government burns through over $1.4 trillion dollars per year, under Obama's watch.
The CBO has estimated that Obama's goal, of letting the Bush tax cuts for the 'rich' expire, will result in an additional $52 billion per year additional revenue for the government to spend. That is enough money to allow the government to run for 13.4 days.
Yes, 13.4 days.
So, all of the harm this tax increase will do to small business, and the negative impact on employment and economic growth will gain us 13.4 days worth of money for Obama to squander.
And squander he will. Will that $52 billion be used to pay down the debt? Will it be used to cut our yearly deficit? Hell no - that's $52 billion more that Obama can give out to his green energy donors, union thugs, campaign contributors, etc.
If the $52 billion was going to be used for something that would actually help our financial disaster, that would be one thing. However, you know it's just going to pad Obama's slush fund ...
By The Way - the Bush era tax cut expiration for the rich is only one of several tax attacks Obama is mounting on the 'rich'. The tax rate for couples making $250,000 or more will increase 3.5% due to Bush expiration, but will also go up 3.8% for a surcharge to support Obamacare. That's a 7.3% increase on Jan.1, just in Federal income tax rates, in addition to SS, Medicare, and all the other tax increases that are due to hit.
7.3% doesn't sound like much, though. Surely that's fair? 7.3% of 250,000 is over 18 thousand dollars.
Folks who earn over 250,000 in areas like New York, where taxes are sky high already, will see their effective tax rates rise to between 55-60% next year.
As usual, the Obama telepromoter delivered story line sounds reasonable, especially to those who aren't affected. However, when you look at the details and what is not said, the truth is there to see.
I'd like to see the tax returns for next year of uberrich left wingers like John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, George Soros, and that hateball Bill Maher. Lets see how their teams of accountants figure out how to sidestep Obama's rules.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Here It Comes, Part III
Foreign Policy ramifications will take a little longer to become apparent, but they will happen:
1) Israel, you're on your own. You can not count on any assistance from the US Government for at least the next 4 years. You won't get military assistance. If you are forced to defend yourself against your growing list of enemies in the region, we will not back you up. Though I have not heard any specifics, do not be surprised if military aid starts getting smaller.
However, watch for military aid to Egypt to continue. Watch for aid to your other enemies to begin, or increase.
Don't expect any concrete action from the United States in curbing Iran's nuclear endeavors - and if you decide to attack to defend yourselves, you are going to be on your own.
2) Watch for another round of unilateral disarmament from the United States. No treaty will be needed. Obama is simply going to continue the castration of our military, especially our nuclear deterrent forces. Remember, he has stated his goal is for our country to be free of nuclear weapons, and he's going to try to do it whether our 'friends' in Russia and China do or not.
3) Watch for the Obama Administration to move to accept UN oversight on many things, including gun control inside of the United States. Obama wants to show the world that we are subservient to the greater will of the UN - even though it is stuffed full of criminals, dictators, child molesters, thiefs, human traffickers, torturers, etc.
Watch for Obama to pledge hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to renovate the decripit UN building in NY. The thing is falling apart, due to the fact that no other nation on Earth will put up any money to keep it up.
4) Hillary will sign some bullshit agreement with Iran, one that appears to curb their nuclear weapons program. It won't. There won't be any kind of verification. While she and Obama are crowing about their achievement in diplomacy, Iran will laugh their asses off and continue their work unimpeded.
If you will remember Hillary's bitch Bill, who came up with the same kind of agreement with North Korea in the 90s. What an achievement, we were told. North Korea will never have a nuclear weapon- honest, they promised us. Guess what ... a few years later, North Korea had the bomb, admited it, admited they lied about it, and thumbed their noses at us.
1) Israel, you're on your own. You can not count on any assistance from the US Government for at least the next 4 years. You won't get military assistance. If you are forced to defend yourself against your growing list of enemies in the region, we will not back you up. Though I have not heard any specifics, do not be surprised if military aid starts getting smaller.
However, watch for military aid to Egypt to continue. Watch for aid to your other enemies to begin, or increase.
Don't expect any concrete action from the United States in curbing Iran's nuclear endeavors - and if you decide to attack to defend yourselves, you are going to be on your own.
2) Watch for another round of unilateral disarmament from the United States. No treaty will be needed. Obama is simply going to continue the castration of our military, especially our nuclear deterrent forces. Remember, he has stated his goal is for our country to be free of nuclear weapons, and he's going to try to do it whether our 'friends' in Russia and China do or not.
3) Watch for the Obama Administration to move to accept UN oversight on many things, including gun control inside of the United States. Obama wants to show the world that we are subservient to the greater will of the UN - even though it is stuffed full of criminals, dictators, child molesters, thiefs, human traffickers, torturers, etc.
Watch for Obama to pledge hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to renovate the decripit UN building in NY. The thing is falling apart, due to the fact that no other nation on Earth will put up any money to keep it up.
4) Hillary will sign some bullshit agreement with Iran, one that appears to curb their nuclear weapons program. It won't. There won't be any kind of verification. While she and Obama are crowing about their achievement in diplomacy, Iran will laugh their asses off and continue their work unimpeded.
If you will remember Hillary's bitch Bill, who came up with the same kind of agreement with North Korea in the 90s. What an achievement, we were told. North Korea will never have a nuclear weapon- honest, they promised us. Guess what ... a few years later, North Korea had the bomb, admited it, admited they lied about it, and thumbed their noses at us.
Here It Comes, Part II
We hear the Democrats demand that taxes on the rich raise 'just slightly', to make things more fair. All they publicize is that it's a tiny increase in the upper tax rate, allowing the Bush tax cuts for the rich to expire. They try to convince us its not really a tax increase, its just a return from the temporary rate Bush imposed on us.
Well, the income tax rate is only a small part of what they are after under 'just slightly', and few people realize they are going to be affected - whether they are rich or not.
1) The capital gains tax rate is also part of the Bush cuts Democrats want to expire. Currently at 15%, Dems want it to be at least doubled, if not tripled. Taxes placed on Capital Gains are levied against how much money your investments make. Stocks, Mutual Funds, etc ... any investment that produces a profit is a target for this tax, no matter how much money you make in salary. Even if you only make 20,000 a year, if you have investments they will be hit by the Capital Gains tax increase.
Democrats are going bleed your retirement accounts, its that simple.
The realization of this is why the stock market experienced a huge loss on Wednesday - people already had a plan in place to sell off stocks as soon as possible if Obama won, in order to take their profits before the huge increase in the Capital Gains tax rate.
2) Part of the expiration of the Bush cuts for the rich includes reinstatement of the Death Tax. If your estate is above a certain value, Democrats will take 55% of your estate when you die. 45% will be left to your heirs.
How do you like that? Those of us who have been successful and want to pass along the fruits of our success to our children will see that gift cut by more than half. Democrats see absolutely nothing wrong with this, and can't understand why anyone would object. You can see it in their leaders when they reluctantly talk about it - its no big deal to them, so shouldn't be a big deal to us.
The only thing being discussed is the threshold for the confiscatory 55% theft. They just have to decide how big the estate has to be to trigger the grab - I've heard numbers anywhere from 500,000 to 3 million.
This will hit small business owners especially hard. If the estate consists of hard assets (like a business) instead of cash, the tax will be levied against the value of the entire estate, including the hard assets. As an example, if you have a business that is valued at 5 million dollars and want to leave it to your kids, they will have to come up with 2,750,000 in cash to give to the government in order to keep the business. If they can't come up with that, the government will sieze the business, sell it, take their 2,750,000, and then give anything that is left to the heirs.
I heard a frightening real world example of this when George Steinbrenner passed away. If the Death Tax was active when he died, his kids would have had to give the government about $400,000,000 in order to keep ownership of the NY Yankees.
If you have any kind of investments or retirement accounts, or anything resembling a decent sized estate to pass on, you need to be talking to your financial and tax advisors right now. If the only thing standing in the way of an agreement that will stave off the financial armageddon that awaits us on January 1 is these 'tiny' tax hikes on the rich, then I can guarantee you that Republicans will cave and give Obama what he wants.
Well, the income tax rate is only a small part of what they are after under 'just slightly', and few people realize they are going to be affected - whether they are rich or not.
1) The capital gains tax rate is also part of the Bush cuts Democrats want to expire. Currently at 15%, Dems want it to be at least doubled, if not tripled. Taxes placed on Capital Gains are levied against how much money your investments make. Stocks, Mutual Funds, etc ... any investment that produces a profit is a target for this tax, no matter how much money you make in salary. Even if you only make 20,000 a year, if you have investments they will be hit by the Capital Gains tax increase.
Democrats are going bleed your retirement accounts, its that simple.
The realization of this is why the stock market experienced a huge loss on Wednesday - people already had a plan in place to sell off stocks as soon as possible if Obama won, in order to take their profits before the huge increase in the Capital Gains tax rate.
2) Part of the expiration of the Bush cuts for the rich includes reinstatement of the Death Tax. If your estate is above a certain value, Democrats will take 55% of your estate when you die. 45% will be left to your heirs.
How do you like that? Those of us who have been successful and want to pass along the fruits of our success to our children will see that gift cut by more than half. Democrats see absolutely nothing wrong with this, and can't understand why anyone would object. You can see it in their leaders when they reluctantly talk about it - its no big deal to them, so shouldn't be a big deal to us.
The only thing being discussed is the threshold for the confiscatory 55% theft. They just have to decide how big the estate has to be to trigger the grab - I've heard numbers anywhere from 500,000 to 3 million.
This will hit small business owners especially hard. If the estate consists of hard assets (like a business) instead of cash, the tax will be levied against the value of the entire estate, including the hard assets. As an example, if you have a business that is valued at 5 million dollars and want to leave it to your kids, they will have to come up with 2,750,000 in cash to give to the government in order to keep the business. If they can't come up with that, the government will sieze the business, sell it, take their 2,750,000, and then give anything that is left to the heirs.
I heard a frightening real world example of this when George Steinbrenner passed away. If the Death Tax was active when he died, his kids would have had to give the government about $400,000,000 in order to keep ownership of the NY Yankees.
If you have any kind of investments or retirement accounts, or anything resembling a decent sized estate to pass on, you need to be talking to your financial and tax advisors right now. If the only thing standing in the way of an agreement that will stave off the financial armageddon that awaits us on January 1 is these 'tiny' tax hikes on the rich, then I can guarantee you that Republicans will cave and give Obama what he wants.
Here It Comes, Part I
OK, the second term of hell is upon us. Obama would love nothing more than for all of us to keep crying about his victory, be depressed, withdraw ... All of those things are easy to do. But they don't help anything, and they don't change anything.
What each of us can do is recognize what is going to happen, and prepare ourselves, our families, and our political leaders to survive it and figure out how to successfully fight it.
Now that he doesn't need to plan for a reelection, Obama is free to pursue all the crap that he couldn't in his first term. He has no worries about pissing the voting public off - we can't do anything about it, there is no recourse that will affect Obama himself. Based upon what he and his minions have said, both in public and semi-private, here's a list of what's coming:
1) Within a few weeks, the EPA is going to pass regulations that will effectively make the use of coal illegal in the US. The regulations are designed to bankrupt all coal producers and users. The EPA can do this because our wonderful SCOTUS gave them the power to bypass Congress and regulate coal (and other industries) however they want to. What this will do is throw thousands of people out of work, and eliminate the one cheap fuel used to produce electricity. In addition to those poor people who will be unemployed, you can expect your electricity bill to skyrocket.
2) The 'sequestration' budget cuts that are scheduled to happen on Jan.2 will happen. The Democrats want them to happen. Why? Because half of the cuts will hit the Pentagon. Half a trillion dollars will be slashed from our military's funding over the next 10 years. This will curtail almost all new weapons development and procurement. Hundreds of thousands of defense workers will lose their jobs early next year. Hundreds of thousands of military personnel will be forced out of the service, and the vast majority of them will end up unemployed. Currently deployed weapons systems will be retired at a much faster rate, castrating our ability to defend ourselves and our allies.
Democrats aren't worried about the other programs that will be cut by sequestration. They will either force through legislation to restore those cuts, or Obama will shoot out another Executive Order to do it.
Democrats hate the military, and want it gone. This is a glorious chance for them to strike a blow against it, and they don't even have to take any blame for it! 'Well, we didn't do it, it was automatic'.
3) Taxes are going to go up on everyone on Jan.1. Everyone who pulls in a paycheck is going to get a shock when they get their first one of the new year. All those middle class workers are going to go 'WTF' when they see what their Saviour in the White House is actually doing to them. The combination of expiring tax rates and new taxes are going to be a big hit for a lot of folks.
4) Obama is going to pursue gun control. He said it. It will come in the public form of an attack on so called 'assault weapons'. He wants to completely outlaw them. Under the surface, it will also include other forms of firearms. The only thing he won't go after are single shot hunting rifles and shotguns. He's not only going to go after the guns themselves, he's going after ammunition as well. Don't be surprised by an effort to ban certain types/calibers of rounds. If you want to own an AK or an AR, you better get it on order now, I suspect a lot of people will be doing the same.
There's a lot more that is coming. I'll try to touch on the outrages to come in additional parts of this post.
What each of us can do is recognize what is going to happen, and prepare ourselves, our families, and our political leaders to survive it and figure out how to successfully fight it.
Now that he doesn't need to plan for a reelection, Obama is free to pursue all the crap that he couldn't in his first term. He has no worries about pissing the voting public off - we can't do anything about it, there is no recourse that will affect Obama himself. Based upon what he and his minions have said, both in public and semi-private, here's a list of what's coming:
1) Within a few weeks, the EPA is going to pass regulations that will effectively make the use of coal illegal in the US. The regulations are designed to bankrupt all coal producers and users. The EPA can do this because our wonderful SCOTUS gave them the power to bypass Congress and regulate coal (and other industries) however they want to. What this will do is throw thousands of people out of work, and eliminate the one cheap fuel used to produce electricity. In addition to those poor people who will be unemployed, you can expect your electricity bill to skyrocket.
2) The 'sequestration' budget cuts that are scheduled to happen on Jan.2 will happen. The Democrats want them to happen. Why? Because half of the cuts will hit the Pentagon. Half a trillion dollars will be slashed from our military's funding over the next 10 years. This will curtail almost all new weapons development and procurement. Hundreds of thousands of defense workers will lose their jobs early next year. Hundreds of thousands of military personnel will be forced out of the service, and the vast majority of them will end up unemployed. Currently deployed weapons systems will be retired at a much faster rate, castrating our ability to defend ourselves and our allies.
Democrats aren't worried about the other programs that will be cut by sequestration. They will either force through legislation to restore those cuts, or Obama will shoot out another Executive Order to do it.
Democrats hate the military, and want it gone. This is a glorious chance for them to strike a blow against it, and they don't even have to take any blame for it! 'Well, we didn't do it, it was automatic'.
3) Taxes are going to go up on everyone on Jan.1. Everyone who pulls in a paycheck is going to get a shock when they get their first one of the new year. All those middle class workers are going to go 'WTF' when they see what their Saviour in the White House is actually doing to them. The combination of expiring tax rates and new taxes are going to be a big hit for a lot of folks.
4) Obama is going to pursue gun control. He said it. It will come in the public form of an attack on so called 'assault weapons'. He wants to completely outlaw them. Under the surface, it will also include other forms of firearms. The only thing he won't go after are single shot hunting rifles and shotguns. He's not only going to go after the guns themselves, he's going after ammunition as well. Don't be surprised by an effort to ban certain types/calibers of rounds. If you want to own an AK or an AR, you better get it on order now, I suspect a lot of people will be doing the same.
There's a lot more that is coming. I'll try to touch on the outrages to come in additional parts of this post.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Voter Fraud by Democrats Rampant
As we come closer to election day, reports form all over the country are surfacing, detailing instances of voter fraud. The VAST MAJORITY of these reports indicate the fraud is being perpetrated by Democrats, or in favor of Democrat candidates:
This is a shocking report, detailed on Townhall.com, of how NAACP members took over an early voting location in Houston, and voting officials not only didn't do anything to stop it, but interferred with officially sanctioned poll watchers who tried to report the crimes they were witnessing ...
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/03/breaking_naacp_takes_over_polling_station_advocates_for_president_obama_at_houston_polling_location
Reports from at least 5 states have come up, indicating that voting machines have registered a vote for Obama, even though the voter clearly chose Romney. Officials have pooh-poohed the reports, saying it is impossible, that the voters are incompetent and don't know what they are doing. Curiously, not a single report of an Obama vote coming up as Romney ...
Active Duty members of the military, several hundred, have been removed from Florida voter roles, either preventing them from casting ballots or putting so many roadblocks in the way that they are hindered is casting a ballot.
Several hundred dead people, appearing on Florida voter roles, stay on the voter roles due to a Democrat judge stopping Florida's Secretary of State from removing their names.
ELECTION DAY UPDATE -
Local Democrat Voting Chief Judges all over Philadelphia prevented Republican voting officials from entering polling places this morning, while allowing Democrats access. A judge has issued an order to reinstate the presence of the Republican officials, as they are legally entitled to attend.
In multiple Philadelphia polling locations, New Black Panthers, in their 'uniforms' have been sighted standing by the entrance doors. Its just like 2008, except that they aren't carrying night sticks. Their purpose - try to intimidate white voters into not voting.
Culinary Union 226, based in Las Vegas, has been accused of adding hundreds of illegal immigants to voter registration roles, and then forcing those illegals to vote Democrat if they want to keep their jobs. Despite hard evidence submitted to support the claim, the Nevada Secretary of State (a Democrat) has taken no action.
A man in High Point, NC, filed a compalint with the FBI Voter Fraud unit after he witnessed a polling worker instruct voters to push the Obama button when he was telling them how to operate the voting machine. The man witnessed two people in front of him in line be targeted like this by the worker, and then the worker tried to do the same to him.
This is a shocking report, detailed on Townhall.com, of how NAACP members took over an early voting location in Houston, and voting officials not only didn't do anything to stop it, but interferred with officially sanctioned poll watchers who tried to report the crimes they were witnessing ...
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/03/breaking_naacp_takes_over_polling_station_advocates_for_president_obama_at_houston_polling_location
Reports from at least 5 states have come up, indicating that voting machines have registered a vote for Obama, even though the voter clearly chose Romney. Officials have pooh-poohed the reports, saying it is impossible, that the voters are incompetent and don't know what they are doing. Curiously, not a single report of an Obama vote coming up as Romney ...
Active Duty members of the military, several hundred, have been removed from Florida voter roles, either preventing them from casting ballots or putting so many roadblocks in the way that they are hindered is casting a ballot.
Several hundred dead people, appearing on Florida voter roles, stay on the voter roles due to a Democrat judge stopping Florida's Secretary of State from removing their names.
ELECTION DAY UPDATE -
Local Democrat Voting Chief Judges all over Philadelphia prevented Republican voting officials from entering polling places this morning, while allowing Democrats access. A judge has issued an order to reinstate the presence of the Republican officials, as they are legally entitled to attend.
In multiple Philadelphia polling locations, New Black Panthers, in their 'uniforms' have been sighted standing by the entrance doors. Its just like 2008, except that they aren't carrying night sticks. Their purpose - try to intimidate white voters into not voting.
Culinary Union 226, based in Las Vegas, has been accused of adding hundreds of illegal immigants to voter registration roles, and then forcing those illegals to vote Democrat if they want to keep their jobs. Despite hard evidence submitted to support the claim, the Nevada Secretary of State (a Democrat) has taken no action.
A man in High Point, NC, filed a compalint with the FBI Voter Fraud unit after he witnessed a polling worker instruct voters to push the Obama button when he was telling them how to operate the voting machine. The man witnessed two people in front of him in line be targeted like this by the worker, and then the worker tried to do the same to him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
