DREAM ACT REALLY A NIGHTMARE!

In what should be seen as an obvious act of political chicanery, the remaining days of this Congress will continue to be fraught with yet even more examples of why it is that the Democrats lost their majority in the House and saw their numbers reduced in the Senate. They continue to remain completely tone deaf when it comes to the listening to what the American people are saying that they want, or don't want from their government. Instead, these Democrats seem to be much more interested in their attempt to enhance their political fortunes by creating a vast new pool of likely Democrat voters. So the motivation here is highly suspect to say the least, and it is imperative that the American people see this for what it is before it's too late. This whole concept of amnesty, albeit under another name, has got to be stopped by the American people. In this new era where the Democrats now see themselves as having to shore up the political base it should come as no great surprise that Congress has now reconvened and are behaving as if the election had never happened. They seem to be as determined as ever to pass more laws exactly like those which brought about their defeat. And so it is that in the waning days of this the lamest of lame-duck sessions, Reid and Pelosi continue to fantasize about cramming through as much of their agenda and down the throats of very unwilling population. The defeated Democrats are a wounded and cornered bunch, to be sure, remaining convinced of the fact that the voters were fooled into shooting the wrong party. And these hypocritical hacks are determined to wield their lame-duck majority right up to that day the new voter-approved majority is finally sworn into office in January. Nowhere is this "voters are too stupid to understand" mentality more pronounced than in the Barry/Reid/Pelosi fantasy drive for illegal-alien amnesty, aka, the Dream Act.

Because what we seem to have here is our buddy Senate Majority Leader "Dingy" Harry Reid wishing to make good on his campaign promise of vowing to bring the DREAM Act to the Senate floor for a vote during the lame-duck session. For those who may still be unfamiliar with this yet one more piece stellar Democrat piece of legislation, the bill would create that highly coveted "pathway to citizenship" for children of undocumented (illegal) immigrants who enlist in the military or enroll in college. Proponents say the DREAM Act provides a "path to citizenship" for hard-working college students or members of the U.S. military who were brought to the U.S. illegally as young children and should not be punished for the law breaking of their parents or be victimized by a "broken" immigration system. This propaganda has been blaring for weeks from every available outlet of the Barry state controlled media. These blatant lies can only be believed if you do not actually take the time to read the DREAM Act. And you can believe me when I say that Barry, Reid and Pelosi do not want you anywhere near this thing where there is the slightest chance of you actually reading this nightmare, any more than they wanted you to read their health-care "reform." Opponents of the legislation charge that the language is far too broad and would encourage the flow of labor across the border. "Dingy" Harry promised to bring the DREAM Act, an important piece of legislation for the Latino community, to a vote in the Senate after the November elections, whether or not Democrats retained their majority. With "comprehensive immigration reform" already having been brought to a standstill because of a successful effort to make voters aware of its consequences, the new code speak for yet another attempt at blanket amnesty for "undocumented Democrats," is being called the DREAM Act. The critics of this Dream Act, short for Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors, know that it is nothing more than an amnesty program for illegal aliens. And once again, just like clockwork, accusations of racism are flying around with anyone who doesn't want to spend the money on college subsidies for illegal aliens being called a "racist." But many say plans to address the landmark change not only are being pushed now by Reid, who failed to get it through the U.S. Senate earlier, and outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but they are planning to march it through the process without hearings. Sound familiar?


Let's briefly summarize some of what is actually in the bill. First of all, under the terms of the proposed DREAM Act, any person under the age of 35 illegally present in the U.S., yes that's "illegally present," can apply for lawful permanent residence, or LPR, if they have graduated from high school or have a GED and have been admitted to an "institution of higher education." The illegal need only finish two years of "higher education" (including community college and trade schools) within eight years, and, even if no degree is earned, can then apply for citizenship. For illegal-alien students unable, for whatever reason, to complete the two years work within eight years, the "broken" immigration system can waive the requirement and the "student" can still be granted citizenship. If an application for LPR is denied, the "broken" immigration system cannot use the information provided by the applicant in any deportation process in the future. Ok, what am I missing here. If you are here illegally how is it that you should even be allowed entrance into any institution of higher living. Where they should be admitted to … is prison. But there's more, but then you know that! This DREAM Act "specifically" allows criminal aliens to apply for the "student" amnesty. Illegal's who have engaged in voter fraud, have ignored deportation orders, have falsely claimed U.S. citizenship, have committed marriage fraud, have overstayed their student visas, even those who are a public health risk, yes my friends, they all are eligible for the "student" amnesty under the DREAM Act. WHAT A DEAL!!! The mere act of applying for the LPR gives the illegal immediate amnesty. Applicants cannot be deported, no matter how frivolous the application is. Criminal aliens will learn soon enough that the DREAM Act is yet another way to stall deportation. DREAM Act advocates also tout provisions which allow illegal's, as an alternative to the "student" amnesty, to earn citizenship by serving in the U.S. military. Not quite. The DREAM Act does not require military service. It says the "uniformed service" which also means the Public Health Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and again for only two years.


The "U.S. military" amnesty argument is bogus for another reason as well. Illegal's are already allowed to enlist in the military and earn citizenship through honorable service to the United States. Which as a veteran of 24 years spent in the Navy, is something I don't understand nor do I agree with. These criminals don't need the DREAM Act. And there's still more. Current immigration law allows legal migrants to bring in their family members as well. It's called "family reunification." Under the DREAM Act, those who receive the amnesty could then legalize their illegal family members setting off a chain-reaction amnesty. It was reported on WorldNetDaily just last week that the cost to taxpayers for this "student amnesty" could reach $44 billion. That's because the estimated 2.1 million new "students" (and it will be many more than this administration estimate) qualify for student assistance under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. Want to know how the lame ducks in Congress plan to "cut" federal spending, which seemed to be a dominating theme of the 2010 elections? They're proposing a plan to take upwards of $44 billion a year from taxpayers and hand it over to illegal aliens who are in the United States so they can go to college. According to the Department of Education, the maximum amount one can borrow per year for undergraduate education from the federal government is $21,000. And the Dream Act would incorporate some 2.1 million new "students" into programs under which they would qualify for those loans. Illegal immigrant should be provided with one choice and one choice only, deportation or prison. No enlisting in the military and no enrolling in college. Only to get the Hell out of dodge as expeditiously as possible. Do not pass go and do not collect $21,000, go directly to JAIL.


Some of the more stunning provisions of the plan are:


1. Section 3 of the bill repeals Section 505 of the "Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996" (8 U.S. Code 1623) which currently prohibits the government from giving educational benefits to any "unlawfully present individual," thus ensuring that illegal aliens will qualify for "in-state tuition," at the state college of their choice, even if they live in another state.


2. Section 10 of the act enables illegal aliens who receive amnesty under the bill's general provisions to apply for federally guaranteed student loans under Title IV of the "Higher Education Act of 1965" (20 U.S. Code, et seq.), including Stafford Loans, Perkins Loans, Federal Direct Stafford/Ford loans, federal work-study programs and federally sponsored tutoring and counseling.


3. Another section of the bill ensures that illegal aliens can continue to receive these federal student loans, which are often used to cover living expenses, as well as tuition, over the course of eight years, even if they do not complete a college degree.


The pro-illegal immigration folks comprised of the same usual suspects are once again out in full force and loudly making the claim that the attempt to derail this so-called Dream Act is purely racist in nature and does nothing more than stir up a hatred for Hispanics. Give me a break! They usually go on to claim that our country has hundreds of years of history in allowing people to immigrate. Now that the economy is weak we are turning our anger towards the easiest target which is the people least able to defend themselves. What a crock! It should quite obvious to anyone with half a brain why it is that the Democrats are attempting to put passage of this thing on the fast track. They just suffered a resounding defeat, a shellacking, in the most recent election with the outlook for 2012 not looking all that good either, and they're scared. When they look at 2012, they see their prospects for success are dismal, because Americans aren't coming on board with their big government agenda. Democrats are desperate to gather up millions of new registered voters who will support them. What better way to do this than to open up a wealth of entitlements for millions of people here illegally, making them beholden to Democrats and their socialist agenda. But once again this has nothing to do with race or racism, it has everything to do with be able to come up with way to pay for it. Which at the present time are nonexistent. Just on the off chance no one has noticed, WE'RE BROKE!!! Because Dream Act recipients will immediately become eligible for federal student loans, work study programs and other forms of financial aid.


"Dingy" sounded quite determined during a September interview with host Jorge Ramos, Mexican news anchor for Noticiero Univision, during his re-election campaign. On Twitter, Ramos would later write that, "Harry Reid told me that, win or lose, he will present again the Dream Act in the Senate after the elections." This one more cockamamie piece of legislation is in reality the Nightmare Act. "I will move the DREAM Act as a standalone bill in the lame duck. It's good for the economy & Pentagon says good for national security," "Dingy" tweeted as recently as November 17. A Reid spokesman said that no date had been set for a vote, but that Reid had been speaking to his Democratic colleagues throughout the week about holding the vote. And during a recent meeting with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus President Obama, according to Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), promised to put his weight behind the bill and work "hand in glove" to see that it gets passed. Democrats will still need to peel off two Republican votes to beat back a filibuster, but that may not be a very difficult task in the present political environment. You see, Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) who has previously stated that he would vote for the bill as a standalone and since having lost his GOP primary, can now vote freely on the measure without fear of any consequence. Just one more instance of his putting himself above doing the right thing for the country. Just the reason he lost his primary battle. And Senator George Voinovich (R-Ohio) is also retiring in a few weeks time. There are a number of Republicans who previously supported the measure in 2007, though that was several lifetimes ago in political terms. Gutierrez said that House Speaker, soon to be former Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has also promised a vote during the lame duck session. Any vote would be unlikely to come until after the Thanksgiving recess. Ah, that would be NOW!


Republican lawmakers tempted to follow the liberal ethnic group playbook and vote for the DREAM Act in some vain attempt to placate Latino radical groups may want to rethink that little notion as they need can ill afford to look the other way regarding the recent election results. New Republican Hispanic officeholders were elected campaigning on enforcing the border and against illegal-alien amnesty. Newly minted Senator Marco Rubio, my guy from here in Florida, the new Republican governor of New Mexico, Susana Martinez; and Rep.-elect Republican Francisco Canseco, R-Texas, are among a bumper crop of Hispanic Republicans elected on a pro-legal/anti-illegal immigration platform. Policy experts are warning the act is truly transformative and in the end, among other things, would authorize federal loans to literally millions of newly qualified applicants and provide a preference for the children of illegal aliens over legal residents when it comes to in state college admissions. This whole concept is totally upside down, typical for Liberal Democrat proposals. Republicans would be doing themselves a big favor if they were to choose this particular time to listen to the voters. There was a reason for the way the November 2 election turned out.

JOY-LESS BEHAR AND SONNY-LESS CHER…..

Can there be a dumber couple of bitches anywhere on the entire planet than either of these two old, dried up, tired and worn out, rode hard and put up wet lookin hags, Joy-less Behar and Cher? I mean really! I’ve always wondered what it is about Liberal women, of which these two are perfect examples, that causes them to be in a perpetual state of being pissed off? Does it come down to something as basic as they’re being in desperate need of being bent over and made to be put on the receiving end of a really good stiff one? Although, I must say in their defense, that in today's climate, the caliber of men being what it is when speaking of the more liberal crowd, such an opportunity would be quite rare to say the least. Because when you're a female and a member of a political party that considers itself the home for every male narcissist and self-absorbed mental midget in the country, as well as for the majority of gays in this country, the whole environment just doesn't seem to be all that conducive for getting laid on what could be considered as being anything near a regular basis. So with that being the case, I think it fairly safe to say, that both of these “ladies,” more than likely, are in the midst of a rather long dry spell when it comes to the partaking of any activity that could, in any way, even remotely be referred to as being "intimate." I would further venture to guess that the closest either of these two "ladies" have come to any activity that could be considered "intimate," would be any recent "enhanced" pat downs they may have experienced at the hands of their local TSA agents. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that either of these "ladies" would now consider going to the airport as being the equivalent of a "hot date."

And if we're being honest here, we should ask what self-respecting guy would want to go to bed with either of these two bowsers, let alone wake up next to either one of them the following morning. Put yourself in the position of rolling over and looking Behar dead in the face first thing in the morning and then wondering how it was that you could have ever thought that going to bed with her would be a good idea? YUCK! I'm getting nauseous just thinking about it. Seriously though, I doubt if there's enough money in the world that you could pay a guy to have sex with either of these very angry and very pathetic, women. Personally, I'd sooner take a bullet to the brain. And all you ever hear from Behar is a constant screeching, and her spewing of some of the most hateful bile heard anywhere, normally consisting of nothing more than juvenile name calling as she goes about the launching into her very frequent sophomoric temper tantrums. She very rarely, if ever, actually makes any sense whatsoever. She fits the classic definition of what it is to be a moron. And that racist Whoopi Goldberg is another stellar example of the anger that's so prevalent amongst women on the left. Liberal women have got to be the unhappiest segment of our entire population. And did you have stop and ask yourself why it is that they are always so preoccupied with the topic of abortion. With most of them being either gay or having the last time they got laid as being some time in the 60s, it's not likely that any of them are ever going to find themselves being pregnant. And wouldn't you feel sorry for their kids. Yeh, like Chastity turned out so well. She about 200 pounds overweight and gay. Good job there Cher! Can anyone say, lousy self-esteem?


Anyway these two pathetic bitches are far from being the only two out there. Pick any liberal women you want. They're all the same. Pissed off and in bad need of a good stiff d*#k! All any of them would need to turn their entire lives around would be to find themselves on the receiving end of just one good old fashioned orgasm! It would change their whole perspective on things. And maybe, just maybe, they might even become fun to be around. But since the odds against that ever becoming a reality are pretty high, I guess we'll just continue to be exposed to the rantings of lunatics such as these two and others like them who feel so at home out there on the far left, kook, fringe of our society. I can only hope that they're happy in their misery.

A LOT CAN HAPPEN IN 713 DAYS...

While there is really never anything wrong with wishful thinking, or with trying to plan ahead, it is, however, necessary to make sure you always keep things in their proper perspective. And so it is with much of the polling data that we are now being exposed to on any given day, week, or month. So having said all that, my only point is that it is still a very long time, politically speaking, until 2012 so it would be more than a just little foolish to take any of the presidential polling numbers presently flying about very seriously. As well, it is also way to early for anyone to being counting "Our Dear Leader," Barry, as being down and out. To say that he is, or even might be, considered as being too damaged to get himself reelected is a very risky thing and is at this point not something that should be counted on, by any stretch. Such a notion would at best be extremely premature and at worst, dangerously naive. Because as we have all seen, and on any number of occasions, political fortunes can turn rather sharply and overnight. But the facts do appear to indicate that even some Democrats do seem to now be turning away from Mr. "Hope and Change," and it may be that fact that has now contributed to his approval rating plunging to 39 percent. Which is a new low for his 22-month presidency. A presidency that I'm sure we all remember as one that began with so much hype, euphoria and "promise," as well as with poll numbers upwards of 70 percent. This 39 percent would be his lowest ever, according to a recent Zogby Poll, and it is something that prompted even the left leaning John Zogby to describe the result as Barry being in a “perilous position.” It was just two months ago that our buddy Zogby had pegged the president’s approval at 49 percent, but where now, at least at the present time, 60 percent of Americans now give Barry "Almighty" a flunking grade. The approval of independents, that very same noncommittal group who view themselves as being above the fray and who were instrumental in propelling Barry's coalition election, seems to have now fallen like a rock as well. But the question I have is this, does Barry really even care how many people do or do not approve of the way that he is conducting the people business? I mean, it's not like he's still not going to be president for another 2 years. Or, that the Democrats don't still control the Senate. There is tons more damage that this guy will be capable of doing before he's through, the American people be damned. I doubt very much if he'd care if his approval was down in single digits the same as Nancy's. I mean her single digit approval certainly hasn't dampened her spirits.

Zogby puts forth his rather ominous observation, ominous for Barry that is, because it would appear that Barry is now losing support among even many of those in his own party. Mr. Zogby noted that Barry "is failing to please more than one-fourth of his own party’s voters. Conventional wisdom calls for him to reach for the center and assume that Democrats will stay with him in 2012." His approval dropped precipitously by nearly 10 percent in just one week, from 78 percent down to 72 percent in Zogby's latest read of Democrats. And I think it very safe to say that given the comments he has made, even since receiving his "shellacking," as well as the size of his ego, that Barry has no intention of moving toward the "center" of anything. And while I haven't seen any recent numbers regarding the strength of his support coming from the black community, I can only assume that it most likely remains fairly strong since, in reality, the only qualification needed to garner such strong support from this particular segment of the population, is to be black. And just a word of caution here when looking at the numbers as presented by Zogby. I think it's pretty common knowledge that most of Zogby's polling data needs to be taken with a little more than a grain of salt. I think it safe to say that most people realize it as a fact, that Zogby always, or nearly always, skews his numbers just a bit, giving them a bit of a slant so that they at least appear to favor those on the left. My only reason for even mentioning this is that in this instance there may be a ulterior motive regarding the announcing these depressing numbers for Barry. Because the rationale for him to portray an image of Barry as loosing the left, could be seen as an attempt to either create a distraction or as something to be used in an effort to cause a stir in the left all in an attempt to rally support for Barry. Fear can be a very useful and productive motivator, and if fear can be created in a sufficient number of those who have supported Barry in the past, they may come to support him yet again. So I may have to wait to see of there are other numbers out there from other sources that come to reflect the same trend. There are going to be many peaks and valleys over the course of the next 2 years, both for the president as well as for all those who desire to be his opponent in 2012. And I'm sure that at some point a front runner most certainly will emerge from those who comprise the opposition. But that has yet to happen with all potential Republican candidates running pretty much all in a bunch at the present time.


The fact that Obama trails in just about every hypothetical 2012 matchup against some of the more prominent Republicans should really come as no big surprise here. If in fact he really does. If we are to believe what we're being told by all of this recent data, we see that former governor Romney fares the best against Obama (44-38%), then comes Gingrich (43%-39%), then another former governor, Jeb Bush (40%-38%), who, by the way, says he is not even running. Even Sarah Palin ties Barry "Almighty" (40%-41%). You've got to ask yourself, how embarrassing must that be for Barry, after all, there have been any number of polls which have shown that a majority of Americans believe she isn't qualified to be president. So it might also appear that many have also now concluded that on second thought, Barry kind of looks that way too. Obama began losing the support of independents over the course summer of 2009, as he responded to polls showing voter concerns focused on the economy and by the staging of town hall meetings on healthcare. His empty promised regarding result that would be forthcoming from his bogus economic "stimulus" bill and the outright lies that were told regarding his healthcare/insurance "reform" bill, combined to take a toll on that support. Independents, who made up a crucial part of his coalition win in 2008, have now dwindled to 39% regarding their support for Barry. Only 6% of Republicans, no surprise there, approve of Obama's job performance. The only surprise is that there is any Republican support for Barry. I think we could, very much do without that 6 percent of Republicans, because they're obviously more that just a little insane. It would also appear that even those supposed enthusiastic younger voters, also a crucial source of votes in the ex-state Senator/community agitator's convincing defeat of John McCain, now provide a job approval rating of only 42%. Nearly 7 in 10 likely voters say the country is on the wrong track, rarely a good sign for a incumbent president. But even with lopsided numbers such as these, will they provide any significant impact on the direction in which we will continue to be lead by Barry and a Democrat controlled Senate? And ya know, there have been some who have commented on the fact that Barry may not even de interested in serving second term, especially if he can wreak a significant amount of damage in his first. Some see him as preferring to go for the big bucks on the lecture tour as the featured speaker. After all he will be the man who supervised the demise of America. What better billing is there than that?


So with our illustrious president Barry "Almighty" having now gone beyond the Big 4-0, albeit in the wrong direction, with his approval rating having now plummeted to yet another all new low, what can we safely say that it all means. Just what might all of this new polling information foretell regarding the next two years? Does it bode well for the Republicans who are seeking to replace Barry? Is it even to be considered as being significant at this point in time, or instead as nothing more than a interesting topic of conversation. Such hypothetical's make for interesting conversations, but rarely for much of anything else. I for one am of the opinion that it might be a bit too early to attach any amount of importance to how it is that voters may be feeling about things one way or the other at this particular point in time. I do think, however, that it is fair to say that perhaps the voters are exhibiting some rather obvious discontent regarding the fact that over the course of the last 22 months they feel they have been completely ignored by not only the president but the congressional Democrats as well. And it is quite possible that they have not been simply satisfied in they're handing to the president, and his party, in the November 2 midterm elections, not only historic losses in the House, an some rather surprising losses in the Senate, but huge losses reaching far out into the states, that have also been described as being historic. Because even more polling data would now indicate that nearly as many Americans now want Tea Party-backed members of Congress to take the lead in setting policy during the next year as those who choose Barry, so says a recent USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. In the survey taken Friday through Sunday, 28% say Barry should have the most influence on government policy next year while 27% say the Tea Party standard-bearers should. Republican congressional leaders come in at 23%, with the Democrat congressional leaders assuming their natural position by bringing up the rear with 16%. The Republicans have been presented with a prime opportunity here to create an environment that could bring about even greater gains in 2012 and that could even in assist a Republican to move into the Oval Office. However, only time will tell if they will choose to make the most of it. or if instead, they will as they have done so many times in the past, simply choose to squander yet another occasion to finally bury liberalism and the dangers it represents to this country.

AL "BULL HORN" SHARPTON GOES AFTER LIMBAUGH…AGAIN

Perpetual racist gasbag Reverend Al "Bull Horn" Sharpton is busy telling just about anyone who will listen that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should take Rush Limbaugh off the airwaves because of "perceived" offenses toward racial minorities and other groups. This pompous hypocrite, and ardent lover of the limelight, is really quite pathetic. Here we are in a day an age where Liberals control 90 percent of all media, and continually spew some of the most vile, hate-filled garbage you will hear or read anywhere, and yet it's talk radio and Fox News that are being accused of crippling political discourse in America. Old "Bull Horn" has even gone so far as to suggest that the FCC should establish "guidelines" or "standards" to regulate speech. I guess our buddy "Bull Horn" hasn't heard of that little thing called the First Amendment. "You've got to remember that those stations that Rush Limbaugh is on and others are regulated by FCC, granted by FCC; they go back to them to get waivers," Sharpton said on his own radio show on November 19th "They go back to them to get consolidation," Sharpton continued. "They have the right to set standards. That does not impair your right to speak what you believe, but it does say that you are not going to do that to offend groups of Americans based on their race, their gender, their sexual status - none of that." Maybe old Al is just jealous because his ratings suck!

Whatever the reason, Sharpton's broadside comes on the heels of a similar attack last week by blowhard Senator Jay Rockefeller. The West Virginia Democrat went after both right-leaning Fox News and left-leaning MSNBC. I'm sure we all remember hearing the good Senator babble on about that "little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and, more importantly, in their future." And it was earlier this year that Barry "Almighty" himself lamented what he described as the sad state of political discourse hampered by iPods and cable TV shows. Saying, "And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations - none of which I know how to work - information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Barry said during a commencement address at Hampton University in Virginia. "So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it's putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy." I guess, at least according to Barry, empowerment is meant only for those who agree with the Democrats.


You know, all this type of activity does is to show that the party of tolerance is most intolerant of anything it sees as being an opposing viewpoint or opinion. And in this age of Barry it would seem that these liberals feel somewhat emboldened in their efforts to attempt to regulate and even censor the airwaves, especially as outlets like Fox News and shows like Limbaugh's grow ever more popular. Dissent and the freedom of speech and of expression is what this nation is built on. An in times such as these an informed public is all the more crucial. Americans are starved for information because they get so little of it from that 90 percent of the media that is essentially controlled by the state. Which is a big reason why Limbaugh is the most listened to radio host in the nation with more than 15 million weekly visitors and that Fox News continues to trounce its cable news rivals CNN and MSNBC in ratings. "This is scary stuff," lamented an editorial in Investors Business Daily. "Strong speech has always been quintessentially American." And it is free speech that dangerous characters like "Bull Horn" and Barry, are trying so desperately to shut down, or at the very least to control. They "need" the American people to be kept fully in the dark, their actions require it, regarding what it is that they wish to inflict upon the rest of us.


In today's world it's the airwaves and cyberspace that have replaced the soapboxes of the past, making it more vital than ever to protect it against corrupt politicians favoring the creation of a new, more threatening 'fairness doctrine' that would keep voters from being armed with the information and analysis that can be used to unseat them." We, the American people, need to be remain ever vigilant and to stand united against what many are now attempting to perpetrate against us.

TSA...PERVERTS ON PATROL

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

With that having been said, however, it would seem that once again this administration is demonstrating its reckless disregard for all things constitutional. So it is thanks once again to Barry "Almighty," who seems to have provided far too many of today's perverts, pedophiles and degenerates, of nearly every stripe, a new source of employment, the Federal Government. And it is a form of employment which will not only provide to these sickos with any number of opportunities to get their jollies, but will also put them in the position of actually getting paid for that enjoyment at the same time. What a deal, getting paid to be a pervert. That's pervert heaven! But let's be real here, what level of professionalism can we possibly expect from these government employees, who by the way can't be fired no matter how perverse their behavior, when you've got a damn dyke in charge of Homeland Security. For anyone to find it as being even borderline acceptable to strip search and grope kids all in the name of protecting the flying public, should be considered as being simply beyond perverse and sick. These people are doing things that if anyone else were caught doing, they would very quickly be going off to jail for a very long time! And we also have these perverts looking at images of people essentially naked and while being guaranteed that the system had absolutely no capability of storing any of these images. And yet, how many have already ended up on the internet?


I'm sure just about everybody has now heard about how some stellar examples of Janet Napolitano’s army of blue shirts forced a cancer-surviving flight attendant, Penny Moroney, to remove her prosthetic breast. “I was shaking and crying when I left that room,” Moroney says. “Under any other circumstance, if a person touched me like that without my permission, it would be considered criminal sexual assault.” Or how about the woman whose pants a TSA officer felt the need to put a hand down, or the lady who was singled out, apparently, for no other reason than because she was wearing a skirt. She describes her experience as follows, “The female officer ran her hand up the inside of my leg to my groin and she did it so hard and so rough she lifted me off my heels,” she says. “I think I yelped. I was in pain for about an hour afterwards. It just felt excessive and unnecessary.” There is no way on God's green Earth, that you will ever convince me that this type of "screening" is keeping us any safer. All it is doing is to give these warped individuals an opportunity to take advantage of people who are incapable of fighting back. Exhibiting behavior that would, under normal circumstances, be considered as illegal and would otherwise land them in jail. And to think that these law-abiding citizens were subjected to such government sponsored harassment is appalling!


And then there was the cancer survivor who, due to an “enhanced” TSA pat-down breaking the seal on his urastomy bag. Retired special education teacher was on his way to a wedding in Orlando, Fla., and ended up humiliated, crying and covered with his own urine after an enhanced pat-down by TSA officers recently at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. “I was absolutely humiliated, I couldn’t even speak,” said Thomas D. “Tom” Sawyer, 61, of Lansing, Michigan. “I have to wear special clothes and in order to mount the bag I have to seal a wafer to my stomach and then attach the bag. If the seal is broken, urine can leak all over my body and clothes.” On Nov. 7, Sawyer said he went through the security scanner at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. “Evidently the scanner picked up on my urostomy bag, because I was chosen for a pat-down procedure.” Due to his medical condition, Sawyer asked to be screened in private. “One agent watched as the other used his flat hand to go slowly down my chest. I tried to warn him that he would hit the bag and break the seal on my bag, but he ignored me. Sure enough, the seal was broken and urine started dribbling down my shirt and my leg and into my pants.” Humiliated, upset and wet, Sawyer said he had to walk through the airport soaked in urine, board his plane and wait until after takeoff before he could clean up. “I am totally appalled by the fact that agents that are performing these pat-downs have so little concern for people with medical conditions,” said Sawyer.


Now there has been a little boy who was supposedly "randomly selected" for an enhanced screening by "The Sexual Assaulters" of the TSA. These charter members of N.A.M.B.L.A. seemed to have singled this kid out for what reason exactly? I mean is this what today's terrorists are going to be looking like? According to the person who posted the video online, the child apparently was very uncomfortable with having strangers pat him down. DUH! Here are the facts of what supposedly went down. Before the video started the boy went through a metal detector and "DID NOT, I REPEAT DID NOT" set it off, but he was still selected for an "enhanced" pat down. The boy was shy so the TSA couldn’t complete the full pat on the young boy. The father tried several times to just hold the boys arms out for the TSA agent but I guess it didn’t end up as being enough for this pervert. The enraged father pulled his son's shirt off and gave it to the TSA agent to search, that's when the video that was posted online begins. Every time I watch it I get a little more steamed. How anyone can view this as being even remotely acceptable behavior by those acting as bonafide security agents is beyond the pale. Now matter from what angle you view this, it is still more than just a little twisted. Makes you wonder just how far this fondling will end up going.


Then there's the recent case where a San Diego man opted out of security screening using the Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) at Lindbergh Field Friday, who stripped down to his underwear in an attempt to avoid the pat-down procedures. Samuel Wolanyk took the protest started November 13 by Oceanside's John Tyner to a whole new level. While Tyner videotaped his refusal to be patted down, telling the agent "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested," Wolanyk decided to give TSA a look at his body all the way down to his BVDs. Through a statement released by his attorney, Wolanyk said "TSA needs to see that I'm not carrying any weapons, explosives, or other prohibited substances, I refuse to have images of my naked body viewed by perfect strangers, and having been felt up for the first time by TSA the week prior (I travel frequently) I was not willing to be molested again." Wolanyk's attorney said that TSA requested his client put his clothes on so he could be patted down properly but his client refused to put his clothes back on. He never refused a pat down, according to his attorney. Wolanyk was arrested for refusing to complete the security process and for recording the incident on his iPhone, according to his attorney. Maybe we just all need to start showing up at the airport naked and then get dressed only as we're boarding our aircraft. Or hell, why don't we just have everyone fly naked! But then, we'd probable get arrested for that.


And in New Port Richey, Fl., Antonia Riggs Miernik reluctantly rolls up her left pant leg, for our trusty TSA perverts, revealing a scar that runs down her knee. The scar is from when Ms. Miernick was 27 years old. It seems that she was injured in a car crash which “basically destroyed the knee.” Now, she has a metal knee implant. One of the effects of the implant is that whenever she flies, she triggers the metal detectors at airport security. She says the normal procedure is that she is then subjected to a TSA pat down. She has experienced multiple pat downs since Sept. 11. “I feel molested. I’d like to go take a shower with Lysol (afterwards),” Miernik said, describing the pat downs, which she said includes being “touched all over.” Miernik said the worst experience she had came when her 7-year-old granddaughter was at the airport with her. When her granddaughter saw the pat down, “She went ‘Grandmama, they touched you on your special girl spots.’” Miernik was mortified, as was her granddaughter, she said. On Saturday, President Obama said the pat downs “cause huge inconveniences for all of us,” adding that he “understood people’s frustrations.” Yuh, I bet! Would Barry like his girls to be felt up by these perverts?


And so it is that sexual assault, humiliation, and pedophilia are now determined as being, by the likes Janet "THE DYKE" Napolitano, John "Kinky MoFo" Pistole, and Barry "The Creep" Almighty, the preferable methods to see if one represents any kind if a terrorist threat. Such behavior is much more acceptable to these individuals than is having the courage to profile those who might actually represent a potential threat. God forbid, we can't afford to offend any of those rag-headed murdering Islamic zealots who seem to be so intent on murdering as many Americans as possible. This is but one more example of how political correctness is not only running amuck, but is actually placing Americans at even greater risk, while needlessly sexually harassing those who choose to fly. Where the efforts need to be focused is on those who represent a threat. My 80 year old mother, or some 10 year old kid are not going to be blowing up any airplanes. When TSA personnel began looking for weapons of mass destruction in Tyner's underpants, he objected to having his groin patted. One of these TSA sex offenders, determined to do his duty to the fullest, that being his duty to administer the latest (but surely not the last) wrinkle in the government's ever-intensifying protection of us — said: "If you're not comfortable with that, we can escort you back out and you don't have to fly today." "Grope and Change," don't cha just love it!


Is this just one more way Barry is working to “transform” America? Barry could very easily put a stop to all of this rabid fondling. But he chooses not to, because government must work to be ever more intrusive into the lives of every American citizen.


But once again, as they say, the proof is in the pudding with:


Number of TSA Agents: 67,000


TSA’s FY 2010 budget: $7.8 billion


Number of terrorists caught by TSA: ZERO.


Look, just because we have a president whose administration would rather offend American citizens than those who makeup an extremist religion, I think we all know what it is that the majority of terrorists look like. And it isn't like some like some little white boy, a white female wearing a skirt or a fake boob. They will most likely appear as Middle Eastern men and usually in the 18 to around 30 age group. Let's start strip searching those guys. And any women who thinks that just because they're covered from head to toe in the typical Muslim garb, well, they can go through the same process or be told they can walk! These are the people who represent the greatest threat, and we are now well beyond the point where they must be treated as such.

HEY JAY, REMEMBER THE FIRST AMENDMENT??? SURE YA DO!!!

Have you ever stopped and taken the time to consider what this aversion is that the Democrat Party seems to have for the First Amendment? Actually though , I think, it’s more of a hatred of our Constitution in its entirety. Anyway, for those who may not have been paying attention, there has occurred yet another recent example of the outright disdain for our freedom of speech that has been spewed by yet another powerful "Democrat" Senator. This time it came to us in the person of Jay Rockefeller. This pompous, old gasbag of an elitist, is but one more on a rather long list of many Democrats, who continue to demonstrate just how out of control this political party has now become and how much damage they would yet like to do. And all while under the cover of darkness. Because you see, that's exactly the real goal here, what the Democrats are trying to bring about here is a scenario that keeps the American people completely in the dark regarding what it is that they are trying so desperately to accomplish, as they go about their "work" in Congress. While the Senator from West Virginia may disagree with that assessment, that is the very simple reason why people no longer have any faith in their government. And it certainly isn't because of Fox News, or those on Talk Radio, which is another favorite whipping boy of guys like Rockefeller, just not this time around. It's because of the nearly, and not so nearly, criminal behavior of those whom we elect and for some reason, continue to re-elect. But according to Jay, it's all because of FOX News, not because of any of the inherent corruption that is currently so prevalent throughout our "Democrat Party" lead government. Sunlight, it is said, is the best disinfectant, and in this case, the information provided by Fox News, and to a much lesser degree, I suppose, MSNBC, serves as being that necessary sunlight. What Rockefeller is suggesting here, with his thoroughly bizarre statement, is that the views presented on FOX and MSNBC have no place in the news consumers' world, and because they are not "quality news" organizations, as deemed by whom exactly, the government should then intervene. Simply put, that's nothing short of censorship in its purest and deadliest form and serves only to undermine having a diverse flow of vital information into the marketplace. It also destroys market-based competition among the networks. This is still America, right?

The good senator was seen pointing his boney finger from his perch on high, accusing two cable news outlets, Fox News and MSNBC specifically, as being responsible for creating the current politically toxic climate in Washington. He then proceeded to unleash a rather inexplicable tirade in which he expressed his desire to see the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) shut down both of these cable News and information outlets. Now I'll be honest here, I don't think I've ever watched anything on MSNBC, and as their ratings would indicate, not many others have either. So I suppose if it were to be shut down, I doubt very much that it would even be missed. But that's not the point! I really don’t watch all that much on Fox either, or at least not as much as I used to. But to advocate that either of these information sources should be taken off the air goes beyond being absolutely absurd. So I guess what the Senator would like to see happen here, is for less information to be available to the public, rather than more. Which from the Democrat perspective, I suppose, does kinda make sense, when you stop and think about it. The decision regarding where one wishes to get their information is something that should be a personal choice made by the consumers of that information. It most certainly should not be for some egotistical, blowhard of a corrupt politician to decide for them. For someone, especially a high ranking government official, to make such a idiotic comment about limiting sources of information, especially with one being the most watched cable news network, makes very clear, the very ominous threat that these Democrats now pose to our ability to remain a free nation. "I'm tired of the right and the left," West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller said Wednesday during a Senate hearing on retransmission consent. "There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' " This bonehead went on to say, "It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and, more importantly, in their future," said the chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Frankly, I don’t give a flying f$#k what he’s tired of. Maybe the good Senator should see someone about that "bug" infestation from which he is currently suffering.


Once again, this imbecile puts on display what is the typical level of intelligence possessed by a majority of those that we continue to choose to govern us. Seeming to go out of his way to make sure that we are all aware of just how stupid and ill informed he really is, Rockefeller failed to point out the fact that the FCC does not have the authority to regulate either FOX or MSNBC. It makes you want to scream, "Hey you moron, these channels are on cable, not on the broadcast airwaves." I swear, if brains were dynamite, this clown couldn’t blow his own nose! It's more than just a little frightening that we would have a sitting Senator who would even THINK that it would be a good idea to have the government step in because he disagrees with the content of a specific “news” network. Not it goes without saying that Rockefeller's office chose not respond to any requests for an interview. And of course the Democrat lead FCC declined to comment as well. Of course when one is essentially recommending censorship I can understand his unwilling to go before the camera. Instead he chooses to take the easy way out taking his pot shots then going into hiding which only serves undermine the point he’s trying to make. So I guess at least according to Jay, healthy political discourse requires no diversity of opinion whatsoever. We’re all just supposed to be mind-numbed little robots who automatically believe what it is any of these Democrats tell us, not really needing any other information. We just need to all be singing off of the same sheet of music written by the Democrats, and, by God, we need to shut up and be happy about it. What are these people so afraid of? Rhetorical question. You would think that if their ideas were so freakin great, they'd be willing to defend them through the use of every outlet available to them. Instead they feverishly work to keep everything they're doing, or trying to do, as far below the radar of the American people as possible. That's why we don't trust them! They're devious, insidious, callous, unethical and dishonest, and yet they do nothing but to perpetuate that image through any number of examples of corrupt behavior.


And of course, as always, we have the New York Times rushing to the rescue, out there trying to provide cover for this blowhard, reporting that the comments about FOX News and MSNBC were not actually part of Mr. Rockefeller’s prepared remarks. But in those prepared remarks, he did say, "When it comes to developing content, our entertainment machine is too often in a race to the bottom. Even worse, our news media has all but surrendered to the forces of entertainment. Instead of a watchdog that is a check on the excesses of government and business, we have the endless barking of a 24-hour news cycle. We have journalism that is always ravenous for the next rumor, but insufficiently hungry for the facts that can nourish our democracy. As citizens, we are paying a price." I think what the Senator may be objecting to is the fact that sleazy Democrats, of which he is so obviously one, no longer are able to control the release of information as they were once so easily capable of. But that was in another time and another place, before the advent of the "new media" of Fox News, Talk Radio and the internet. Also rushing in to explain to us what it was that the Senator "really meant" by his idiotic statement, was some liberal bimbo that Hannity had on his show the same night. I think we all know pretty well what he meant, and we don’t need some Democrat to interpret it for us. It provides just one more piece of evidence for the rationale for ridding Congress of every single Democrat or at the very least working to keep them in a permanent minority status so they can be prevented from doing any more damage than they have already done. We know how determined they are to disguise their efforts to supplant the will of the people and to inflict upon our country that which they deem as being necessary and appropriate regardless of what the people may think. Can anyone say “healthcare/insurance reform?” We have already witnessed on any number of occasions, especially over the course of the last two years, that they care very little about public opinion. And apparently the results of the most recent election have failed to dissuade them from altering their way of doing business. It's almost as if the election never took place, at least in terms of the behavior still exhibited by the Democrats in the Senate.


Sadly though, these nutty comments that we hear coming from old Jay are just the very small tip of a very large and scary iceberg. But they do provide a window, so to speak, into what is it that these people are up to. For instance, there is an attempt by the current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman, Julius Genachowski, who is presently putting together a net neutrality proposal, and is planning to take action on the controversial issue as early as next month. He’s working to do so before the Republicans take control of the House to increase his odds of success. The long-running net neutrality debate centers around rules that would require Internet service providers to treat all web traffic equally. Internet companies like Google and Skype want net neutrality rules applied to both wireline and wireless networks, but network operators including AT&T, Verizon and Comcast say they need flexibility to manage web traffic on their lines. Barry "Almighty" campaigned on a promise to implement just such a policy of net neutrality. Genachowski’s earlier plans to carry out that promise were initially hampered when a federal court ruled the FCC did not have legal authority to adopt the regulations. But never ones to be side tracked by any pesky court decisions, speaking in San Francisco on Wednesday, Genachowski hinted that he had not let net neutrality fall from his priority list. "That'll happen," Genachowski said of developing net-neutrality rules. If the last two years have shown us anything, it is that liberals, no matter what position we may find them in, simply cannot be trusted.


But wait there's more in this ongoing Democrat effort to stomp on our First Amendment!


Because it would seem that on Thursday of this week, the illustrious Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously approved a bill that would give Attorney General Eric “the racist” Holder, the right to shut down websites with a court order if copyright infringement is deemed “central to the activity” of the site, regardless if the website has actually committed a crime. The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) is among the most draconian laws ever considered to combat digital piracy, and contains what some have called the “nuclear option,” which would essentially allow the Attorney General to turn suspected websites “off.” Many people opposed to the bill agree in principle with its aims: Illegal music piracy is, well, illegal, and should be stopped. Musicians, artists and content creators should be compensated for their work. But the law’s critics do not believe that giving the federal government the right to shut down websites at will based upon a vague and arbitrary standard of evidence, even if no law-breaking has been proved, is a particularly good idea. COICA must still be approved by the full House and Senate before becoming law. A vote is unlikely before next year. In short, COICA would allow the federal government to censor the internet without due process.


These are dangerous times my friends. We must be very vigilant, because these slimy characters will stop at absolutely nothing as they work to keep more and more of what they're doing from ever seeing the light of day. Knowledge is power, so we are now seeing that that's where they are focusing their energy, that being, the keeping of as much information as possible where we in the public have no access to it. Deception is the rule of the day. Their actions cannot withstand scrutiny from the public. The blatant dishonesty with which they approach their task poses a very grave threat to our being able to know what it is that they may be up to until it is simply too late to stop them. And their main focus seems to be on those resources where many Americans use to get the necessary information from, Fox News and the internet. If they can succeed in keeping the people blind to what they are so determined to bring about, their chances for success increase greatly. Dissent has become something not to be tolerated by those who comprise the liberal ruling class. It is the Democrats who continue to perceive themselves as knowing what's best for the rest of us.

NANCY, THE GIFT THAT JUST KEEPS ON GIVING…YOU GO GIRL!!!!!

Well, with the Democrats in the House having now voted to retain Speaker Nancy Pelosi as their leader when in January they assume minority status, with Republicans then taking control, it would seem that the "Wicked Witch of the West" isn't quite dead after all. As such, it would seem that we, the Republicans, have now been blessed with that proverbial gift that keeps on giving. Deciding to reject complaints made by some that it was Pelosi who played a critical role in the Democrats losing their majority in the House, a sufficient number of Democrat House members decided to stick with Pelosi as their incoming minority leader. Pelosi has served as House Speaker, the chamber's presiding officer, since 2007. Bruised but not beaten, our very Liberal heroine, Ms. Pelosi, has now apparently emerged pretty much unscathed as she was able to lock up the necessary votes needed to transition from Speaker to minority leader in the new Congress, easily fending off a challenge from Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), 150-43, during a private Wednesday meeting of House Democrats. The 43 votes against her, and the 68 cast in a losing effort to delay her election, reveal that a caucus bloodied by the loss of at least 60+ seats and control of the House no longer bends to her will in the same way that it once did. The minority leader vote came after an attempt to delay leadership elections was put down on a 129-68 vote. A few Democrats thought the party would be better served by taking some much needed time to cool off. Reps. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio and Peter DeFazio of Oregon had introduced a proposal to push the election off until December 8, which they said would have given Democrats a chance to review their leadership team and structure. "When you have taken the largest losses of any majority in a life time, then I think a little time for reflection to better understand the reason for those losses," said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), a co-sponsor of the delay proposal. Adding, "Losing across categories where we do not historically lose votes, women, seniors and others, independents, I think we need to better understand that." The discontent over Pelosi and the timing of the leadership elections came from many different corners during the closed Democratic Caucus meeting. "I cannot support you in your race for minority leader. Maybe December 8, but not today," Rep. David Wu said, according to those in the room.

The Democrat leadership election followed on the heels of what has been described as being a brutally long, contentious and somewhat divisive leadership meeting held on Tuesday. There were not many in attendance who thought that Pelosi was ever in any real danger of losing her job as leader of the Democratic Caucus, but she did find herself on the receiving end of some serious criticism from a rather diffuse set of critics, with dozens believing that she should step aside after her party suffered such a humiliating defeat at the polls. There were also those who had hoped to perhaps strip her power to appoint loyalists to positions of influence within the caucus and still others who simply wanted more time to reflect on whether endorsing the same set of leaders is the best course of action for a minority that was so thoroughly defeated. But it was not to be. The caucus went on to elect Steny Hoyer (Md.) as minority whip, and Jim Clyburn (S.C.) to some new and thoroughly bogus position of "assistant leader," whatever the heck that is. Even Nancy doesn't know what it is, since the duties of that particular position have yet to be accurately defined by Ms. Pelosi. Our Ms. Nancy had to think pretty fast on that one, in order to pacify the poor black guy who found himself being aced out of the number two spot by Hoyer, the rich white guy. Afterward it was Hoyer who piped up, saying, "We are going to participate as a minority in this Congress. But we will be ever vigilant to keep Republicans, as they did to us, to their rhetoric on fiscal balance and on growing jobs. We have listened to the American people and we're going to respond to their needs." What a delusional and pathetic, pompous old gasbag this guy is! But the poo really started to get deep with New Jersey Rep. Robert Andrews, one of Pelosi’s more vocal backers, saying that the election to select the leadership would be about “who is the best listener, who is the best consensus builder and who is in the best position to give us a record to take to the American people in 2012, and I think that is Nancy Pelosi.” What a suck up! This guy needs a pee test, because he is obviously on some pretty potent stuff. But there remains a very significant number in the caucus who believe that Pelosi, who became the poster girl for the Democratic excesses over the last two years, especially, throughout an number of campaigns for the midterm elections, is the worst possible choice as leader for a party that was so very soundly rejected at the polls.


As someone on the outside looking in, I can't help but smile. You see, I am of the opinion that the Democrats are most deserving of Ms. Pelosi remaining in the position that she currently holds as leader of the House Democrats. I was glad that she chose to ignore all those calling for her to step aside, because it is just one more example of her putting herself above her party. It should go without saying that Nancy was, in fact, a major factor behind Democrats’ rather extensive losses in this month’s congressional elections. But having said that, she also refused to allow herself to be shoved aside especially after what she considers as being her very impressive list of accomplishments over the course of the last two years. Pelosi and the old power brokers who led Democrats back into the majority four years ago remain insistent in feeling that they are in no possible way, culpable in the party’s downfall. Pelosi has argued ad nauseam to her troops that she was demonized in any number Republican campaign ads for no other reason than because she is the party’s political rainmaker. “I know some of you suffered because of ads targeted to me,” she said, according to several sources, “They had to take down the person who brings the resources.” Man, talk about denial! Her allies, as well as any number of her ardent admirers in the state controlled media, contend that she is the only one with the strategic skills, the vision, the touch with donors, as well as the necessary political muscle to lead the party back into the majority. All while she maintains an approval rating of somewhere in the lower single digits, amazing. Look, I'm all for maintaining the status quo when it comes to the Democrat Congressional Leadership. I mean after all, how can I, as a Republican, argue against what these stellar individuals accomplished on November 2, for my party. Just two years ago we had guys like that goof Carville declaring the Republican Party was dead! Good call there James! But Pelosi was defiant as ever in her post-election press conference Wednesday afternoon. Asked why she should remain Democratic leader after the election wipeout, Pelosi said: "Because I'm an effective leader, because we got the job done on health care and Wall Street reform and consumer protection. Because they know that I'm the person that can attract the resources both intellectual and otherwise to take us to victory, because I've done it before." HERE! HERE!


For Pelosi to feel the need to continue to make the claim that she bares no responsibility for the "shellacking" received on November 2, it makes you wonder just who it is that she's trying to convince. But the way I see it, Nancy's remaining in her present post can only serve to be a boon to Republicans as they start to get geared up for 2012. A year that will find far more Democrats in the Senate up for re-election than Republicans and of course, all of those in the House once again be facing re-election. Which is something that I would have thought that this political party, so often seen by so many as being so brilliant politically adept, would have taken into account. But I guess they feel that they will be able to sufficiently overcome any perceived handicap they may suffer from keeping Pelosi around in her leadership position. Hopefully, it may prove to even be a help to those who will most assuredly be working to kick Barry "Almighty" out of the Oval Office. One of the voices that seems to have been ignored by those voting to keep Pelosi around, was that of just-defeated Rep. Allen Boyd of Florida who stood up in Tuesday’s Democratic caucus meeting to declare that Pelosi is “the face of our defeat.” He put it rather bluntly when he declared that “we need new leadership,” while truer words may never have been spoken, they were also soundly ignored. His sentiments, a stinging blow for Pelosi because her camp sought his vocal support after he lost, were seconded by other lawmakers who were defeated and even by some who won reelection, according to attendees. But hey, who am I to dictate to these folks who they should or should not select as being the leader. What I do find as being somewhat ironic is the level of pure stubbornness on the part of Pelosi to accept any of the blame whatsoever for the huge, as well as historic, losses Democrats suffered on her watch. Losses that extended far beyond the House and well out into the states where in the neighborhood of 680 seats, of one type or another, were gained by the Republicans. It would appear to those of us less schooled in the goings on in the Democrat Party, that the "old guard", so to speak, were able to make a concerted effort to beat back any potential rank-and-file rebellion. So the Democrats will essentially have the same stellar leadership team that presided over the loss of 60+ Democratic seats earlier this month, yet feels worthy of holding on to their positions. Perhaps they will achieve a similar level of success come 2012. We can only hope.


So now I guess we shall see what we shall see. Will it in the end prove to have been the right choice by the Democrats to keep Pelosi as their leader? Will Nancy remain as determined in her assisting of Barry to drag us farther and farther to the Left? Will the Republicans heed the message from the voters and behave accordingly? Will Republicans be able to adequately make the case for having their numbers increased come the election in 2012? Or, will the Republicans show us that they have really learned nothing from past errors and therefore cast themselves into the vast wilderness of political obscurity for a generation? The next 24 months will tell us much about what the future holds for both political parties. Will we see a renewed drive for creating a third party? So many questions, so few answers. Questions we'll know the answers to in a mere 719 days.

SO, "DEATH PANELS" ARE NOW AN EXCELLENT METHOD OF DEFICIT REDUCTION???

Paul Krugman, I'm told, is someone who, like Barry, has apparently achieved that highly desperately sought, but rarely achieved, God-like stature amongst the more liberal simpletons among us. He is, I’m also told, looked upon as being some brilliant economist, whose opinion seems to be highly valued by those presently heavily involved in the bankrupting of our country. But if one would genuinely listen to what it is that he advocates, it seems very difficult to take anything that he says seriously. The fact that he is a Professor of Economics and International Affairs at, of all places, the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University, should in itself tell you exactly on which end of the political spectrum he enthusiastically resides. He is also a Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics, and, as most of us are aware, an op-ed columnist for The New York Times. He is also, most certainly a certifiable, kook and a card carrying, charter member of the leftwing menagerie. In 2008, it was decided by those who determine such things, to give Krugman the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, supposedly for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography. Wikipedia describes the rationale for his being bestowed with the Nobel Prize as being, "According to the Nobel Prize Committee, the prize was given for Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic concentration of wealth, by examining the impact of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services. Krugman is known in academia for his work on international economics (including trade theory, economic geography, and international finance), liquidity traps and currency crises. According to the IDEAS/RePEc rankings, he is among the thirteen most widely cited economists in the world today." I think we have gotten to a point where I think most of us can agree that the importance of the Nobel Prize has now been effectively degraded to the point where it has become something akin to being about as noteworthy as being awarded your favorite cup of coffee from Starbuck's. To me, if it meant that I'd be in the company of such luminaries as, Jimmy Carter, Algore, Yasser Arafat, Barry "Almighty" and of course Krugman, I believe that if I were ever to be deemed worthy of being awarded with such a supposed honor, I'd gladly turn it down. That's just not a crowd that I'd like to have my name associated with.

In truth, this guy is nothing but one more blatant hypocrite in a very large group of many, and one that ranks right up there with other such notables in the outlying leftwing fringe, such as "linguist" Noam Chomsky. These great minds of the left possess a unique level of hypocrisy and wholeheartedly agree in an apparent hatred for America as designed by the Founders. To show the level of his being an out and out fanatic, as well as a dedicated leftist, one really need look no further than his most recent interview just this past Sunday in which the esteemed Mr. Krugman quite matter-of-factly referred to using “death panels” as a way to rein in our present runaway deficits. Ya know, if guys like Krugman are such strong advocates for these death panels, which he initially claimed didn't even exist back when healthcare/insurance “reform” was being shoved down the throats of the American people, lets start by subjecting him and his Liberal buddies to them. For example, shouldn't that fat slob of a drunk Teddy Kennedy have been reviewed by one of these death panels. Just how much of the taxpayer's money was needlessly wasted on keeping his waste-of-skin-blow-hard self alive and breathing? Most likely, much more than what should have been. In a blog post written after what was a rather contentious participation in a panel discussion on “This Week with Christiane Amanpour,” Krugman said that he had used such language before and linked to a single column of his that mentioned death panels, but only in passing. But what our leftist buddy, Krugman, neglected to mention was the fact that over the course of the last year or so, he has devoted at least a half dozen columns mocking conservatives, especially former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, over the use of the term “death panels.” He said such accusations were nothing more than "smears." Palin used the term in reference to language in the Obama healthcare plan that urged seniors to plan for their deaths. That, coupled with Medicare cutbacks in the plan is what resulted in the "death panel" coinage. In a review of Krugman's columns over the last two years, "Newsmax" uncovered these rather scathing references to death panels in which our highly respected Nobel laureate, Mr. Krugman, frequently calls Republican leaders liars for using the term:


August 13, 2009 "Right now, the charge that’s gaining the most traction is the claim that health care reform will create “death panels” (in Sarah Palin’s words) that will shuffle the elderly and others off to an early grave. It’s a complete fabrication, of course."


August 20, 2009 “It seems as if there is nothing Republicans can do that will draw an administration rebuke: Senator Charles E. Grassley feeds the death panel smear, warning that reform will “pull the plug on grandma,” and two days later the White House declares that it’s still committed to working with him.”


February 25, 2010 “So what did we learn from the summit? What I took away was the arrogance that the success of things like the death-panel smear has obviously engendered in Republican politicians. At this point they obviously believe that they can blandly make utterly misleading assertions, saying things that can be easily refuted, and pay no price. And they may well be right.”


August 30, 2009“Moderate Republicans, the sort of people with whom one might have been able to negotiate a health care deal, have either been driven out of the party or intimidated into silence. Whom are Democrats supposed to reach out to, when Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who was supposed to be the linchpin of any deal, helped feed the “death panel” lies?”


October 4, 2009 “The Republican campaign against health care reform, by contrast, has shown no such consistency. For the main G.O.P. line of attack is the claim — based mainly on lies about death panels and so on — that reform will undermine Medicare. And this line of attack is utterly at odds both with the party’s traditions and with what conservatives claim to believe.”


March 21, 2010: “Politicians like Sarah Palin — who was, let us remember, the G.O.P.’s vice-presidential candidate — eagerly spread the death panel lie, and supposedly reasonable, moderate politicians like Senator Chuck Grassley refused to say that it was untrue. On the eve of the big vote, Republican members of Congress warned that “freedom dies a little bit today” and accused Democrats of “totalitarian tactics,” which I believe means the process known as “voting.”


Krugman is just another typical anti-American crackpot, who has achieved a rather dubious kind of celebrity. He one of those individuals who seem to think that simply because they have achieved some level of notoriety, they are smarter than the rest of should therefore be listened to whenever they're pushing some favorite cause. He, as with many others of his ilk, is nothing more than hardcore disciple of the failed economic and political theory of Socialism/Communism that has as its premise, the notion that the almighty "state" is the center of the universe and is much better equipped to ensure a fair and equitable society where all are said to benefit. Nothing could be further from the truth. The evidence is everywhere, and it has repeatedly shown, that this system so coveted by the likes of Krugman, is completely unworkable and unsustainable. The only thing such a system of government is capable of producing is a bureaucracy that is nearly lethal in its ability to bring about abject poverty and to spread misery equally amongst those who comprise the lowly citizenry. A big factor in the most recent election was that a majority of people feel that the government has encroached much too far into the private lives of the American people. And that it definitely has no role to play in such matters as deciding when an individual has ceased to be a contributing member of society. As far as I'm concerned, Krugman ceased to provide anything beneficial to society some time ago, so I think at the first opportunity that is presented to us, we should just pull his plug! Look, it is a fact that Liberalism, as a rule, is focused primarily on nothing more than the complete dehumanizing of those who are subjected to it. Such a thing is its primary goal. Of course, those in the ruling class are exempt and considered as being immune to the effects of the environment that they themselves create, but those who make up the unwashed masses, well, they must work to maintain their ability to remain a contributing member of the collective. And once they are no longer capable of doing so, they have effectively outlived their usefulness to that society, and are therefore no longer worth the expense of being kept alive. They then have the responsibility to go off into the wilderness and to cease being a burden on the collective. In true "It takes a village" fashion, monies must be focused only on those still able to assist in furthering the goals of the collective. Rationing of such resources as those needed for healthcare, according to Krugman and his fellow leftists, would contribute considerably to the reduction of our rapidly increasing amount of debt. Thus is the premise fully supported by corrupt ideologues like Krugman. It is these folks who have ceased to provide any useful service to their fellow man. His efforts are concentrated more on the spreading of falsehoods through outright lies and deception, and distortions while he portends to be for the advancement of all. But his true goal, I fear, is just a bit more sinister.

A MADE TO ORDER LITMUS TEST FOR SPEAKER BOEHNER...

MEET JOE BARTON

With the assuming of majority status by the Republicans in the House, there will come any number of opportunities that will reveal, and rather quickly, in what direction it is that they intend to head. One of those opportunities that will provide us as early indication will be who it is that is selected for the various committee chairman positions. There are several committees that are seen as being key to the implementing of necessary road blocks to the policies what Barry is working so diligently to put into place, as he remains focused on his agenda of "radically transforming" America. While I am sure that we can all agree that Boehner has, in recent months and especially since the election, managed to say all the right things, the jury remains out and will remain so until we see exactly what actions he intends on taking up in the House. Actions that are designed to combat what have been outrageous Democrat expansions of spending, regulation, debt, and a virtual pandemic level of intrusion into the personal lives of every single American. Because as they say, actions speak much louder than words. And who it is that is appointed to head the various committees will go a long way and tell us a great deal, regarding just what kind of stamp it is that Mr. Boehner intends to put on the 112th Congress. And who it is that he backs as chairmen of these various and very important committees will provide a made to order litmus test that will indicate if anything has been learned from past Republican errors in judgment. So the question is, will the House Republicans stand with America and against the Barry/Pelosi Democrats, or will it once more betray the American people and cave, compromise, negotiate away, and outright surrender their principles, all in order to be on the receiving end of a few crumbs from the table? Well, we shall see what we shall see.

Being that it was we the people who were doing the voting, we know what this election was all about. The question yet to be answered is, do those in the Republican Party, especially those who were victorious in the many electoral contests, realize what this election was all about? Do they realize that it was in no way a vindication for them regarding errors made in the past, or that it was also not an endorsement of them politically? Do they understand that what has been granted to them is a reprieve, of sorts, provided to them as an opportunity to prove themselves, that this was much less a vote "for" them than it was a vote "against" Barry? They should consider themselves as being on a two year contract with no option for automatic renewal or extension. Now you would think that it would be painfully obvious since the last time such a monumental shift has taken place was back in 1938. What occurred last week was the electorate throwing things back into the face of those who perceive themselves as being less the servant of the people and more of an overseer of the people. Barry told America that the reason for this "shellacking" was all because he had not communicated his policies clearly enough, or because the economy was not recovering fast enough. But I think we all know that which brought this seismic shift about, was something quite different. That being that we the people were more than a little tired of simply being ignored. And if the trend continues from this new majority, then I'm afraid the tenure in the majority will end on a much more somber note than the one on which it began. What people will be expecting from the new Speaker is the developing of a serious strategy that will define the intended mission of this new Republican majority. They will also be expecting the transparency that was promised but so sorely lacking over the course of the last two years.


With the electoral tsunami that swept Republicans back into control of the U.S. House, the time for determining which people need to occupy which key positions, is now. In an effort to do that, over the course of the next few weeks the Steering Committee will be assigning chairmanships to the various committees. It should go without saying that whatever incoming Speaker Boehner wants in that regard, he’s very likely to get. As such, those who are selected for such positions will provide an excellent indicator regarding the seriousness with which the new Speaker will be approaching the legislative agenda in the new Congress. Which brings me to Energy and Commerce, one of the committees that is sure to be one of the more important, possibly even critical, over the course of the next two years. There are presently two individuals who are up for the chair of that committee: the current Ranking Member Joe Barton (TX-06); and the second-in-seniority Fred Upton (MI-06). Now I'll be honest in that I must confess that I wasn't all that sure what The Energy and Commerce Committee even deals with. But as you would guess, it deals with all matters related to energy and interstate commerce, particularly the regulation and management of same. In practical terms it means that in the near future the Committee is tasked with:


1. reining in EPA abuses of power and attempts to enact the carbon tax policies of the Waxman-Markey Bill, even though it has never passed the Senate or been signed into law.


2. repealing or significantly crippling Obamacare


3. repairing damage done to the oil industry and overall domestic energy industry and working toward sensible energy independence.


4. dismantling a system-wide regulatory cancer based on Global Warming…. Climate Change…. Global Climate Disruption…. whatever they’re calling the global warming hoax these days.


5. putting the brakes on the proposed ‘net neutrality’ scheme, which means government regulation of the internet by burying it legislatively and thwarting the FCC’s attempt to bypass Congress and implement it anyway.


The critical role to be played by this committee over the course of the next two years, will require that we have as its chairman, a leader who firmly believes in and fully supports small-government principles, and a person not afraid to fight against Barry's administration, the Republican establishment, or a massive and totally out of control federal bureaucracy.


Of the two individuals who are presently up for the position of Committee Chairman for this specific committee, the differences between them could not be more stark. Candidate number one for consideration by the Steering Committee for chairman, is Fred Upton (MI-06), who, as previously mentioned, is the second-ranking Republican presently on this committee. What I've been able to discover leads me to believe that Mr. Upton would not be the wisest choice for the position of committee chairman, as he is not the conservative he portends himself to be. And just because he may now he posing as such, like every other Republican in search of a powerful position, doesn't make it so. He is not the man for this position, nor any other leadership position for that matter. He loves to claim that he’s ready willing and able to take on the Democrats, and to demand explanations from EPA head Lisa Jackson and “Energy Czar” Carol Browner. And so on. However, the facts tell a different, and rather telling, story regarding just where Mr. Upton's sentiment may truly lie. He is not what he would like us to believe that he is. You see, apparently he doesn't find all much wrong with the Democrat agenda of Nancy Pelosi and Barry, and very little that could be considered as hazardous to America. For example he was:


1. one of 29 House Republicans to support creation of the Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area along the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona. This empowered federal bureaucrats to impose strict zoning and land-use rules and made it more difficult for the U.S. Border Patrol to do its job in blocking illegal immigration through federal wilderness areas.


2. one of 20 Republicans to vote against an amendment offered by Rep. Jim Jordan that would have reduced the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2010 funding to 2008 levels.


3. one of 9 House Republicans who voted against Rep. Dave Camp’s substitute amendment to the $787 billion Obama-Pelosi economic stimulus bill in March 2009. The Camp amendment would have substituted a GOP stimulus alternative made up primarily of new tax cuts for individuals and business.


4. one of 16 Republicans to support House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 2009 omnibus spending bill that included an 8.4 percent spending increase over and above the stimulus package, as well as $7.7 billion in earmarks. The measure also canceled the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program for 1,900 students in the nation’s capital.


There's more..


5. He co-wrote, along with Jane Harman (D-CA), the bill in 2007 that outlaws incandescent light bulbs in 2014.


6. He is a founding member of the Republican Main Street Partnership. If that sounds familiar to you, it should. It is a group of liberal Republicans dedicated to thwarting and marginalizing any and all conservative influences on the Republican Party. John McCain is a member.


7. In 2005 he voted against the extension of the Bush tax cuts on capital gains and dividends.


8. He voted for oil and gas drilling bans off the coast of Florida and in the Great Lakes, as well as for blocking millions of acres from new oil and gas leasing, logging, mining, and other business activity.


So is it me, or does this guy need to be as far removed as possible from any position of leadership? Does anybody seriously think that when the American people spoke on November 2, they were saying, yeah, what we need is guys like Fred Upton in charge of things? I guess more importantly, does Speaker Boehner think that is what the American people were asking for? Only time will tell.


Now for candidate number two, who is Mr. Joe Barton. It was earlier in the week on Greta that I first saw Congressman Joe Barton. I must admit that I know very little about him, but I heard enough from him on Greta to cause me to go in search of more information about him. What I did know about him is the fact that he was the guy who in a recent committee hearing accused the Barry administration of a “shakedown” and actually apologized to the CEO of British Petroleum for the despicable treatment from Democrats and the Barry's administration while BP was going to extraordinary lengths to stop the spill and do right by the people in the Gulf. I also remember it somehow being portrayed as some major “gaffe” committed by an ignorant and bumbling back-bencher who was quickly and publicly put in his place by GOP "leadership." But I wanted to find out more about this guy.


And find out more I did! Congressman Barton was first elected in 1984, and served as Chairman of this committee in the 2005-2006 session, and as the Ranking Member (leader of the minority party) ever since. Now while 26 years is certainly a long time and may, for some, conjure up an image of his being one of the “good old boys” of the Republican establishment that drove the Republican Party to ruin, nothing could be further from the truth. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey is a great admirer Joe Barton with stories that include :


1. As a freshman in 1985, he was the sole vote in favor of President Reagan’s proposed balanced budget, at 350-1, with 5 minutes left in the vote, before Republicans joined him in droves. GOP leadership threatened him that DCCC would target his seat if he did not cave.


2. Early in his career he dogged Hewlett-Packard and eventually nailed them for using illegally gained phone records to spy on employees, and using spyware to spy on journalists. He eventually went on a crusade to stop the online gathering of private consumer information, and has ever since made personal privacy a matter of great importance. [You can imagine that Google is no fan of Joe ]


3. Over time Barton has become known on the Hill as one who is unabashedly relentless in his conservative and pro-growth goals, and yet a notable team builder who has won the respect and admiration of political opponents like John Dingell for being open, decent, and fair. His first act as Chairman was to gain passage of the 2005 Energy Policy Act.


4. In 2006, NBC Chairman Bob Wright unleashed nitwit shock jock Don Imus on Barton, because Barton insisted that the NIH be allowed to decide, free of lobbying, whose research it would fund (Wright’s pet project being autism). Barton withstood daily nationally broadcast smearing from Imus, and was called every disgusting name imaginable. Needless to say, the NIH was granted its autonomy. Guys like Barton are not moved by the likes of Donald Imus, or the likes of Bob Wright for that matter.


5. Barton gained a name for himself by moving the debate rightward and getting legislation passed, while being evenhanded and respectful to the other side, always behind the scenes and rarely in front of a microphone. Nevertheless, since the Democrat takeover in 2007, he has been a veritable thorn in the flesh to the Democrats. He has incessantly called for Obama EPA head Lisa Jackson to testify before the committee. The Democrats have not heeded, but he hasn’t shut up about it. He has written letters and filed motions, keeping her name in constant view.


In July 2009, Democrats desperately wanted to blow through committee hearings and get quick passage of Obamacare before the August recess, so as to not have to face angry constituents before the vote. Those hopes were pretty much dashed by none other than Joe Barton. In spite of being outnumbered 35-23, Barton’s forces subjected the bill to 17 days of markups, and forced the Democrats to a 10-day retreat. Republicans offered 350 amendments and debated 54 of them. It was this committee’s protracted and brutal hearings that exposed the details of the disastrous bill to the World. The bill passed out of Energy and Commerce 31-28 on Friday, July 31, as members rushed home for the August recess. I'm sure we all remember what fun the August 2009 recess was with all of those rather exuberant folks attending, as well as all of those deer in the headlights expressions we saw coming from any number of Democrats, during all of those townhalls. And all of the outpouring of emotion that came from the people and was directed at those who were viewed as invading their privacy and robbing them of an ever increasing amount of their liberties. I think it very safe to say that it was during that August recess was when the Tea Party found its voice, and became a movement unto itself fully aware its own power. It was in the townhalls, that the seeds were first sown for November 2, 2010. I think it also safe to say that Joe Barton may have played an unheralded role in it. Congressman Barton has plans for this session too. Not content just to be the “party of no”, he’s published numerous statements and propounded to-do lists. Among them is Ten ways to start cleaning up the mess. To borrow a phrase from a supporter of Mr. Barton, "He’s shovel ready, you might say."


If there is any lesson to be learned from Republican congressional rule from most of 1994-2006, it is how quickly and easily the Republican establishment can become Democrat-Lite once it has power. We can only hope that those who comprise this new Republican majority in the House know that the best they can say about this most recent election, is that they have now been provided with a golden opportunity to redeem themselves, an audition of sorts, and a chance to do better. As of this point in time there is no guarantee that they will be asked to come back for a return engagement come 2012. They must now back up all of the election-season talk with clear and concise action and begin leading this Republic back from the brink. They must be focused on a return to Constitutional rule, to sanity, to accountability, and to freedom. Failing that, they will suffer the same fate as was suffered just four short years ago. Joe Barton is a truly effective leader, an unswervingly conservative, as well as a savvy and smart veteran who knows no fear. Hopefully we will have many more of his caliber who will be able rise to the occasion for the sake of their country. He knows exactly what to do, and exactly how to get it done. Upton, on the other hand, is not even worth a second look. So we will see on whose side it is that Speaker Boehner comes down on, and this one key position will be very telling in its providing us with an indication of where the Speaker is headed and what his priorities may be.


The November election was one of the most important in our lifetimes. The 112th Congress needs every one of our ace pitchers, our closers, and our clutch hitters to step up to the plate. For Commerce and Energy, that is Joe Barton. But there are also many other committees that will need their own versions of Mr. Barton. Let's hope we have a sufficient level of commitment from a sufficient number of individuals willing to properly take care of the necessary business at hand. The course embarked upon will determine what the future may hold not only for the Republican Party but our nation as well, with 2012 is hanging in the balance.