Filed under: Conservatism, Democrat Corruption, Humor, Media Bias, News, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: Andrew Breitbart, Democrats, Liberal lies, Obama
According to the most recent Rasmussen poll, the issues Americans care most about are: the economy, health care, government corruption, taxes, energy, education, social security, immigration, national security, and the war in Afghanistan.
So what do Obama and the Democrat/Media complex have us talking about?
Free contraception for Harvard Law School students, government funding of abortions and a phony “War on Women”, ostensibly waged by Republicans for refusing to subsidize Democrats’ sex-lives. They’re talking about dog carriers, car-elevators, Ann Romney’s clothes, Julia’s American Dream of lifelong government-dependency, gay marriage, and now a Washington Post hit-piece essentially calling Romney a gay-basher. (A ridiculous story that’s already falling apart).
It’s only natural that Obama would try to distract; his presidency has been an abject failure. Those issues about which Americans care most are the very same issues where Obama’s policies have done the most harm.
Real unemployment is in the double-digits. Far from hope, Obama has delivered despair as millions upon millions of Americans have given up even looking for a job. The labor force participation rate is the lowest it’s been in 30 years. As anyone who goes to the supermarket can tell you, real inflation is much higher than what the government is reporting. And that’s just grazing the surface of the first issue. I could write volumes about the failures and corruption of Obama and his administration, but you know them as well as I.
And while predictable, it’s no less unconscionably corrupt that the media would so blatantly run interference for the administration — indeed, seeming to take their plays directly from the Obama campaign.
That’s where we come in. Something new is happening. Taking their cue from the fearless champion of the underdog, Andrew Breitbart, citizens and (some) politicians alike are standing up to the Democrat/Media Complex and calling bullshit! We saw it in the debates, when the audience had had it with trivial distractions, and started booing the media moderators. Newt, and then other candidates, latched on to this and began — hallelujah — rejecting the moderator’s false premises and calling out their partisan tactics.
And so it goes, today, as I rattle this off, conservatives across blogs and social media are calling bullshit. We aren’t going to allow the media’s in-kind contributions to the Obama campaign, the interference, the activism. We’ll make them the story. We’ll call them out, publicly mock, ridicule and eviscerate them for their hackery, and destroy what little credibility, and audience, they have left. And we’ll ridicule the Obama campaign for even attempting to fool us twice.
It was in this spirit that I whipped up the new Obama campaign slogan above. I think it hits the nail right on the head. If you agree, please take it, like it, post it, spread it far and wide. Mockery is a very effective tool — one of Saul Alinsky’s favorites. And it warms the cockles of my cold, dead, conservative heart to use the left’s own tactics against them.
Filed under: Education, Media Bias, News, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: Bigots, Bullies, Dan Savage, Liberal lies, NSPA, Obama
This is Dan Savage. Dan Savage makes me ashamed to be gay. Dan Savage is a vile [warning: when I say vile, I mean it], loathsome human being, far more hateful than any Christian I’ve ever known, and I know many.
Here, he proves that he does not seek to END bullying, but seeks TO bully. He also proves that he has no clue what the meaning of the word tolerance is, not to mention the words irony and hypocrisy.
He uses his position of power and authority over these high school kids, as an invited speaker with a stage, a microphone, and a very real “bully pulpit,” to bully those in the audience who dare to be Christian. He willfully misrepresents what the Bible says, knowingly lies about what Christians believe, dishonestly berates their religion (I know he knows better because I’ve seen and heard Christians explain to him exactly how he misrepresents their religion and beliefs, but instead of correcting his arguments, he keeps right on repeating what he knows to be lies.)
I am SO PROUD of all the kids, of every race & creed who got up and walked out on his bigoted, hateful tirade. I’m only sorry that the camera was zoomed in on Savage so that only one aisle could be seen. There were at least three aisles — probably 5 if you count the outsides, and I’m sure just as many kids were leaving via those aisles as well.
Tolerance does not mean that you must agree with people, or approve of what they do — that is the totalitarian leftist definition: “give us more money & control or you are a ‘H8er’.” If everyone agreed with one another, there’d be no need for tolerance. Tolerance means living in peace with people with whom you disagree — even strongly. Something Savage has never shown any evidence of doing. Something Christians do every day.
Tolerance is what these Christian kids did! (assuming they were all Christian, which may not be the case) — coming to see him speak knowing who he was, knowing he was gay, knowing that he was a hateful, anti-Christian, anti-religious bigot.
And when he started berating them from his bully pulpit, they didn’t protest, they didn’t throw things at him and try to shout him down — as so-called “progressives” regularly do to conservative speakers. Quite the contrary, they let him speak, and quietly left, refusing to sit there and be bullied.
And when these throngs of kids left, what did this “progressive, enlightened, tolerant” man do? He pretended HE is the victim and called these high school kids (guilty of nothing) “pansy ass” (a little self-loathing, internal homophobia there Dan?) for leaving.
The most courageous people in that auditorium were those who stood up and left, in front of an auditorium full of their peers.
Dan was the least courageous. Dan was and is a coward. Bullying Christian kids, knowing full well that the very ‘worst’ thing they would do is possibly pray for him.
He has the GALL to accuse Christianity of teaching that women should be stoned (which shows he doesn’t understand a thing about Christianity Hey Dan! New Testament, Google it!) and to intimate that Republicans might want to do that much or more, cus ‘who knows where they’re going” as he put it — at the very same time his “progressive” president is sending millions to Palestinians who actually DO kill people for being gay.
He picks on high school kids whom he knows will do nothing, but doesn’t have the balls to criticize the only religion on Earth that actually DOES stone, hang and burn gays to death in the name of their religion. You, Dan, are the “pansy ass”. The kids who laughed & applauded you at least have the excuse of being young and ignorant.
And lastly, I fervently hope it was more than just Christians who left!
I hope students of other faiths, and no faith at all, got up and left too. Most of all, I hope at least a few of those who left were gay kids who recognized the glaring hypocrisy of this “man” spewing hate and lies in the name of tolerance.
They were RIGHT to leave. Dan Savage is the bully. Dan Savage is the bigot.
[PS: He is supported & endorsed by Barack Obama & Democrats.]
Filed under: Domestic Policy, Health Care, Law, Liberalism | Tags: "Healthy Food Initiative", Junk Science, Liberal lies
Sam Kass, who was the Obama’s chef in Chicago, came to the White House with the Obamas. He was known as Mrs. Obama’s Food Initiative Coordinator, but about a month ago, his title was changed to Senior Policy Adviser for Healthy Food Initiatives. The new title more accurately reflects Kass’ broad range of duties, as internal and external expert on all things health, kids, and food. Or in the vernacular — he is the “Food Czar.”
So Sam Kass went from being a 20-something Chicago gourmet cook, privately paid to cook for the Obamas, to a big-time White House adviser. Michelle Obama’s healthy nutrition program is supposed to eliminate childhood obesity within a generation, especially in the country’s inner cities. Mrs. Obama claims that childhood obesity is a threat to national security, and a crisis that requires the administration to spend $400 million a year to bring “healthy foods” to low-income neighborhoods and $10 billion to make revisions to the old federal program that feeds tens of millions of poor children at school. Mrs Obama said when launching last month’s “Chefs Move to Schools” initiative — a program to get professional chefs to volunteer in America’s schools:
I think it’s just pretty powerful to see what started out as a few conversations in our kitchen on the South Side of Chicago turn into a major initiative that hopefully will change the way we think as a country, not just about the health of our kids but about our health as a nation,”
I think the ambitions may once again exceed what is possible or probable. Mrs. Obama is enamored of organic produce, local, regional and “sustainable” food. I assume that is not “sustainable” in the sense of the cans of food in the pantry, but in some larger, greener sense. “Sustainable” is very big in the green left, but I haven’t figured out yet just what it means, but is sure is a popular word.
Mr. Kass gave the keynote speech at the Food Marketing Institute’s trade show in Las Vegas, urging supermarket important people to take a leadership role in “Let’s Move.” He told the grocery retailers that it’s time to seize the opportunity to be leaders in creating a generation of healthier kids by being “architects of choice” on the micro and macro level. He gave, according the to blog “Obama Foodorama” “a mini dissertation on how to change the design of markets which ranged from where to position healthy foods, to changing food packaging labels is crucial for parents’ decision making, to why it’s important to build more supermarkets in places that don’t have them.”
There was also a conference with governors to urge them to establish food initiatives in their states and cities. Baltimore has a food czar named Holly Freishtat, and the City of Boston has recently joined in, creating a $75,000 a year position of “Food Policy Director” with an ambitious agenda.
I may not grasp the true meaning of “sustainable” but I do know a bit about “organic” food. “Organic” is a marketing ploy designed to sell smaller fruits and vegetables grown on larger acreages at higher prices. Organic produce has been tested over and over, and there is no benefit in nutrition or freshness. It usually costs about 30% more. Organic designates a method of growing which involves using only ‘natural’ fertilizers (manure) and only ‘natural’ pesticides (like pyrethrums–some of the most poisonous pesticides). No better for you. You can look up the process that farmers must follow to get the “organic” label, but it remains only a marketing ploy.
I would have loved to be a fly on the wall at that convention of supermarket CEOs being lectured by the Obama’s 20-something cook. But I’m not a foodie, I’m just an ordinary good cook.
Filed under: Energy, Junk Science, National Security, Progressivism | Tags: Liberal lies, No Green Economy, Power Grab
President Barack Obama, on Friday, directed the government to set the first-ever mileage and pollution limits for big trucks and buses, and to tighten the rules for future cars and SUVs. He wants vehicles that run on half the fuel they use now, and give of half the “pollution.”
The nation that leads in the clean energy economy will lead the global economy, And I want America to be that nation.” Obama said.
Well, of course, this is the presidency that operates on the theme of “never letting a crisis go to waste.” The Deepwater Horizon rig disaster in the Gulf of Mexico makes everyone look at all oil askance — time to jump on some more regulation of little use.
Elsewhere, headlines in the Spanish newspaper La Gaceta:
Spain admits that the green economy sold to Obama is a ruin.
There is no “clean energy economy.” No one, apparently except Obama, has any illusions that any regulation of CO2 emissions will do anything to lower global temperatures. The economic case for the embrace of renewable energy has collapsed. It’s over.
President Obama has cited Spain as an exemplar of an “ecologically sound energy economy” no fewer than eight times. Spanish economist Gabriel Calzada — has clearly established that for every green job created by the Spanish nation’s massive investment in wind and solar, that transfer of wealth to uneconomic activities has cost the economy 2.2 jobs in opportunity cost, as well as direct job losses due to the increased cost of power. The President of Spain’s National Commission of Energy, socialist Maite Costa has called Spain’s energy policies unsustainable.
Obama’s Presidential Memorandum Regarding Fuel Efficiency Standards. From the photo-op, Obama said:
We know that out dependence on foreign oil endangers our security and our economy. We know that climate change poses a threat to our way of life — in fact we’re already seeing some of the profound and costly impacts. And the disaster in the Gulf only underscores that even as we pursue domestic production to reduce our reliance on imported oil, our long-term security depends on the development of alternative sources of fuel and new transportation technologies.
Can we do away with some of the nonsense? We are not “addicted” to oil. Our economy runs on oil. Wind, solar and nuclear energy produce electric power, which, at present, does not power our cars and trucks, nor will it into the foreseeable future, despite Obama’s enthusiasm for electric cars.
You will note just how the disaster in the Gulf has been turned around to somehow be a contribution to global warming, which Obama called “a threat to our way of life.” Sorry, the global warming scare is over — yesterday’s scam.
In spite of all the talk, there is no expansion of nuclear power. Should a new plant be given approval at the federal level, environmentalist delaying tactics and lawsuits would take years. Wind and solar produce energy only sporadically and must have 24/7 backup from regular gas or coal-fired plants.
For example, the Washington DC-based U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is readying a proposal to place much of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge off-limits, allowing no economic development of any kind, even on Native-owned lands, which would hamstring native survival. The FWS proposal to place the nearly 1.5 million acres of ANWR’s coastal plain off-limits — could even be permanent.
Here’s another one. The Iraqi government needed to quickly bring its oilfields online. They desperately needed the revenues. They selected the best in the business — Exxon-Mobil. Three senators, John Kerry (D-Ma), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Claire McCaskill (D-MO), wrote a public letter to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, imploring her to derail the Iraqi deal. The Senators claimed “It is our fear that this action by the Iraqi government could further deepen political tensions in Iraq and put our service members in even great danger.” They wanted Iraq to have no revenue until they had passed an oil revenue-sharing plan that the Senators liked.
That spooked the Iraqis. Washington politics intruded into the political arguments in Iraq — Iraq just needed a willing partner, without the meddling of American politicians. So they signed up with the state-owned — China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), which is now set for the next 20 years in Iraq. China is busily buying up oil all over the world.
What is the President’s real aim? Ending our reliance on oil? Shutting down our economy? Forcing people into public transportation? Or is it just another power grab?
Filed under: Capitalism, Conservatism, Freedom, Liberalism, Statism | Tags: big government, Bureaucracy, Liberal lies, Loss of Will
Conservatives praise the free market. Liberals prefer big government, and many simply do not understand what the fuss is all about.
Alexis de Tocqueville explained it many years ago in his masterpiece Democracy in America. Tocqueville saw the transformation of a free society, not in melodramatic terms like a military coup, but as a slow, creeping death. The power of the centralized government will gradually expand, meddling in the tiniest corners of our lives. We will be immobilized, like Gulliver, by innumerable rules and regulations, hundreds of annoying little restrictions that become more and more binding until eventually we are paralyzed.
Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by the whole community indiscriminately. It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will. Thus their spirit is gradually broken and their character enervated…
Tocqueville describes the new tyranny as “an immense and tutelary power,” and its task is to watch over us all, and regulate every aspect of our lives.
It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.
We are to be seduced. American democracy will end not with bludgeons, but with the emergence of a vast welfare state that manages all the details of our lives and corrupts our character.
The…sole condition required in order to succeed in centralizing the supreme power in a democratic community is to love equality, or to get men to believe you love it. Thus the science of despotism, which was once so complex, is simplified, and reduced, as it were, to a single principle.
I came across a story, of all things, about a maker of bourbon. A company went “green”, but not as demanded by the EPA. Not forced by a mass of regulations and mandates devised by environmental busybodies or by rules passed by Congress “for the children”. Maker’s Mark was faced with the challenge of how to dispose of the spent grains from the distillery process. They turned to a firm called Ecovation. Do read the story of what they did with the thick slop that was once a refuse product.
Innovation? The government will produce innovation. They will create an agency, or perhaps a committee or a commission. They will appropriate funds, issue directions, establish rules, add mandates, a schedule, and a vast chain of command, a hierarchy that must approve each step. Something may be created, but it won’t be innovative or creative, for the impulse for innovation is stamped out by petty nitpicking, and bureaucracy is the home ground of petty nitpicking. In a hierarchical organization the next one up on the ladder must approve, so that the one on the next rung will approve. And so on, and so on. It is how societies die.
That is what the fuss is all about.
Filed under: Economy, Health Care, Taxes | Tags: Democrat Corruption, Liberal lies, Massachusetts Health Care
The health care drama in Massachusetts continues. Governor Deval Patrick kicked off his re–election campaign by rejecting most of the premium increases that the state’s insurance companies had asked regulators to approve. Mr. Patrick rejected the increases, and now claims that price controls are the correct response to “industry greed.”
In Massachusetts, all of the major insurance companies are nonprofits. Three of the largest four posted operating losses in 2009. In an emergency lawsuit in Boston superior court yesterday, they argued that the arbitrary rate cap would result in another $100 million in collective losses, and make it impossible to pay the expected cost of claims. Even the solvency of some companies may be threatened. So, until the matter is settled, the insurers have just stopped selling new policies.
State officials have demanded that the insurers resume offering policies, under threat of fines or regulatory punishment. Amazing! The situation is so bad that the Governor has to threaten companies to make them sell their products at less than market cost.
The state’s Attorney General and his insurance regulators have concluded that the reason why Massachusetts insurance premiums are the highest in the nation is the underlying cost of health care, not greedy insurance companies that Mr. Patrick and Mr. Obama like to cite.
Central to Massachusetts health care are mandates requiring insurers to cover anyone who applies regardless of their state of health or pre-existing conditions, and to charge everyone the same rate. Surprise! This allows people to wait until they’re about to face major medical bills to purchase insurance. Between April 2008 and March 2009, about 40% of new enrollees at Harvard Pilgrim Health Plan stayed with it for fewer than five months and on average, ran up costs about 600% higher than the company would otherwise expect. Blue Cross Blue Shield has had similar experience.
This kind of thing will soon be coming to your insurance market. Democrats chose to regard all Republicans’ warnings about unworkable mandates, underestimated costs and ignored savings as simply more right-wing troublemaking. Keep watching Massachusetts. It will be instructive.