South Carolina Democratic Senate nominee Alvin Greene is the victim here, folks, and we saw this coming a long, long time ago....first, the trumped-up charges:
Longshot Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alvin Greene was indicted Friday on two charges, including a felony charge of showing pornography to a teenage student in a South Carolina college computer lab....
Authorities said he approached a student in a University of South Carolina computer lab, showed her obscene photos online, then talked about going to her dorm room.
A Richland County grand jury indicted Greene, 32, for disseminating, procuring or promoting obscenity — a felony — as well as a misdemeanor charge of communicating obscene materials to a person without consent.
If convicted, Greene could face up to three years for the misdemeanor or up to five years for the felony.
Mediaite gives voice to our suspicions:
...furthermore, this whole indictment seems biased. Since when is it against the law to be bad at propositioning coeds? If that’s the case, then didn’t most of us break that law for four straight years?
Or maybe Greene is crazy...like a fox. Crazy like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory.
Here's a quote from Alvin shortly after his stunning primary win, that the AP uses to establish Greene as a bit off-kilter:
At his home in Manning on Thursday, Greene told an AP reporter who reviewed the documents with him that the evaluations show he was discriminated against by military supervisors but he did not explain what that meant.
"I'm telling you who they promote: the terrorists and the communists," said Greene, wearing a blue U.S. Air Force T-shirt. "This is why we need to overhaul the military and get these people out."
And here's what I wrote on his hypothesis a few weeks back:
Sounds crazy? Really? Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain Major that was promoted again and again before deciding to shoot up Ft. Hood, killing 13 American soldiers and wounding more than 30 others while screaming "Allah Akbar!", the terrorist's mantra. Ah, yes - Major Nidal Malik Hasan, promoted a multitude of times despite poor evaluations and concerns about his radical Islamic rants. Would seem to validate at least part of Greene's accusation....
And how about General Stanley McCrystal? Communist is a tough charge, but....ultra-ultra liberal to the point of banning beer on bases and creating rules of engagement so restrictive that it gave a distinct advantage to our enemy? And what kind of freedom-loving American bans FOX News from the television sets in and around his headquarters? And really - who besides a communist would ban Burger King from American bases as they might be construed as a sign of "American (capitalistic?) excess"? Seems like he really might approve of a different system of government than is espoused by our Constitution...
Is Alvin Greene crazy? Or is he speaking some uncomfortable truths about our military establishment under the iron grip of political correctness? And could Obama and the Democrats be sending out the media in order to discredit Greene, to make a mockery of him, so that people don't pay any attention to his "outrageous" claims and the evidence that seems to back him up?
Is Alvin Greene the victim of....a massive government conspiracy?
Short answer: Yes. In Obama's America, if the truth is inconvenient, the truth must be silenced, even when coming from an incoherent vessel such as Mr. Alvin Greene....
Friday, August 13, 2010
Guess The Profession of This Anti-Semite !!
A tale told by Carol Gould, of an incident at a "lovely house party" across the pond, in once-Great Britain, a few weeks back. We'll excerpt:
...A friend and I arrived at the party and were having a lovely time when a young man in a baseball hat sauntered over to me and said, “I have some questions for you.” I had no problem with this and sat down next to him on a bench in a cramped corner. He proceeded to spend what seemed like an eternity traducing Americans, Jews, Zionism, and Israel until I began to suspect he was a Nazi. When I attempted to defend my ancient heritage (I told him this will be the 5,771st Jewish New Year), of which I am as proud as would be a person of Egyptian, Indian, Chinese or Persian descent, he became irate. I thought he was going to strike me.
He was fixated on the Jewish lobby so I reminded him that many American banks are Protestant-run. When I reminded him of the good that Jews do, like writing virtually every Broadway and West End show, he erupted and said I was self-obsessed. “It’s always me, me , me — the Jews, the Jews,” he shouted. It is unheard of for me to scream and shout at a genteel summer garden party, but I suddenly found myself bellowing at the top of my lungs: “Listen, I am damned proud of my Jewish heritage and burst with pride at being an American.” It was impossible for me to get away from him because every seat was taken and I was hemmed in. Meanwhile, his little girl sat down across his lap and glowered at me as he ranted in an endless stream of the f word...
Let's get to the title question: What does this ugly bloke do for a living?
....He is creative director of one of the main British television networks! The anti-Jewish and anti-American abuse I nobly tolerated was astonishing in the context that he is in charge of output for a main channel watched by millions. It was deeply disturbing to me that a man with such high responsibility could harbor such rabid sentiments about Jews and Americans.
I'll go out on a limb and say he's a BBC man, as Carol mentions it's an after-party for a BBC show.
Everything you need to know about the sh*tbags at the BBC can be found here, at Biased BBC.
Remember when the Left used to cry out, "Why do they hate us"? Well, there's a clue for you, Jack....
Incidentally, I take issue with one of Ms. Gould's statements - "the abuse...I nobly tolerated". Carol, it is not noble to tolerate such abuse. The last time I ran into such a person at a party, I calmly removed the little drink straw from my glass, and poked the abuser in the eye. That too, is noble. Lefties love to spew hate, but when challenged physically, they revert to the little bitch inside of them...
Via Closet Conservative
...A friend and I arrived at the party and were having a lovely time when a young man in a baseball hat sauntered over to me and said, “I have some questions for you.” I had no problem with this and sat down next to him on a bench in a cramped corner. He proceeded to spend what seemed like an eternity traducing Americans, Jews, Zionism, and Israel until I began to suspect he was a Nazi. When I attempted to defend my ancient heritage (I told him this will be the 5,771st Jewish New Year), of which I am as proud as would be a person of Egyptian, Indian, Chinese or Persian descent, he became irate. I thought he was going to strike me.
He was fixated on the Jewish lobby so I reminded him that many American banks are Protestant-run. When I reminded him of the good that Jews do, like writing virtually every Broadway and West End show, he erupted and said I was self-obsessed. “It’s always me, me , me — the Jews, the Jews,” he shouted. It is unheard of for me to scream and shout at a genteel summer garden party, but I suddenly found myself bellowing at the top of my lungs: “Listen, I am damned proud of my Jewish heritage and burst with pride at being an American.” It was impossible for me to get away from him because every seat was taken and I was hemmed in. Meanwhile, his little girl sat down across his lap and glowered at me as he ranted in an endless stream of the f word...
Let's get to the title question: What does this ugly bloke do for a living?
....He is creative director of one of the main British television networks! The anti-Jewish and anti-American abuse I nobly tolerated was astonishing in the context that he is in charge of output for a main channel watched by millions. It was deeply disturbing to me that a man with such high responsibility could harbor such rabid sentiments about Jews and Americans.
I'll go out on a limb and say he's a BBC man, as Carol mentions it's an after-party for a BBC show.
Everything you need to know about the sh*tbags at the BBC can be found here, at Biased BBC.
Remember when the Left used to cry out, "Why do they hate us"? Well, there's a clue for you, Jack....
Incidentally, I take issue with one of Ms. Gould's statements - "the abuse...I nobly tolerated". Carol, it is not noble to tolerate such abuse. The last time I ran into such a person at a party, I calmly removed the little drink straw from my glass, and poked the abuser in the eye. That too, is noble. Lefties love to spew hate, but when challenged physically, they revert to the little bitch inside of them...
Via Closet Conservative
Barack Obama: President Of....The Travel Channel?
Or is the leader of the free world on, as Aerosmith put it, Permanent Vacation?
Actually, I like Jim Geraghty's moniker for the relaxer-in-chief: President Carmen Hussein Sandiego :
There they go again. For the fifth time since July, the first family has set plans to board Air Force One for a frilly vacation, a 10-day return trip to exclusive Martha’s Vineyard where they are expected to stay at the 28-acre oceanfront Blue Heron Farm that rents for up to $50,000 a week. But first the Obamas will be traveling to the Gulf Coast of Florida for a mini-vacation as a way to encourage other vacationing Americans to head to the beaches that have been shunned by tourists worried about oil-slicked sands due to the Gulf oil spill. They are expected to travel to Florida this weekend, return to Washington for a few days then it’s off to the Massachusetts island August 19....
Here's what the elites don't get, as they have insulated themselves from the downturn:
Everybody’s feeling anxiety. Everybody’s having a hard time figuring out how they get from where they are and where they want to be. Everybody’s worried about dreams postponed and perhaps withering entirely....
So when they see the president take off yet again on another 5-star vacation, well...no wonder they feel like Washington is a reality show, where the stars are playing drama games with other people's money, and have no clue as to what reality really is...
That's why we are clamoring for cancellationof this dismal production...
Actually, I like Jim Geraghty's moniker for the relaxer-in-chief: President Carmen Hussein Sandiego :
There they go again. For the fifth time since July, the first family has set plans to board Air Force One for a frilly vacation, a 10-day return trip to exclusive Martha’s Vineyard where they are expected to stay at the 28-acre oceanfront Blue Heron Farm that rents for up to $50,000 a week. But first the Obamas will be traveling to the Gulf Coast of Florida for a mini-vacation as a way to encourage other vacationing Americans to head to the beaches that have been shunned by tourists worried about oil-slicked sands due to the Gulf oil spill. They are expected to travel to Florida this weekend, return to Washington for a few days then it’s off to the Massachusetts island August 19....
Here's what the elites don't get, as they have insulated themselves from the downturn:
Everybody’s feeling anxiety. Everybody’s having a hard time figuring out how they get from where they are and where they want to be. Everybody’s worried about dreams postponed and perhaps withering entirely....
So when they see the president take off yet again on another 5-star vacation, well...no wonder they feel like Washington is a reality show, where the stars are playing drama games with other people's money, and have no clue as to what reality really is...
That's why we are clamoring for cancellationof this dismal production...
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Video: Bill Clinton Masters 21st Century Elitism
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em? Hillary Clinton tried to connect with the American people by downing shots of Crown Royal in Pennsylvania blue-collar barrooms, and she was defeated by a snotty man who shunned the residents of said state due to their frighteningly unenlightened propensity for clinging to "guns and religion".
So what to do? Join the winning team, stick your nose up in the air, and declare your elitism by equating capitalism with greed, and stating loud and proud that only the government can really run things right, assuming he's the one (or his elite bretheren) running the government:
"We have known now for 100 years now...capitalism has a tendency to self-destruct … once you get so much growth going that people get greedy.”
"The health care reform bill is not perfect...but you are never going to get hold of this until you cover everybody..."
So health care reform as the first step to socialism? Oh, Bill, from feeling our pain to delivering it....
So what to do? Join the winning team, stick your nose up in the air, and declare your elitism by equating capitalism with greed, and stating loud and proud that only the government can really run things right, assuming he's the one (or his elite bretheren) running the government:
"We have known now for 100 years now...capitalism has a tendency to self-destruct … once you get so much growth going that people get greedy.”
"The health care reform bill is not perfect...but you are never going to get hold of this until you cover everybody..."
So health care reform as the first step to socialism? Oh, Bill, from feeling our pain to delivering it....
Memo to Linda McMahon: Don't Run From The WWE, Embrace it !!
With former WWE CEO Linda McMahon now the formal Republican nominee for Senate, the Connecticut Democrats are blasting away with the only weapon they have in their arsenal: An elitist's disdain for the world of "professional" wrestling:
It took less than an hour after Linda McMahon’s triumph in the Connecticut Republican primary election for Senate Tuesday night for Democrats to throw her past as a pro wrestling CEO in her face, in a volley of attacks that is unlikely to cease until election day in November.
“Today the party of Bob Dole, Jack Kemp and Richard Lugar nominated a candidate who kicks men in the crotch, thinks of scenes of necrophilia as ‘entertainment,’ and runs an operation where women are forced to bark like dogs. This is what has become of the once grand old party,” said Hari Sevugan, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.
Usually personal attacks are saved for the final third of a campaign, when the down-in-the-polls candidate realized they cannot win based on the merits of their arguments (see Corzine, Jon). The fact that this is what the Connecticut Democratic establishment is leading with signals they are working with very ammunition at the very start of what will be a long, protracted battle.
How should McMahon respond? Let's break it down:
-She should not respond to the WWE taunts. At all. She should fire back at opponent Richard Blumenthal by tying him to the Democratic establishment and Barack Obama (hey, if it worked in Massachusetts...), and remind voters in Connecticut that he represents a continuation of the polices that are enraging them in the
first place. Let the Democrats talk about sweaty, oily Mexicans in masks, Linda can talk economics.
-Should she feel the need to respond, she should not do it by degenerating the very business that made her and her husband so wealthy.
Wrestling is a type of NASCAR to the liberal elites: something they don't watch, something they don't understand, and something they would rather see replaced by chamber music and museum exhibits. But professional wrestling has been around and beloved by Americans for over a century, enough for the WWE to hold sold-out shows nightly across America (making them, on an annual basis, the largest grossing "entertainment tour" in the world). Their pay-per-views, especially Wrestlemania, are usually the most-purchased events of the television season. And with a WWE product on cable/free TV four nights out of seven - TV being the ultimate democracy; if people don't watch you, you're gone - all the evidence points to a NASCAR-like following completely under the radar of the Leftist elite.
Go ahead, let the Democrats mock wrestling, the way they mock NASCAR fans. How well has that worked out for the party? And again, do not distance yourself too far or degenerate your product, Linda - otherwise you will alienate fans who are going to vote for you simply based upon your last name...
-Finally, if Al Franken, an untalented, uncouth, unkempt, rude "entertainer" could win a Senate election without abandoning what made him famous, why can't Linda do the same? If Ronald Regan could become the greatest president in my lifetime without turning his back on his monkey co-stars in the "Bonzo" film series, why should Linda have to disown Rey Mysterio?
Embrace your life, Linda McMahon, along with all the jobs you have created with it, and all the joy and laughter you have brought to people. You cannot run from the WWE.
So run with it, instead....
It took less than an hour after Linda McMahon’s triumph in the Connecticut Republican primary election for Senate Tuesday night for Democrats to throw her past as a pro wrestling CEO in her face, in a volley of attacks that is unlikely to cease until election day in November.
“Today the party of Bob Dole, Jack Kemp and Richard Lugar nominated a candidate who kicks men in the crotch, thinks of scenes of necrophilia as ‘entertainment,’ and runs an operation where women are forced to bark like dogs. This is what has become of the once grand old party,” said Hari Sevugan, national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee.
Usually personal attacks are saved for the final third of a campaign, when the down-in-the-polls candidate realized they cannot win based on the merits of their arguments (see Corzine, Jon). The fact that this is what the Connecticut Democratic establishment is leading with signals they are working with very ammunition at the very start of what will be a long, protracted battle.
How should McMahon respond? Let's break it down:
-She should not respond to the WWE taunts. At all. She should fire back at opponent Richard Blumenthal by tying him to the Democratic establishment and Barack Obama (hey, if it worked in Massachusetts...), and remind voters in Connecticut that he represents a continuation of the polices that are enraging them in the
first place. Let the Democrats talk about sweaty, oily Mexicans in masks, Linda can talk economics.-Should she feel the need to respond, she should not do it by degenerating the very business that made her and her husband so wealthy.
Wrestling is a type of NASCAR to the liberal elites: something they don't watch, something they don't understand, and something they would rather see replaced by chamber music and museum exhibits. But professional wrestling has been around and beloved by Americans for over a century, enough for the WWE to hold sold-out shows nightly across America (making them, on an annual basis, the largest grossing "entertainment tour" in the world). Their pay-per-views, especially Wrestlemania, are usually the most-purchased events of the television season. And with a WWE product on cable/free TV four nights out of seven - TV being the ultimate democracy; if people don't watch you, you're gone - all the evidence points to a NASCAR-like following completely under the radar of the Leftist elite.
Go ahead, let the Democrats mock wrestling, the way they mock NASCAR fans. How well has that worked out for the party? And again, do not distance yourself too far or degenerate your product, Linda - otherwise you will alienate fans who are going to vote for you simply based upon your last name...
-Finally, if Al Franken, an untalented, uncouth, unkempt, rude "entertainer" could win a Senate election without abandoning what made him famous, why can't Linda do the same? If Ronald Regan could become the greatest president in my lifetime without turning his back on his monkey co-stars in the "Bonzo" film series, why should Linda have to disown Rey Mysterio?
Embrace your life, Linda McMahon, along with all the jobs you have created with it, and all the joy and laughter you have brought to people. You cannot run from the WWE.
So run with it, instead....
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
New Hampshire Democrat Wishes for Sarah Palin's Death
The media blocked out all hints of the ugliness of the American Left in the 2008 election cycle. But with JournoList disbanded, the mainstream media discredited, and people finally seeing the truth through the smoke, stories like this will get out more often:
New Hampshire Democratic activist and State Rep. candidate Keith Halloran wrote in a Facebook post, of the Alaska plane crash, “Just wish Sarah and Levy were on board.”
Halloran serves on the Rindge, NH Planning Board and is a Democratic candidate for State Representative in Cheshire County.
And if you think 'ol Keith is just an outlier, well, he seems tied in pretty tight with certain members of the New Hampshire Democratic establishment:
Say, is this the same Keith Halloran whose LinkedIn profile lists him as an “advocate at PAUL HODES for SENATE,” the Democrats’ Senate candidate in New Hampshire? The photo certainly looks like him.
And what does Mr. Hodes have to say about the hatred put out on display from his supporters?
(cue cricket sounds....now)
He'll have to answer for it, eventually...this ain't 2008 any more, and with any luck, it never will be again...
UPDATE: What is it with Hodes' staff?
Halloran isn’t alone among New Hampshire Democratic leaders in wishing ill toward the controversial former Republican Vice Presidential nominee.
Natch Greyes, a staffer for Democratic Rep. and Senate hopeful Paul Hodes tweeted the following on July 21st: “I have to wonder if & or when @sarahpalinusa will learn the meaning of our state motto: “live free or die.”
New Hampshire Democratic activist and State Rep. candidate Keith Halloran wrote in a Facebook post, of the Alaska plane crash, “Just wish Sarah and Levy were on board.”
Halloran serves on the Rindge, NH Planning Board and is a Democratic candidate for State Representative in Cheshire County.
And if you think 'ol Keith is just an outlier, well, he seems tied in pretty tight with certain members of the New Hampshire Democratic establishment:
Say, is this the same Keith Halloran whose LinkedIn profile lists him as an “advocate at PAUL HODES for SENATE,” the Democrats’ Senate candidate in New Hampshire? The photo certainly looks like him.
And what does Mr. Hodes have to say about the hatred put out on display from his supporters?
(cue cricket sounds....now)
He'll have to answer for it, eventually...this ain't 2008 any more, and with any luck, it never will be again...
UPDATE: What is it with Hodes' staff?
Halloran isn’t alone among New Hampshire Democratic leaders in wishing ill toward the controversial former Republican Vice Presidential nominee.
Natch Greyes, a staffer for Democratic Rep. and Senate hopeful Paul Hodes tweeted the following on July 21st: “I have to wonder if & or when @sarahpalinusa will learn the meaning of our state motto: “live free or die.”
Three Times, "Enough!"
Echoing Peggy Noonan's piece in the Wall Street Journal last week which warned that "America is at Risk of Boiling Over", Peter Kirsanow has a powerful piece over at The Corner simply titled "Enough". Some excerpts:
The contempt for ordinary Americans displayed by the ruling class is reaching critical mass. There may never have been a time in American history when the governing, academic, cultural, and media elites have been more manifestly disdainful of the country’s values, traditions, principles, and people...
The same elites who lecture incessantly refuse to listen to the racist rabble populating flyover country. They have no problem listening, apologizing, and bowing obsequiously to our declared enemies, but insist on acting imperiously toward their fellow Americans.
When thousands flooded town-hall meetings to express opposition to Obamacare, they got Obamacare shoved down their throats...And when 71 percent of Missouri voters rejected the abominable bill, Robert Gibbs proclaimed that the vote meant “nothing.”
It’s certainly evident that it was, indeed, “nothing” to the ruling class. That class will pass a 2,000-page, $800 billion spending bill without even reading it. They will “redistribute” billions from disfavored groups to favored constituencies.They will rack up ethics charges like frequent-flier miles. They will take over giant car companies and financial institutions despite never having run so much as a pop stand. They will drop missile defense and open our borders because we’ve been on the wrong side of history all these years. They will shut down oil drilling in the Gulf, thereby sacrificing the livelihoods of thousands, without any empirical justification whatsoever. They will abandon our nation’s allies and embrace our enemies for no other reason than that it’s a different policy than George W. Bush’s. They will prosecute Navy SEALs but wink at the release of convicted terrorists. They will exhibit galactic ineptitude in cleaning the Gulf but assure us they can completely reorder the economy in response to the non-debateable evidence of global warming. They will raise our taxes so that our comparatives in the federal government can be paid twice as much as we are. They will sue Arizona for doing the job they refuse to do themselves. They will grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants by bureaucratic fiat. They will tell us what light bulbs to use, how much fat we may have in our diets, and how much water we may have in our toilets....
....Perhaps in the recent past, with a compliant, JournoList-infected media providing cover, they could do anything. Not anymore. Americans have had enough.
Let's throw in some Tony Blankly, and make it a trio:
if the upcoming election results fail for any reason (including GOP campaign incompetence) to empower the public's overwhelming desire to stop and reverse the "fundamental transformation" of the United States - I suspect the country will be rocked to its core within the following months and few years.
A foul and dangerous brew is heating up that is composed of: (1) The economic collapse that started in 2008; (2) the radical, "fundamentally transforming" left-wing agenda of the government; and, (3) the thwarting of the public will - with glee - by the entrenched, non-elected powers (in the courts, media, colleges and government bureaucracies) as they get into the face and under the skin of the cultural and political majority.
It is insufferable (and will not long be suffered) to be lectured to and imposed upon by a ruling class that loathes our nation's history, values and accomplishments; by those who are not, in fact, our genuine betters. They are neither better educated nor more profoundly morally versed.
In fact, they are our intellectual and moral inferiors - not superiors....
...as the first details of the transformation were revealed to the nation - in Obamacare, the stimulus, bailouts, nationalizations and running roughshod over the Constitution - it became clear that the price for security turned out to be our birthright of liberty. Americans were not that rattled.
Now that we who cling to our liberty know we are a majority - and potentially a very large majority - we are aroused to the defense of our ancient rights - and we will not slacken in our efforts until that repulsive plan for transformation has been expurgated from the body politic - to quote Franklin D. Roosevelt - "so help us God."
Despite the darkness, there is Hope...
The contempt for ordinary Americans displayed by the ruling class is reaching critical mass. There may never have been a time in American history when the governing, academic, cultural, and media elites have been more manifestly disdainful of the country’s values, traditions, principles, and people...
The same elites who lecture incessantly refuse to listen to the racist rabble populating flyover country. They have no problem listening, apologizing, and bowing obsequiously to our declared enemies, but insist on acting imperiously toward their fellow Americans.
When thousands flooded town-hall meetings to express opposition to Obamacare, they got Obamacare shoved down their throats...And when 71 percent of Missouri voters rejected the abominable bill, Robert Gibbs proclaimed that the vote meant “nothing.”
It’s certainly evident that it was, indeed, “nothing” to the ruling class. That class will pass a 2,000-page, $800 billion spending bill without even reading it. They will “redistribute” billions from disfavored groups to favored constituencies.They will rack up ethics charges like frequent-flier miles. They will take over giant car companies and financial institutions despite never having run so much as a pop stand. They will drop missile defense and open our borders because we’ve been on the wrong side of history all these years. They will shut down oil drilling in the Gulf, thereby sacrificing the livelihoods of thousands, without any empirical justification whatsoever. They will abandon our nation’s allies and embrace our enemies for no other reason than that it’s a different policy than George W. Bush’s. They will prosecute Navy SEALs but wink at the release of convicted terrorists. They will exhibit galactic ineptitude in cleaning the Gulf but assure us they can completely reorder the economy in response to the non-debateable evidence of global warming. They will raise our taxes so that our comparatives in the federal government can be paid twice as much as we are. They will sue Arizona for doing the job they refuse to do themselves. They will grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants by bureaucratic fiat. They will tell us what light bulbs to use, how much fat we may have in our diets, and how much water we may have in our toilets....
....Perhaps in the recent past, with a compliant, JournoList-infected media providing cover, they could do anything. Not anymore. Americans have had enough.
Let's throw in some Tony Blankly, and make it a trio:
if the upcoming election results fail for any reason (including GOP campaign incompetence) to empower the public's overwhelming desire to stop and reverse the "fundamental transformation" of the United States - I suspect the country will be rocked to its core within the following months and few years.
A foul and dangerous brew is heating up that is composed of: (1) The economic collapse that started in 2008; (2) the radical, "fundamentally transforming" left-wing agenda of the government; and, (3) the thwarting of the public will - with glee - by the entrenched, non-elected powers (in the courts, media, colleges and government bureaucracies) as they get into the face and under the skin of the cultural and political majority.
It is insufferable (and will not long be suffered) to be lectured to and imposed upon by a ruling class that loathes our nation's history, values and accomplishments; by those who are not, in fact, our genuine betters. They are neither better educated nor more profoundly morally versed.
In fact, they are our intellectual and moral inferiors - not superiors....
...as the first details of the transformation were revealed to the nation - in Obamacare, the stimulus, bailouts, nationalizations and running roughshod over the Constitution - it became clear that the price for security turned out to be our birthright of liberty. Americans were not that rattled.
Now that we who cling to our liberty know we are a majority - and potentially a very large majority - we are aroused to the defense of our ancient rights - and we will not slacken in our efforts until that repulsive plan for transformation has been expurgated from the body politic - to quote Franklin D. Roosevelt - "so help us God."
Despite the darkness, there is Hope...
Harry Reid Plays The Race Card, Hispanic-Style
Ah, divide and conquer. That's about all that's left for the party who claims to represent racial harmony, except when racial harmony harms their election chances. Then, it becomes time to spice up the broth with a dash of racial hatred....
Harry Reid, campaigning for his life in Nevada yesterday, spoke thusly to a group of Hispanics yesterday:
"I don't know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, okay. Do I need to say more?"
Oh, I don't know about that, Harry. Maybe there are Hispanics that don't want to be pandered to, who don't want to be infantilized, who came here honestly and expect others to do the same, and who only ask to work hard and be allowed to keep the money they earn so that they may pursue their share of the American dream.
You would mock these people, Harry, and for the thought-crime of daring to step off the Democratic racial plantation, you would strip them of their Hispanic heritage, as you seem to insinuate above.
But that's OK. Most of the Hispanics I am referring to - and their are plenty of them - don't need your approval to relish their heritage. And furthermore, I think there is another name for Hispanics who reject your path and choose to take another:
Americans.
And that's a name they likely cherish...
(click the link above for the response of Sharron Angle's campaign....)
Harry Reid, campaigning for his life in Nevada yesterday, spoke thusly to a group of Hispanics yesterday:
"I don't know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, okay. Do I need to say more?"
Oh, I don't know about that, Harry. Maybe there are Hispanics that don't want to be pandered to, who don't want to be infantilized, who came here honestly and expect others to do the same, and who only ask to work hard and be allowed to keep the money they earn so that they may pursue their share of the American dream.
You would mock these people, Harry, and for the thought-crime of daring to step off the Democratic racial plantation, you would strip them of their Hispanic heritage, as you seem to insinuate above.
But that's OK. Most of the Hispanics I am referring to - and their are plenty of them - don't need your approval to relish their heritage. And furthermore, I think there is another name for Hispanics who reject your path and choose to take another:
Americans.
And that's a name they likely cherish...
(click the link above for the response of Sharron Angle's campaign....)
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Boston Globe: Shut Up And Watch Elliot Spitzer! (and learn what, exactly?)
And no, it's not because he will discuss the intricacies of deceptive whore-mongering (now that would be a ratings draw!). For some reason, the Globe saw fit to waste editorial space to defend a show that hasn't even hit the air yet.
Strange but true:
THERE ARE signs of more intelligent life in TV news, but critics, channeling what Michael Wolff of Vanity Fair called “the inside-baseball television-news diaspora,’’ are trying hard to snuff it out.
CNN, overhauling its evening lineup, recently announced a prime-time show co-hosted by former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer and Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Kathleen Parker. The blowback couldn’t have been stronger if the network had chosen Tony Hayward and Rielle Hunter.
The Globe does not discuss the merit of the blowback, but simply defends Spitzer, who was apparently simply a great liberal caught up in a tiny, minor scandal - as if cheating on his wife with high-priced hookers was really his fault! C'mon, really now! How unfair that he be judge by such conservative standards! Isn't Spitzer in fact the victim here?
Yes, Spitzer will forever be marred by his use of prostitutes, but the demise of his political career has freed him up to be far more candid than the average moonlighting politico. Parker, a voice of common-sense conservatism, is notable for her willingness to break with the GOP herd; in 2008, she wrote that Sarah Palin lacked important qualifications for national office.
Ah. So here's why the Globe so desperately wants to see Spitzer's critics silenced - it's an opportunity for a longtime liberal to get a primetime speaking slot on a nightly basis, paired with a squishy conservative who is more likely to agree with him than disagree. Gee, whose agenda does that advance?
Love the way the Globe uses Parker's dismissal of Palin as an indication of "smarts" - smart because she agreed with the Globe's editorial board, I reckon. In retrospect, with a virtual revolution brewing across America, wouldn't it have been more interesting to have a liberal host a show who questioned Barack Obama's qualifications? And after all, when all is said and done, can't one argue that Sarah Palin is in fact more popular and powerful than our emasculated president?
Well, according to the Boston Globe, we shouldn't even be having this conversation now. We should shut up and watch the wisdom of The Whore-Monger when he graces our television sets come September, for the Globe has already informed us that, like God looking over his Creation, that it is Good.
Although God, at least, withheld judgement until his works was complete. The Globe, apparently, doesn't need to...
Strange but true:
THERE ARE signs of more intelligent life in TV news, but critics, channeling what Michael Wolff of Vanity Fair called “the inside-baseball television-news diaspora,’’ are trying hard to snuff it out.
CNN, overhauling its evening lineup, recently announced a prime-time show co-hosted by former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer and Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Kathleen Parker. The blowback couldn’t have been stronger if the network had chosen Tony Hayward and Rielle Hunter.
The Globe does not discuss the merit of the blowback, but simply defends Spitzer, who was apparently simply a great liberal caught up in a tiny, minor scandal - as if cheating on his wife with high-priced hookers was really his fault! C'mon, really now! How unfair that he be judge by such conservative standards! Isn't Spitzer in fact the victim here?
Yes, Spitzer will forever be marred by his use of prostitutes, but the demise of his political career has freed him up to be far more candid than the average moonlighting politico. Parker, a voice of common-sense conservatism, is notable for her willingness to break with the GOP herd; in 2008, she wrote that Sarah Palin lacked important qualifications for national office.
Ah. So here's why the Globe so desperately wants to see Spitzer's critics silenced - it's an opportunity for a longtime liberal to get a primetime speaking slot on a nightly basis, paired with a squishy conservative who is more likely to agree with him than disagree. Gee, whose agenda does that advance?
Love the way the Globe uses Parker's dismissal of Palin as an indication of "smarts" - smart because she agreed with the Globe's editorial board, I reckon. In retrospect, with a virtual revolution brewing across America, wouldn't it have been more interesting to have a liberal host a show who questioned Barack Obama's qualifications? And after all, when all is said and done, can't one argue that Sarah Palin is in fact more popular and powerful than our emasculated president?
Well, according to the Boston Globe, we shouldn't even be having this conversation now. We should shut up and watch the wisdom of The Whore-Monger when he graces our television sets come September, for the Globe has already informed us that, like God looking over his Creation, that it is Good.
Although God, at least, withheld judgement until his works was complete. The Globe, apparently, doesn't need to...
"Battleground States": A Massacre For The Democrats?
A recent poll taken in 13 states with competitive Senate races tells a story of doom, dismay, and despair for the Democratic party. If they were listening, that is, which they haven't been since 2008. Some highlights:
(1) The Republican candidate leads on the ballot 47%-39% across the 13 Battleground Senate states. The lead is 45%-37% in the Republican-held states (Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Ohio), and 47%-40% in Democratic-held states (Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Washington).
(2) Independents are voting Republican by 47%-25% across the Battleground states.
(3) In the four states John McCain won in 2008, the GOPer leads 46%-36%. In the nine states Barack Obama won, the GOPer still leads 47%-40%, including 50%-38% in the five states Obama won with less than 55%, and 43%-42% in the four Obama 55%+ states.
(4) There is a 21-point gender gap. Men are voting GOP 52%-33% while women split 42% GOP/44% Democratic.
(5) Democratic candidates face a wide disparity in terms of enthusiasm. Republicans lead 52%-36% among high-interest voters.
(6) Among Independents, only 21% say the nation is in the right direction, while 68% say it’s on the wrong track.
Does this about sum it up?
Voters in the 13 Battleground Senate seats — five held by Republicans, eight by Democrats — want to vote for Republicans...
So how are the Democrats responding? With a fierce but reasoned debate based on defense of their positions and the legislation they've passed in the last 18 months?
No, they are responding by...bashing Bush. Which finally makes sense. Because if people want to vote Republican, the Dems have to give them a reason why not to. And since the public hates most of their legislation (Democrats have, to a man, refused to talk about the health care reform bill they passed), and has lost confidence in both their social and economic policies, the only way for the party to convince these wanna-be Republican voters to stick with the Democrats is by reminding them how awful, how terrible, how hopeless things were in the Republican/Bush years.
Nothing left in the bucket but mud, so they gotta throw it. The problem is, it doesn't look like 2010 is a year that much of it is going to stick to the wall. What happens once the bucket is empty, and the polls are unchanged?
Do we see a political version of Custer's Last Stand? Or do we see something more scurrilous, an enormous "f*ck you!" to the American people and the entire democratic system, in the form of a "lame duck" session of Congress where the Democrats vote every liberal wet dream into law?
Well, Nancy Pelosi is smirking again, just like she did during the health-care "debate"...
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) tells NRO that the GOP will not be able to block Democrats from legislating during the lame-duck session. “As long as we can come back and create jobs, we will take every opportunity to do it,” she says with a smile
Sound like someone who is going to respect the system?
(1) The Republican candidate leads on the ballot 47%-39% across the 13 Battleground Senate states. The lead is 45%-37% in the Republican-held states (Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Ohio), and 47%-40% in Democratic-held states (Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Washington).
(2) Independents are voting Republican by 47%-25% across the Battleground states.
(3) In the four states John McCain won in 2008, the GOPer leads 46%-36%. In the nine states Barack Obama won, the GOPer still leads 47%-40%, including 50%-38% in the five states Obama won with less than 55%, and 43%-42% in the four Obama 55%+ states.
(4) There is a 21-point gender gap. Men are voting GOP 52%-33% while women split 42% GOP/44% Democratic.
(5) Democratic candidates face a wide disparity in terms of enthusiasm. Republicans lead 52%-36% among high-interest voters.
(6) Among Independents, only 21% say the nation is in the right direction, while 68% say it’s on the wrong track.
Does this about sum it up?
Voters in the 13 Battleground Senate seats — five held by Republicans, eight by Democrats — want to vote for Republicans...
So how are the Democrats responding? With a fierce but reasoned debate based on defense of their positions and the legislation they've passed in the last 18 months?
No, they are responding by...bashing Bush. Which finally makes sense. Because if people want to vote Republican, the Dems have to give them a reason why not to. And since the public hates most of their legislation (Democrats have, to a man, refused to talk about the health care reform bill they passed), and has lost confidence in both their social and economic policies, the only way for the party to convince these wanna-be Republican voters to stick with the Democrats is by reminding them how awful, how terrible, how hopeless things were in the Republican/Bush years.
Nothing left in the bucket but mud, so they gotta throw it. The problem is, it doesn't look like 2010 is a year that much of it is going to stick to the wall. What happens once the bucket is empty, and the polls are unchanged?
Do we see a political version of Custer's Last Stand? Or do we see something more scurrilous, an enormous "f*ck you!" to the American people and the entire democratic system, in the form of a "lame duck" session of Congress where the Democrats vote every liberal wet dream into law?
Well, Nancy Pelosi is smirking again, just like she did during the health-care "debate"...
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) tells NRO that the GOP will not be able to block Democrats from legislating during the lame-duck session. “As long as we can come back and create jobs, we will take every opportunity to do it,” she says with a smile
Sound like someone who is going to respect the system?
Sunday, August 08, 2010
The King Meets The Queen...
...Queen Michelle Obama, self-appointed, was welcomed into the palace of the King of Spain for a light midday meal:
Lunch was Andalusian-style chilled gazpacho soup, chargrilled turbot, veal escalopes with mustard, Oriental rice with sauteed mushrooms, a Mallorca-style vegetable ratatouille and sliced fruit with ice cream, accompanied by wines from the northern regions of Rueda and Rioja...
What did the Royals discuss over this regal feast? Michelle Obama's desire to control the menus of "ordinary" Americans under the guise of fighting "obesity"? The need to control carbon dioxide under the cover of "climate change" so that there is plenty of fuel for Air Force One/Two and the King's yacht?
Or, while sipping sumptious wines, did they discuss the need for the peasants to undergo hardships in these "difficult times" we face, as what little wealth that remains needs to be "spread" ? Oh, even these fine Lords must have choked back laughter, in order not to upset the delicate digestion necessary to process meals such as only they are entitled to enjoy...
UPDATE: From the comments at the Yahoo article:
Michelle Antoinette, Queen of Spain
Using her position for such personal gain
And all the while her King Louie man
Is destroying America as fast as he can
Lunch was Andalusian-style chilled gazpacho soup, chargrilled turbot, veal escalopes with mustard, Oriental rice with sauteed mushrooms, a Mallorca-style vegetable ratatouille and sliced fruit with ice cream, accompanied by wines from the northern regions of Rueda and Rioja...
What did the Royals discuss over this regal feast? Michelle Obama's desire to control the menus of "ordinary" Americans under the guise of fighting "obesity"? The need to control carbon dioxide under the cover of "climate change" so that there is plenty of fuel for Air Force One/Two and the King's yacht?
Or, while sipping sumptious wines, did they discuss the need for the peasants to undergo hardships in these "difficult times" we face, as what little wealth that remains needs to be "spread" ? Oh, even these fine Lords must have choked back laughter, in order not to upset the delicate digestion necessary to process meals such as only they are entitled to enjoy...
UPDATE: From the comments at the Yahoo article:
Michelle Antoinette, Queen of Spain
Using her position for such personal gain
And all the while her King Louie man
Is destroying America as fast as he can
Katie Couric, Sarah Palin, and Camile Paglia
If you haven't seen it yet, here's America's (former) Sweetheart, Katie Couric, mocking Sarah Palin just moments after she was announced as John McCain's running mate. It didn't matter that Couric didn't know jacksh*t about Palin, all that mattered was that she was a Republican woman and a threat to the liberal hierarchy.
Anyway, for the uninitiated...roll tape:
But let's remember that this was not the last time Couric took potshots at Palin. Never one to learn a lesson - really, the media arm of the Democratic party is nothing if not intellectually flawless - she took some snark shots while speaking to students in Princeton last year:
- "Coming here was a real no brainer! After all, I can see New Jersey from my house!"
Oh, how witty you are , Katie C.! Well, maybe in your own mind. But not in the minds of most Americans, who avoid you at 630P EST like the plague:
Numbers for the week of July 26:
Anyway, for the uninitiated...roll tape:
But let's remember that this was not the last time Couric took potshots at Palin. Never one to learn a lesson - really, the media arm of the Democratic party is nothing if not intellectually flawless - she took some snark shots while speaking to students in Princeton last year:
- "Coming here was a real no brainer! After all, I can see New Jersey from my house!"
Oh, how witty you are , Katie C.! Well, maybe in your own mind. But not in the minds of most Americans, who avoid you at 630P EST like the plague:
Numbers for the week of July 26:
NBC - 7,440,000
ABC - 6,750,000
CBS - 4,980,000
But really, is there anything I can say about Katie that sharp-tounge feminist Camile Paglia has not already said?
...let me take this opportunity to say that of all the innumerable print and broadcast journalists who have interviewed me in the U.S. and abroad since I arrived on the scene nearly 20 years ago, Katie Couric was definitively the stupidest. As a guest on NBC’s ‘Today’ show during my 1992 book tour, I was astounded by Couric’s small, humorless, agenda-ridden mind, still registered in that pinched, tinny monotone that makes me rush across the room to change stations whenever her banal mini-editorials blare out at 5 p.m. on the CBS radio network . And of course I would never spoil my dinner by tuning into Couric’s TV evening news show. That sallow, wizened, drum-tight, cosmetic mummification look is not an appetite enhancer outside of Manhattan or L.A. There’s many a moose in Alaska with greater charm and pizazz.”
But really, is there anything I can say about Katie that sharp-tounge feminist Camile Paglia has not already said?
...let me take this opportunity to say that of all the innumerable print and broadcast journalists who have interviewed me in the U.S. and abroad since I arrived on the scene nearly 20 years ago, Katie Couric was definitively the stupidest. As a guest on NBC’s ‘Today’ show during my 1992 book tour, I was astounded by Couric’s small, humorless, agenda-ridden mind, still registered in that pinched, tinny monotone that makes me rush across the room to change stations whenever her banal mini-editorials blare out at 5 p.m. on the CBS radio network . And of course I would never spoil my dinner by tuning into Couric’s TV evening news show. That sallow, wizened, drum-tight, cosmetic mummification look is not an appetite enhancer outside of Manhattan or L.A. There’s many a moose in Alaska with greater charm and pizazz.”
Bottom line: Let's not fret about our little teleprompter monkey, Katie Couric. Nobody watches her, nobody respects her, and even those own her own side find her revolting.
Should've stuck with puff-pieces about colon exams, Katie....
Saturday, August 07, 2010
Barack Obama & The Democratic Congress: Elite Crack Whores
From the Freakanomics blog in the New York Times, yesterday:
From Dan Okrent’s recent Q&A about Prohibition: “No factor played a larger role in the repeal of Prohibition than the government’s desperate need for revenue as the country fell into the grip of the Depression.”
In short: governments who hate vice suddenly hate it much less when cash flow is slow. And we are seeing that again today.
- Congress may overturn a four-year-old ban on Internet gambling in order to tax it. (One potential conflict: most states rely on proceeds from their own lotteries, which carry a comically huge vig of at least 30%.)
- In California (and elsewhere), marijuana is becoming increasingly available, and is being taxed accordingly.
- Hard-hit local governments are loosening alcohol restrictions in airports to raise tax revenue.
And of course, prostitution taxes are being floated again. Which is the perfect analogy. The government is a crack addict hooked on Big Green, Phat Cash, Big Benjamins - and once socially acceptable mea
ns of obtaining it are insufficient for quenching the craving, all options are placed on the table.
So like the nice girl turned crack whore, now debasing herself in ways never dreamed possible in the name of a quick fix, governments are about to legalize and promote behavior seen (rightfully, in many cases) as destructive for both the individual and for society at large.
The government doesn't care. It needs it's cash fix. If it means destroying itself, and the American people along with it, well...how much morality does a drug addict have, anyway?
You wonder how a person winds up filthy, huddled in an alley, eyes sunken, face dawn, teeth rotted,with a gnarled hand out? Just watch the actions of Barack Obama, and his Congress of degenerate reprobates...
From Dan Okrent’s recent Q&A about Prohibition: “No factor played a larger role in the repeal of Prohibition than the government’s desperate need for revenue as the country fell into the grip of the Depression.”
In short: governments who hate vice suddenly hate it much less when cash flow is slow. And we are seeing that again today.
- Congress may overturn a four-year-old ban on Internet gambling in order to tax it. (One potential conflict: most states rely on proceeds from their own lotteries, which carry a comically huge vig of at least 30%.)
- In California (and elsewhere), marijuana is becoming increasingly available, and is being taxed accordingly.
- Hard-hit local governments are loosening alcohol restrictions in airports to raise tax revenue.
And of course, prostitution taxes are being floated again. Which is the perfect analogy. The government is a crack addict hooked on Big Green, Phat Cash, Big Benjamins - and once socially acceptable mea
ns of obtaining it are insufficient for quenching the craving, all options are placed on the table.So like the nice girl turned crack whore, now debasing herself in ways never dreamed possible in the name of a quick fix, governments are about to legalize and promote behavior seen (rightfully, in many cases) as destructive for both the individual and for society at large.
The government doesn't care. It needs it's cash fix. If it means destroying itself, and the American people along with it, well...how much morality does a drug addict have, anyway?
You wonder how a person winds up filthy, huddled in an alley, eyes sunken, face dawn, teeth rotted,with a gnarled hand out? Just watch the actions of Barack Obama, and his Congress of degenerate reprobates...
And won't somebody please tell Michelle, before it is too late?
Friday, August 06, 2010
How Bad Are Obama's Poll Numbers?
....They have gotten so bad that the NAACP has started referring to him as the "first Hawaiian president...."
Seriously, folks. We'll be here all week...
Via the O.C.
Seriously, folks. We'll be here all week...
Via the O.C.
Charlie Rangel: Obeying The Law Is For White People!
Ah, the race card, the last gasp of the desperate stooge. Rangel, about to walk the plank an saber point, throws it all out there, hoping something sticks. Via Jammie Wearing Fool:
A defiant Rep. Charlie Rangel said yesterday his birthday-party fund-raiser at The Plaza next week is still on -- despite some nervous politicians who have backed out of the bash in the wake of his ethics woes.
Rangel also got a boost from Mayor Bloomberg, who aides said will attend the beleaguered congressman's 80th-birthday celebration Wednesday.
"It's not a birthday for them, it's a birthday party for me!" Rangel exclaimed after delivering a fiery speech defending his actions at a Columbia University business event sponsored by the Greater Harlem Chamber of Commerce.
Rangel was upbeat yesterday as he received rousing ovations from the Harlem faithful, who rallied around the 20-term congressman.
The Harlem Democrat yesterday likened himself to a defendant being asked to confess to crimes he didn't commit and dismissed talk of a plea bargain as "English, Anglo-Saxon" procedure for criminal cases.
Typical Rangel, "it's for me"! Just like all the money he's extorted from taxpayers and businesses over the years...
You know, perhaps the beleaguered Congressman shouldn't feel too pleased about the attendance of Bloomberg, who is now perceived by New Yorkers as being in the same race-baiting category as Rangel after accusing residents opposed to the Islamic flag flying over Ground Zero of racial and religious hatred. Is one race-baiter's racism justified by standing next to another? I doubt New Yorkers would think so...
And yet, the Harlem faithful applaud. The way an Italian neighborhood backs the local Don, perhaps, aware that they are in the hands of a criminal, and yet knowing they will at least get their share of kickbacks and payouts?
It's a nice scam, going on a quarter-century. Of course, if these black leaders actually cared about black people, they would have endorsed others and sent Charlie packing a long time ago.
But the African -Americans have their own elites, I suppose, and they live to support the establishment that elevates them above their peers, even as the people they claim to represent wither on the vine....
A defiant Rep. Charlie Rangel said yesterday his birthday-party fund-raiser at The Plaza next week is still on -- despite some nervous politicians who have backed out of the bash in the wake of his ethics woes.
Rangel also got a boost from Mayor Bloomberg, who aides said will attend the beleaguered congressman's 80th-birthday celebration Wednesday.
"It's not a birthday for them, it's a birthday party for me!" Rangel exclaimed after delivering a fiery speech defending his actions at a Columbia University business event sponsored by the Greater Harlem Chamber of Commerce.
Rangel was upbeat yesterday as he received rousing ovations from the Harlem faithful, who rallied around the 20-term congressman.
The Harlem Democrat yesterday likened himself to a defendant being asked to confess to crimes he didn't commit and dismissed talk of a plea bargain as "English, Anglo-Saxon" procedure for criminal cases.
Typical Rangel, "it's for me"! Just like all the money he's extorted from taxpayers and businesses over the years...
You know, perhaps the beleaguered Congressman shouldn't feel too pleased about the attendance of Bloomberg, who is now perceived by New Yorkers as being in the same race-baiting category as Rangel after accusing residents opposed to the Islamic flag flying over Ground Zero of racial and religious hatred. Is one race-baiter's racism justified by standing next to another? I doubt New Yorkers would think so...
And yet, the Harlem faithful applaud. The way an Italian neighborhood backs the local Don, perhaps, aware that they are in the hands of a criminal, and yet knowing they will at least get their share of kickbacks and payouts?
It's a nice scam, going on a quarter-century. Of course, if these black leaders actually cared about black people, they would have endorsed others and sent Charlie packing a long time ago.
But the African -Americans have their own elites, I suppose, and they live to support the establishment that elevates them above their peers, even as the people they claim to represent wither on the vine....
Queen Michelle Brings Skank Style To Spain
For us ordinary Americans, we need to learn to lower our thermostats, avoid trips to Vegas, and be more frugal so we can afford to pay our taxes. For the Obamas, though, the story is a bit...different.
Especially if you are Michelle Obama, who is currently in Marbella, Spain,
....on a four-day visit and will be staying at the five-star Villa Padierna, rated as one of the world's top 30 hotels, with 40 friends. The party has reserved 60 rooms.... The 129-room establishment, an Italian palazzo-style building, is nestled in the hills of Benahavis overlooking the millionaires' playground of Marbella and about three miles from the coast.
Rooms start at £210-a-night and stretch to around £4,100 for a villa with 24-hour butler service and private pool and garden.
The Villa Padierna has five restaurants, a spa and access to three 18-hole golf courses....
Sixty f*ckin' rooms. While her subjects wander about back home, desperately looking for work with an eye askew towards a Congress that can't wait to raise taxes on virtually everything. And who's paying for Michelle's party? Here's a clue:
Mrs Obama and her daughter are expected to visit Spain's King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia at their summer palace on the island of Majorca, a short flight from Marbella.
Bingo! Diplomatic meeting = taxpayer funded expenditure. Pony up, America! Michelle and her posse need some walking-around money!
And how is America's First Lady presenting herself? According to this blogger...not so well:
Getting out of the plane she looked very much unlikely to be on anyone’s best dressed list. All black with her hair rolled into a little dung beetle ball....
The top makes her arm look deformed, such a short tiny stub for a lower arm. The top is of course too small around her hips. And the large hoop earrings she likes to wear lately make her always look cheap.
It’s the extravagance of Michelle Obama’s trip and glitzy destination contrasted with President Obama’s demonization of the rich that smacks of hypocrisy and perpetuates a disconnect between the country and its leaders. Toning down the flash would humanize the Obamas and signify that they sympathize with the setbacks of the people they were elected to serve.
Especially if you are Michelle Obama, who is currently in Marbella, Spain,
....on a four-day visit and will be staying at the five-star Villa Padierna, rated as one of the world's top 30 hotels, with 40 friends. The party has reserved 60 rooms.... The 129-room establishment, an Italian palazzo-style building, is nestled in the hills of Benahavis overlooking the millionaires' playground of Marbella and about three miles from the coast.
Rooms start at £210-a-night and stretch to around £4,100 for a villa with 24-hour butler service and private pool and garden.
The Villa Padierna has five restaurants, a spa and access to three 18-hole golf courses....
Sixty f*ckin' rooms. While her subjects wander about back home, desperately looking for work with an eye askew towards a Congress that can't wait to raise taxes on virtually everything. And who's paying for Michelle's party? Here's a clue:
Mrs Obama and her daughter are expected to visit Spain's King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia at their summer palace on the island of Majorca, a short flight from Marbella.
Bingo! Diplomatic meeting = taxpayer funded expenditure. Pony up, America! Michelle and her posse need some walking-around money!
And how is America's First Lady presenting herself? According to this blogger...not so well:
Getting out of the plane she looked very much unlikely to be on anyone’s best dressed list. All black with her hair rolled into a little dung beetle ball....
Wide pants tighter than the skin on her hips, but too wide and way too long and heavy on the bottom! There is no female grace in these photos. The way she walks it’s as if she is a rodeo star with her fans in tow.
And swimsuit lines with an off-shoulder top? The top makes her look unbalanced. I’d like to see the designer outfit on a model, on a petite woman this could be great. But for MOO, her shoulders are just too wide to highlite them.
And swimsuit lines with an off-shoulder top? The top makes her look unbalanced. I’d like to see the designer outfit on a model, on a petite woman this could be great. But for MOO, her shoulders are just too wide to highlite them.
The top makes her arm look deformed, such a short tiny stub for a lower arm. The top is of course too small around her hips. And the large hoop earrings she likes to wear lately make her always look cheap.
You would think, being that this is the eighth vacation she has taken in the last 18 months (thanks to us peasants), she would have at least learned how to dress by now...
What an ugly woman Queen Michelle is. It's an ugliness that begins deep inside her, a distaste and a disdain for all that are not like her, and a surging hatred and hostility for all that do not think as she (and Barack) does. Like most people full of ugly emotions, it becomes impossible not to wear it on your sleeve, whether you realize it or not. And boy, is her ugly inside clearly reflected on the outside.
And yet, media doyennes and their ilk label her as beautiful. Is it just a variation of the bullsh*t they sling about how "intelligent" Barack is? Or do they see a lot of themselves in her unattractive visage...?
Update: From the Modern-Day Marie Antoinette file:
It’s the extravagance of Michelle Obama’s trip and glitzy destination contrasted with President Obama’s demonization of the rich that smacks of hypocrisy and perpetuates a disconnect between the country and its leaders. Toning down the flash would humanize the Obamas and signify that they sympathize with the setbacks of the people they were elected to serve.
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Democrats spend $26 Billion of YOUR money to help ensure THEIR re-election
Thanks to two RHINOs, as smart as their anthropomorphical namesakes:
Legislation to provide billions to save the jobs of teachers and other public workers is on track to pass the Senate, helped along by the votes of a couple of GOP moderates.
The $26 billion measure would help states ease their severe budget problems and, advocates said, stop the layoffs of perhaps 300,000 teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public employees. Though scaled back, the bill also would salvage a victory for Democrats who have been unable to deliver most of the jobs help they and President Barack Obama promised.
The legislation advanced by a 61-38 tally that all but ensured it would pass the Senate on Thursday...Many Republicans objected to the expense at a time of record budget deficits, but moderate Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine cast the key votes to break the filibuster — as they did last month in helping Democrats pass a six-month extension of jobless benefits.
Wednesday's bill would extend programs enacted in last year's economic stimulus law...
Collins and Snowe - the two of them combined don't equal one idiot. Why spend $26 billion on programs that have proven to be ineffective? Why extort $26 billion from the private sector to pay to save jobs in the public sector, which has been virtually untouched by the Great Recession? And most importantly, why allow the Democrats to spend $26 billion in taxpayer dollars in order to help their own re-election efforts?
“Out of the estimated 3.3 million public school teachers nationwide, teachers unions were expecting 160,000 layoffs this year — just 4.8 percent of all teachers. 38.1 percent of those layoffs are centered in just three states: 9,000 in New Jersey, 16,000 in New York and 36,000 in California,” Wilson noted.
“If you take those 160,000 teachers, and assumed only half are unionized — which is very conservative — with contributions to state and local unions averaging $300 per teacher, and another $162 per teacher to the National Education Association or $190 per teacher to the American Federation of Teachers, and the Senate just voted to give $40 million to the public teachers unions’ political coffers, which will be mobilized into campaign ads, direct mail, phone banks, you name it, all to elect Democrats”
Not to mention feeding the liberal drug habits of three states that need to learn now more than ever the price and perils of "progressive" economic policies. Keep putting off that day of reckoning, fellas....
How stupid are Snowe and Collins? Putting taxpayer money into union coffers to be spent on liberal candidates, as well as allowing the Democrats to "claim victory" where most Americans were looking for the Democrats to suffer another defeat is beyond comprehension? Simply incomprehensible...
Here's the truth, same link:
“The American people will be harangued over the next few weeks about what a wonderful thing the Senate has done when, in reality, we have drastically increased the burden on American workers, taxpayers, and businesses,” Wilson added.
When Democrats spend, and Republicans go along, we all suffer, every one of us. No wonder the Tea Party movement is gaining strength and anti-incumbent sentiment is so high; when the party of conservatism goes along with the party of self-destruction, we all lose.
And we the people are tired of losing to the political class, time and time again...
Legislation to provide billions to save the jobs of teachers and other public workers is on track to pass the Senate, helped along by the votes of a couple of GOP moderates.
The $26 billion measure would help states ease their severe budget problems and, advocates said, stop the layoffs of perhaps 300,000 teachers, firefighters, police officers and other public employees. Though scaled back, the bill also would salvage a victory for Democrats who have been unable to deliver most of the jobs help they and President Barack Obama promised.
The legislation advanced by a 61-38 tally that all but ensured it would pass the Senate on Thursday...Many Republicans objected to the expense at a time of record budget deficits, but moderate Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine cast the key votes to break the filibuster — as they did last month in helping Democrats pass a six-month extension of jobless benefits.
Wednesday's bill would extend programs enacted in last year's economic stimulus law...
Collins and Snowe - the two of them combined don't equal one idiot. Why spend $26 billion on programs that have proven to be ineffective? Why extort $26 billion from the private sector to pay to save jobs in the public sector, which has been virtually untouched by the Great Recession? And most importantly, why allow the Democrats to spend $26 billion in taxpayer dollars in order to help their own re-election efforts?
“Out of the estimated 3.3 million public school teachers nationwide, teachers unions were expecting 160,000 layoffs this year — just 4.8 percent of all teachers. 38.1 percent of those layoffs are centered in just three states: 9,000 in New Jersey, 16,000 in New York and 36,000 in California,” Wilson noted.
“If you take those 160,000 teachers, and assumed only half are unionized — which is very conservative — with contributions to state and local unions averaging $300 per teacher, and another $162 per teacher to the National Education Association or $190 per teacher to the American Federation of Teachers, and the Senate just voted to give $40 million to the public teachers unions’ political coffers, which will be mobilized into campaign ads, direct mail, phone banks, you name it, all to elect Democrats”
Not to mention feeding the liberal drug habits of three states that need to learn now more than ever the price and perils of "progressive" economic policies. Keep putting off that day of reckoning, fellas....
How stupid are Snowe and Collins? Putting taxpayer money into union coffers to be spent on liberal candidates, as well as allowing the Democrats to "claim victory" where most Americans were looking for the Democrats to suffer another defeat is beyond comprehension? Simply incomprehensible...
Here's the truth, same link:
“The American people will be harangued over the next few weeks about what a wonderful thing the Senate has done when, in reality, we have drastically increased the burden on American workers, taxpayers, and businesses,” Wilson added.
When Democrats spend, and Republicans go along, we all suffer, every one of us. No wonder the Tea Party movement is gaining strength and anti-incumbent sentiment is so high; when the party of conservatism goes along with the party of self-destruction, we all lose.
And we the people are tired of losing to the political class, time and time again...
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Liberal Economics
Charles Krauthammer, dead-on.
This is how liberal economics works. The government takes your money in taxes, and then, it will deign to restore some of it as a loan, on which you have to go to a bureaucrat, you have to fill out a form, to get on your knees, you have to be nice, adhere to all the mandates. Then you get part of your money back with interest, or, in targeted tax cuts, which means the government will tell you how to spend your money, how to do your expansion of business, spend it on “x” and not “y.”
Krauthammer just leaves out the "why" here. It's because the liberals who will run things are smarter than you, and know best how to run your life, and the only means they have of realizing the control that is by birthright theirs is by choking you with taxes taken from every dollar you earn, then forcing you to engage in their preferred behavior to get some of it back. Like killing a man with his own gun. After you made him dance.
Of course, as the smarter class, they'll be exempt from most of these rules, and the tax laws designed to whip you into submission will only be optional for them. Making them richer and more free than you are, of course, while you are forced to pay to keep their oppressive system intact.
Like Orwell's pigs.
This is how liberal economics works. The government takes your money in taxes, and then, it will deign to restore some of it as a loan, on which you have to go to a bureaucrat, you have to fill out a form, to get on your knees, you have to be nice, adhere to all the mandates. Then you get part of your money back with interest, or, in targeted tax cuts, which means the government will tell you how to spend your money, how to do your expansion of business, spend it on “x” and not “y.”
Krauthammer just leaves out the "why" here. It's because the liberals who will run things are smarter than you, and know best how to run your life, and the only means they have of realizing the control that is by birthright theirs is by choking you with taxes taken from every dollar you earn, then forcing you to engage in their preferred behavior to get some of it back. Like killing a man with his own gun. After you made him dance.
Of course, as the smarter class, they'll be exempt from most of these rules, and the tax laws designed to whip you into submission will only be optional for them. Making them richer and more free than you are, of course, while you are forced to pay to keep their oppressive system intact.
Like Orwell's pigs.
Anna Little Goes To Edison
If the Tea Party is an express train, then Anna Little is the..."little" engine that could. Our candidate for NJ-12 (against the detestable Frank Pallone) heads up to Edison, New Jersey, on the same day that Obama was in town slumming with "local business owners". She offers a Tea Party take on the state of the Union, and to the surprise of no one save the tribalist Left, gets a fairly warm welcome in this blue-collar, minority city.
-Check out the 00:37 second mark, where Anna talks to some Ecuadorian immigrants in their native tongue, and signs autographs for them (She's also fluent in French, Russian, and Japanese - that's four more languages than our president is able to speak in. Remove the teleprompter, and it's five).
-Just past the four minute mark, Anna has a great heart-to-talk with another mom...
-At 5:30, some minority rage against illegal immigration and paying for their health care (did anyone tell this young lady the penalty for stepping off the Democratic Plantation? Listen to the foul language from the Obama supporters in the background...). She does disagree with Little at some points, but it was a great conversation with an educated minority voter. It should strike fear in the heart of every Democrat. If they had a brain...
Watch it all, to see the exact type of person the Founders had in mind when they created a House of Representatives:
Via MoreMonmouthMusings and Manly Rash (a blog that I need to dig into a bit...)
You can contribute to Anna Little here. Let's help our "Little" David defeat Frank Pallone, the Goliath of the Left, and symbol of everything that is wrong with America today...
-Check out the 00:37 second mark, where Anna talks to some Ecuadorian immigrants in their native tongue, and signs autographs for them (She's also fluent in French, Russian, and Japanese - that's four more languages than our president is able to speak in. Remove the teleprompter, and it's five).
-Just past the four minute mark, Anna has a great heart-to-talk with another mom...
-At 5:30, some minority rage against illegal immigration and paying for their health care (did anyone tell this young lady the penalty for stepping off the Democratic Plantation? Listen to the foul language from the Obama supporters in the background...). She does disagree with Little at some points, but it was a great conversation with an educated minority voter. It should strike fear in the heart of every Democrat. If they had a brain...
Watch it all, to see the exact type of person the Founders had in mind when they created a House of Representatives:
Via MoreMonmouthMusings and Manly Rash (a blog that I need to dig into a bit...)
You can contribute to Anna Little here. Let's help our "Little" David defeat Frank Pallone, the Goliath of the Left, and symbol of everything that is wrong with America today...
Ground Zero Mosque: New Yorkers Betrayed By Their Elites
So let's look at the most recent poll about how New Yorkers feel about the plan to build a mosque at Ground Zero:
52% Opposed
31% Approve
17% Undecided
The first cry of "racism" comes from the pollster himself:
"Is it because we're still nursing the wounds from the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center or is it more like bigotry?" he asked.
Well, gee, tell us what you really think! But it is comments like that that lead me to believe the 17% who are "undecided" are primarily opposed, and just fear being called a racist.
But never fear! The High Brahmin himself, Billionaire Bloomberg, "Mayor Mike" who changed the laws to allow himself a third term, is there to make sure you know that your opposition can only mean one thing: Racism!
....we also recognize that part of being a New Yorker is living with your neighbors in mutual respect and tolerance....But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves -- and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans -- if we said 'no' to a mosque in Lower Manhattan.
Get it? If you oppose the wailing call for Islamic prayer wafting over the weeping relatives of those who are mourning their dead by the hands of Islamists...you're an un-American racist.
He follows up with an inane liberal trope:
In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists...
Really? I thought that planting the flag if Islam on the graves of 3,000 Americans murdered in it's name was letting the terrorists win. How lucky am I to have an intellectual superior like Mike Bloomberg to teach me moral inversion...
But it isn't just the Mayor who is determined to allow America's enemies to plant their flag into the bodies of our dead. It is New York's strongest (and craziest) politicians who have been entirely mum on their constituent's opposition:
As the proposal to build a 13-story Islamic center two blocks from Ground Zero moves forward and controversy surrounding the plan grows, top New York Democrats are maintaining radio silence on the matter.
A spokesman for Senator Chuck Schumer told the Wall Street Journal two weeks ago that the senator is "not opposed" to building the mosque near Ground Zero. But Schumer himself was mum this afternoon following the Senate Democrats' weekly luncheon. Asked by THE WEEKLY STANDARD to elaborate on his position (is the mosque good for interfaith relations? insensitive to 9/11 families?), Schumer didn't reply and ducked into a senators-only elevator, staring blankly ahead while waiting for the elevator doors to close.
A call this afternoon to Schumer's office was not returned. And though a spokesman for New York's junior senator Kirsten Gillibrand told the Journal that Gillibrand supports the mosque, Gillibrand's office also hasn't responded to a request for clarification on the issue from TWS. Meanwhile, the Washington Post's Greg Sargent reports that liberal firebrand Anthony Weiner of New York City will not respond to requests for comment on the Ground Zero Mosque.
Want to know why? here's a clue:
President Obama is also declining to take a position on the issue...
As liberals love to say about whatever their cause du jour may be, "Silence=Assent"! Or even better, in this case - "Silence = Death!"
New Yorker's Democratic elite, whom they have put so much trust in, has failed them. They have abandoned them to their enemies, and allowed their loved one's graves to be desecrated forever, in the name of their liberal ideology, and in the name of their unquestioned leader, Barack Hussein Obama, whose silence in this case speaks volumes about where his loyalty stands.
Will the peasants cower under the threat of being tarred as "racists", as Shumer, Bloomberg, and the brain-dead Gillibrand assume? Or will they rise up against a leadership that has so distanced themselves from the concerns of their constituents that they feel not a moment's remorse about allowing such a desecration to take place on such holy land?
The Elite have no fear of the Peasants of New York; they are merely serfs on the Great Democratic Plantation. Or are they? We'll see in 2010, but I fear that the elites may have their people pegged right.
And if so, New Yorkers deserve all the humiliation they vote for...
52% Opposed
31% Approve
17% Undecided
The first cry of "racism" comes from the pollster himself:
"Is it because we're still nursing the wounds from the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center or is it more like bigotry?" he asked.
Well, gee, tell us what you really think! But it is comments like that that lead me to believe the 17% who are "undecided" are primarily opposed, and just fear being called a racist.
But never fear! The High Brahmin himself, Billionaire Bloomberg, "Mayor Mike" who changed the laws to allow himself a third term, is there to make sure you know that your opposition can only mean one thing: Racism!
....we also recognize that part of being a New Yorker is living with your neighbors in mutual respect and tolerance....But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves -- and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans -- if we said 'no' to a mosque in Lower Manhattan.
Get it? If you oppose the wailing call for Islamic prayer wafting over the weeping relatives of those who are mourning their dead by the hands of Islamists...you're an un-American racist.
He follows up with an inane liberal trope:
In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists...
Really? I thought that planting the flag if Islam on the graves of 3,000 Americans murdered in it's name was letting the terrorists win. How lucky am I to have an intellectual superior like Mike Bloomberg to teach me moral inversion...
But it isn't just the Mayor who is determined to allow America's enemies to plant their flag into the bodies of our dead. It is New York's strongest (and craziest) politicians who have been entirely mum on their constituent's opposition:
As the proposal to build a 13-story Islamic center two blocks from Ground Zero moves forward and controversy surrounding the plan grows, top New York Democrats are maintaining radio silence on the matter.
A spokesman for Senator Chuck Schumer told the Wall Street Journal two weeks ago that the senator is "not opposed" to building the mosque near Ground Zero. But Schumer himself was mum this afternoon following the Senate Democrats' weekly luncheon. Asked by THE WEEKLY STANDARD to elaborate on his position (is the mosque good for interfaith relations? insensitive to 9/11 families?), Schumer didn't reply and ducked into a senators-only elevator, staring blankly ahead while waiting for the elevator doors to close.
A call this afternoon to Schumer's office was not returned. And though a spokesman for New York's junior senator Kirsten Gillibrand told the Journal that Gillibrand supports the mosque, Gillibrand's office also hasn't responded to a request for clarification on the issue from TWS. Meanwhile, the Washington Post's Greg Sargent reports that liberal firebrand Anthony Weiner of New York City will not respond to requests for comment on the Ground Zero Mosque.
Want to know why? here's a clue:
President Obama is also declining to take a position on the issue...
As liberals love to say about whatever their cause du jour may be, "Silence=Assent"! Or even better, in this case - "Silence = Death!"
New Yorker's Democratic elite, whom they have put so much trust in, has failed them. They have abandoned them to their enemies, and allowed their loved one's graves to be desecrated forever, in the name of their liberal ideology, and in the name of their unquestioned leader, Barack Hussein Obama, whose silence in this case speaks volumes about where his loyalty stands.
Will the peasants cower under the threat of being tarred as "racists", as Shumer, Bloomberg, and the brain-dead Gillibrand assume? Or will they rise up against a leadership that has so distanced themselves from the concerns of their constituents that they feel not a moment's remorse about allowing such a desecration to take place on such holy land?
The Elite have no fear of the Peasants of New York; they are merely serfs on the Great Democratic Plantation. Or are they? We'll see in 2010, but I fear that the elites may have their people pegged right.
And if so, New Yorkers deserve all the humiliation they vote for...
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Christiane Amanpour Drags ABC Into The Dirt
Well, geez - who's bright idea was it to replace a evenhanded, respected journalist like Jake Tapper with an international affairs correspondent from a last-place cable network?
Christiane Amanpour's debut as host of ABC's "This Week" finished third in total viewers behind NBC's "Meet the Press" and CBS' "Face the Nation" according to Nielsen Fast Nationals early ratings numbers.
Considering Tapper finished first on at least one occasion....Was this a case of the elitists inside ABC news figuring everyone would love who they loved, an anti-American, anti-Semitic miserable little woman who views herself as a Washington outsider (AP" "She plans to commute to her new job from a home in New York, which seals her credibility as a Washington outsider.") despite the fact that her husband is an -
...informal foreign policy advisor to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama [and] served in the State Department during the administration of President Bill Clinton...
Yeah. A real outsider, one who subscribes perfectly to the worldview of President Barack Hussein Obama. And maybe that's why she was hired - to gain favor with The One before the government starts handing out media subsidies?
Jennifer Rubin offers some hope for ABC:
But who knows, maybe there is an audience for a screechy, rude host who turns policy arguments into personal spats and makes no effort to hide her biases....
Or maybe not. She'll be unwatchable by Labor Day, and the media elite will blame the American people for being too parochial to appreciate the hatreds that Amanpour brings to the table. And ABC, loathe to admit their mistake, will keep her on. As an anchor. That drags them to the bottom....
Christiane Amanpour's debut as host of ABC's "This Week" finished third in total viewers behind NBC's "Meet the Press" and CBS' "Face the Nation" according to Nielsen Fast Nationals early ratings numbers.
Considering Tapper finished first on at least one occasion....Was this a case of the elitists inside ABC news figuring everyone would love who they loved, an anti-American, anti-Semitic miserable little woman who views herself as a Washington outsider (AP" "She plans to commute to her new job from a home in New York, which seals her credibility as a Washington outsider.") despite the fact that her husband is an -
...informal foreign policy advisor to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama [and] served in the State Department during the administration of President Bill Clinton...
Yeah. A real outsider, one who subscribes perfectly to the worldview of President Barack Hussein Obama. And maybe that's why she was hired - to gain favor with The One before the government starts handing out media subsidies?
Jennifer Rubin offers some hope for ABC:
But who knows, maybe there is an audience for a screechy, rude host who turns policy arguments into personal spats and makes no effort to hide her biases....
Or maybe not. She'll be unwatchable by Labor Day, and the media elite will blame the American people for being too parochial to appreciate the hatreds that Amanpour brings to the table. And ABC, loathe to admit their mistake, will keep her on. As an anchor. That drags them to the bottom....
Monday, August 02, 2010
Jon Corzine and Carla Katz: Lust in the Dust!
Well, considering the way these two perfectly-mated lovebirds - one a union negotiator, the other a governor with a union fetish - financially pulverized New Jersey, this post title is apt.
Jon Corzine spent two years and nearly $200,000- of taxpayer money to keep secret the emails between himself and former lover and union leader Carla Katz. Now that the Star-Ledger has gotten hold of around 100 of them, we can get a peek as to whether the bedroom talk was simply about the size of Jon's tax increases, or more geared towards the nuts and bolts, as it where, of contract negotiations.
The answer: Both. But most of the pressing came from Carla's side, who comes off more as an unhinged ex-girlfriend than a savvy negotiator. Still, I guess there was nothing untoward on her end in using sex to lure the governor into giving her union more goodies. Who doesn't try a wink and a peek when the chips are down?
Anyway - some examples of Carla's craziness:
At 11:15 p.m. on Feb. 13, she sent the governor a note harking back to their romantic days, saying, "Happy Valentine’s Day, sweetie. You are both a good man and a hard man...and I like both. xxx"
A day later, Katz wanted to know what was happening with the contract talks. As the evening of Valentine’s Day progressed, she still hadn’t gotten the answers she sought, and that sharpened her edge.
At 12:04 p.m. on Feb. 15, she was growing insistent and said she was taking the governor’s silence "personally."
It didn’t stop there. At 8:56 a.m. on Feb. 17, Katz was annoyed and upped the ante, saying she wasn’t looking to discuss negotiations but she needed to speak with Corzine and had been leaving messages for him. "I rarely say it is important and wish you respected that by getting a hold of me quickly."
Corzine responded by having Tom Shea, his chief of staff, deal with Katz. But that did not suit the governor’s ex-girlfriend, who wrote him at 9:40 a.m. on Feb. 17 to say talking to Shea was not sufficient....
Seems like Corzine did the right thing, and continued to try to do so:
While Corzine tried to convince Katz that they needed to avoid contact because of the negotiations, Katz had been sending e-mails pertaining to the talks for weeks.
On Feb. 7, Katz sent him a 22-point list of "non-economic issues" that were part of the union discussions. Ninety minutes later, she said she was disturbed that the Treasury Department had, in her view, leaked a story that would hurt the union’s bargaining position...
And when she wasn't begging for union giveaways, she was begging for sex. Yuk:
She kept asking to see Corzine — for a drink or just a brief chat — and even dispatched his-and-hers horoscopes in separate e-mails on March 12.
By 5:21 p.m. March 15, she sent a note announcing that she had relaxed and was back in Hoboken with the hope that Corzine would see her and that the quiet time could give way to being "temporarily noisy." Ninety-three minutes later, she wrote: "Anybody there???... 9 p.m. drinks? 9:30? 10?" Six minutes after that, she wrote: "Tomorrow? Sat? Sunday? 2008? 2009? 2020?"
Corzine said he was tied up, first with official appearances and then visiting his adult children. He was suspicious about a lull in the controversy, and he encouraged Katz to relax and go to bed.
So why did Jon fight so hard to keep these emails secret, emails that show him as a man pursued by a woman scorned, almost as - a victim? Fellow Democrats weigh in:
"There was nothing in there that he did that he should be embarrassed about," said Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex), Corzine’s predecessor in the governor’s office. "I don’t know what he was thinking when he thought something would be damaging. Sometimes his political acumen wasn’t always the best. Sometimes he just wasn’t thinking clearly."
Just sometimes, Richard?
What's the best part of this story? That the losers turned out to be...Corzine, rejected by the voters, and Carla Katz, fired by the union. Finally - a union communique that I can march along with:
Katz, then president of Communications Workers of America Local 1034, is now 51 and a practicing attorney.
Katz was expelled from the union after it was learned she was secretly communicating with Corzine about the contract talks. Yesterday, CWA leaders said they feel vindicated after reading the e-mails.
Katz was expelled from the union after it was learned she was secretly communicating with Corzine about the contract talks. Yesterday, CWA leaders said they feel vindicated after reading the e-mails.
"When it became known that such unauthorized and prohibited communications occurred, CWA took action to enforce its constitution," the union said in a statement. "Carla Katz is no longer a member of CWA and Jon Corzine is no longer governor and we hope that this chapter is finally over."
So do we, guys - so do we....
WikiLeaks Scandal Tied To Gay Rage?
If so, this will not help the cause of those fighting for homosexuals to be allowed to serve openly in the armed services. Nor will it give any confidence to those already questioning Obama's competence as the Commander-in-Chief of our armed services. Via Environmental Republican, we get this report:
The British Telegraph newspaper is reporting that the American soldier at the center of the scandal was “openly homosexual” and apparently held a grudge against the U.S. because of the military’s anti-gay policy.
In another bizarre twist, reliable reports suggest that Private First Class Bradley Manning, the U.S. Army Intelligence analyst accused of leaking the classified information to the WikiLeaks.org website, was not only a homosexual but was considering a sex change. Manning was arrested at the end of May and is being detained by U.S. authorities.It is apparent that Manning, based on published reports, was a public homosexual activist for at least over a year. During this time he apparently came up with the idea of downloading and releasing the classified information to WikiLeaks as a way to get back at the United States military over its policy regarding homosexuality.
Why does this report have credence? Because it fits the Obama/Liberal M.O. to a f*cking "T":
The riveting Telegraph account of Manning’s growing rage and anger raises serious questions of how the soldier was able to flaunt his homosexuality despite the fact that the Pentagon still officially has a policy in place of excluding open homosexuals from military service.
In a clear indication that the law was being ignored by the Obama Administration, the evidence demonstrates that Manning was continuing to serve after openly flaunting his homosexuality, including on Facebook.
Who in the Obama Administration—and the Department of Defense—was aware of his conduct and looked the other way? Was Manning given a pass because his “lifestyle” was considered to be in favor and acceptable under the Obama Administration?
The revelations of Manning’s openly pro-homosexual conduct suggest that a more liberal Department of Defense policy, in deference to the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief, had already been in effect and has now backfired in a big way.
If you can't change the law, break the law. Or turn a blind eye towards lawbreakers if they are members of your voting coalition. That's the Obama way, that's the Democrat's way...and now some of our bravest young Americans - those who volunteer to go into combat - are going to die so that hardcore liberal ideology can thrive.
But that's the Democrat's way, too....
Are Rangel and Waters victims of racism?
Like a drunk turning to the bottle as his first and final answer to any of life's complications, it seems as if the Democratic party has as well. Or at least the Congressional Black Caucus, who are claiming the ethics probes against Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters are based on....well, you know:
The politically charged decisions by veteran Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel of New York and Maxine Waters of California to force public trials by the House ethics committee are raising questions about race and whether black lawmakers face more scrutiny over allegations of ethical or criminal wrongdoing than their white colleagues.
The question of whether black lawmakers are now being singled out for scrutiny has been simmering throughout the 111th Congress, with the Office of Congressional Ethics a focal point of the concerns....
There’s a “dual standard, one for most members and one for African-Americans,” said one member of the Congressional Black Caucus, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Another black lawmaker, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) — a close Rangel confidant — has been caught up in an ongoing Justice Department criminal probe involving some of Queens’s most powerful politicians. Meeks has denied any wrongdoing, and, like Rangel, blamed his problems on the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative watchdog group.
Hmmm. Like blaming the cops, I suppose, when you get caught red-handed in a criminal act...
But there is a racial element here, one that is likely to go unspoken. And I may be wrong, but...
Is it possible that there have been ethical problems for many years within the membership of the CBC, problems that have been ignored precisely because the offenders were black? Were the Republicans, when empowered, so concerned about accusations of racism that they figured it was easier to let Maxine and Charlie continue lining their pockets, especially as the media would be the last ones to highlight minority Democratic malfeasance? And was the Democratic majority so desperate to keep their coalition together since 2006 - and especially since 2008 - in order to pass their radical agenda that they too turned a blind eye towards the ongoing bad behavior of the CBC's membership in order to guarantee their votes?
And why now, the rush to actually investigate these wrongdoers? Politics, politics - the last thing a Democratic party, desperate to hold on to its power against an angry electorate, needs is to be seen as aiding and abetting criminal activity and illicit earnings by its representatives. So they move now, with less than 100 days to go before elections, in order to create the perception they are properly policing their members.
And the final result will still have a racial element, one that will inevitably please the CBC - Charlie and Maxine will get off with slaps on the wrist for activity that would have netted them serious jail time were they "ordinary citizens". They will likely be spared the harsher condemnation that would be allotted them were they white, or Republican, as well. So they still win.
It's all just a theory, but let's give it a name - maybe "The Race Card Coming Home to Roost" theory....?
(Why are there less "whites" before the Ethics Committee at the current time? Maybe because those most recently accused, unlike the "untouchables" of the CBC, resigned rather than attempting to continue to milk the cash cow of the public teet...)
The politically charged decisions by veteran Democratic Reps. Charles Rangel of New York and Maxine Waters of California to force public trials by the House ethics committee are raising questions about race and whether black lawmakers face more scrutiny over allegations of ethical or criminal wrongdoing than their white colleagues.
The question of whether black lawmakers are now being singled out for scrutiny has been simmering throughout the 111th Congress, with the Office of Congressional Ethics a focal point of the concerns....
There’s a “dual standard, one for most members and one for African-Americans,” said one member of the Congressional Black Caucus, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Another black lawmaker, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) — a close Rangel confidant — has been caught up in an ongoing Justice Department criminal probe involving some of Queens’s most powerful politicians. Meeks has denied any wrongdoing, and, like Rangel, blamed his problems on the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative watchdog group.
Hmmm. Like blaming the cops, I suppose, when you get caught red-handed in a criminal act...
But there is a racial element here, one that is likely to go unspoken. And I may be wrong, but...
Is it possible that there have been ethical problems for many years within the membership of the CBC, problems that have been ignored precisely because the offenders were black? Were the Republicans, when empowered, so concerned about accusations of racism that they figured it was easier to let Maxine and Charlie continue lining their pockets, especially as the media would be the last ones to highlight minority Democratic malfeasance? And was the Democratic majority so desperate to keep their coalition together since 2006 - and especially since 2008 - in order to pass their radical agenda that they too turned a blind eye towards the ongoing bad behavior of the CBC's membership in order to guarantee their votes?
And why now, the rush to actually investigate these wrongdoers? Politics, politics - the last thing a Democratic party, desperate to hold on to its power against an angry electorate, needs is to be seen as aiding and abetting criminal activity and illicit earnings by its representatives. So they move now, with less than 100 days to go before elections, in order to create the perception they are properly policing their members.
And the final result will still have a racial element, one that will inevitably please the CBC - Charlie and Maxine will get off with slaps on the wrist for activity that would have netted them serious jail time were they "ordinary citizens". They will likely be spared the harsher condemnation that would be allotted them were they white, or Republican, as well. So they still win.
It's all just a theory, but let's give it a name - maybe "The Race Card Coming Home to Roost" theory....?
(Why are there less "whites" before the Ethics Committee at the current time? Maybe because those most recently accused, unlike the "untouchables" of the CBC, resigned rather than attempting to continue to milk the cash cow of the public teet...)
Sunday, August 01, 2010
Pardoning Billy The Kid?
Kill anywhere from between 9 and 21 people, including two sheriff's deputies during a prison break-out, and what to you get? A pardon from a Democratic governor, of course:
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is considering granting a posthumous pardon to Billy the Kid, angering descendants of Garrett who call it an insult to recognize such a violent outlaw.
Like all Democrats, Richardson's ideology demands moral inversions: Billy the Kid, murderer of civilians and law officers, is a misunderstood victim, and the real villain was famous Sheriff Pat Garrett, who ruthlessly hunted him down. And like a deluded 9/11 truther, all it takes is one flimsy conspiracy theory to win him over:
Some history buffs claim Billy the Kid didn't die in the shootout with Garrett and landed in Texas, where he went by "Brushy Bill" Roberts and died of a heart attack at age 90 in 1950.
Thin gruel for pardoning a killer of a dozen or so men, maybe more? You betcha:
Gale Cooper, an amateur historian who lives near Albuquerque, said a pardon by Richardson would be the "culmination of the hoax that contended Pat Garrett was a nefarious killer and Billy was not buried in his grave."
Cooper has written a book, "MegaHoax," to debunk claims that Garrett killed someone other than the Kid.
Richardson will be meeting with descendants of the Garrett clan shortly to discuss the pending pardon. Well, they'll get some explanation or another for Richardson's act of deifying a killer and demonizing the man who brought him to permanent justice. Well, at least it is more than the families of the Lockerbie bomber got when he was released on prison with a wink-and-nod from the Obama Administration....
Such a strange pursuit though, for Richardson. Is is his socialist liberalism that forces him to admire a thief and a killer as a "redistributionist" and a "revolutionary"? Doesn't this pardon raise the curtain a bit on who are the good guys (bank robbers) and who are the villains (lawmen) in the eyes of the Democrats? And does it not speak to the intellectual depravity of the party, not simply for the moral inversion but for the easy way the party regulars are duped into believing almost anything that seems to jive with their tightly-held radical ideology?
First Billy the Kid...who's next for rehabilitation for Richardson and the Democrats? See the mosque about to rise on the sight of the World Trade Center for a clue...
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is considering granting a posthumous pardon to Billy the Kid, angering descendants of Garrett who call it an insult to recognize such a violent outlaw.
Like all Democrats, Richardson's ideology demands moral inversions: Billy the Kid, murderer of civilians and law officers, is a misunderstood victim, and the real villain was famous Sheriff Pat Garrett, who ruthlessly hunted him down. And like a deluded 9/11 truther, all it takes is one flimsy conspiracy theory to win him over:
Some history buffs claim Billy the Kid didn't die in the shootout with Garrett and landed in Texas, where he went by "Brushy Bill" Roberts and died of a heart attack at age 90 in 1950.
Thin gruel for pardoning a killer of a dozen or so men, maybe more? You betcha:
Gale Cooper, an amateur historian who lives near Albuquerque, said a pardon by Richardson would be the "culmination of the hoax that contended Pat Garrett was a nefarious killer and Billy was not buried in his grave."
Cooper has written a book, "MegaHoax," to debunk claims that Garrett killed someone other than the Kid.
Richardson will be meeting with descendants of the Garrett clan shortly to discuss the pending pardon. Well, they'll get some explanation or another for Richardson's act of deifying a killer and demonizing the man who brought him to permanent justice. Well, at least it is more than the families of the Lockerbie bomber got when he was released on prison with a wink-and-nod from the Obama Administration....
Such a strange pursuit though, for Richardson. Is is his socialist liberalism that forces him to admire a thief and a killer as a "redistributionist" and a "revolutionary"? Doesn't this pardon raise the curtain a bit on who are the good guys (bank robbers) and who are the villains (lawmen) in the eyes of the Democrats? And does it not speak to the intellectual depravity of the party, not simply for the moral inversion but for the easy way the party regulars are duped into believing almost anything that seems to jive with their tightly-held radical ideology?
First Billy the Kid...who's next for rehabilitation for Richardson and the Democrats? See the mosque about to rise on the sight of the World Trade Center for a clue...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)