AT WHAT POINT DOES LIBERAL IGNORANCE BECOME DANGEROUS???

Appearing on Fox News last night, we had someone who, while described as being a Democrat Strategist, was either remarkably naïve or, quite simply, demented. Obviously someone who was released from her padded cell a little early, Zerlina Maxwell actually tried to argue that preventing rape is really as simple as "telling men not to rape women." The focus of her argument, and the basis for her insane remarks, was that women should not be able to use guns as a means of self-defense. And in so doing she seemed to be willing to take her ignorance into uncharted territory. I simply don't understand these liberal women who seem to be perfectly content with allowing themselves to be used for nothing more than to further a political agenda.

Host Sean Hannity began by slamming the "ignorant politicians" in Colorado for trying to remove a woman’s right to use a firearm to defend herself against an attacker via recent gun control legislation. "I don’t think that we should be telling women anything," Maxwell said. "I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there." To which Hannity said, "Criminals are not going to listen to that." But not to be deterred, Maxwell replied, "You are talking about it as if there is some faceless, nameless criminal, when a lot of times it is someone that you know and trust." Is that not some of the most ridiculous logic you've ever heard in your life? It makes no sense.

Hannity pointed out that "evil exists in the world" and women need to know that these situations unfortunately occur. "We can prevent rape by telling men not to commit it," Maxwell said, again repeating the same bizarre claim. Instead, Maxwell, who oddly enough is a rape survivor herself, said she wants women to "not be in this situation." She added that if you "train" men not to be rapists, we can prevent rape. And then she made the same idiotic comment that I've heard so many times I want to scream. She actually said, "If firearms were the answer, then the military would be the safest place for women and it’s not." Any doubts about just how stupid she might be, were wiped out by her making that statement.

I have a daughter and if she were to want to carry a gun I'd go out and buy it for her. And I'd teach her how to use it against anyone who would wish to do her harm. And frankly to hear such utter nonsense coming from a black woman, seems to me, to be all the more crazy. Personally if my daughter were ever to find herself in the position of being raped by some black dude I have no trouble whatsoever with her shooting the guy's balls off. And I'd expect her to do just that! I guess Ms. Maxwell would rather become nothing more than just another statistic. Women need an equalizer to use against those who choose to prey on them. And a Glock 9mm neatly tucked away in the purse fills that need quite nicely.

Remember all of that talk during the last presidential campaign about how it was that the Republicans had declared war on women? And how many women, do you suppose, fell for that nonsense and how many just might end up losing their right to defend themselves because of their gullibility and who they chose to vote for? These women actually voted for those who have not only declared war on women, but who also seem to view women as being nothing more than necessary collateral damage needed if they are to finally be able to erase the Second Amendment once and for all. And mind-numbed little robots like this bimbo, Maxwell, appear to be only too happy to do their part in the Democrat's ongoing propaganda campaign.

THE "SEQUESTER" PLOT THICKENS...

In what was nothing if not a crystal clear of example of just how Barry "Almighty" views this 'sequester' idea of his, there was a recently issued, and rather stern, denial of an appeal for flexibility in lessening the sequester’s effects. A response to an email this week appeared to direct officials in Washington, that because it already had promised that cuts would be devastating, to follow through on those threats. No leeway will be permitted nor tolerated. In an email sent Monday by Charles Brown, an official with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), yes I guess we have one of those, office in Raleigh, N.C., Mr. Brown asked "if there was any latitude" in how to spread the sequester cuts across the region to lessen the impacts on fish inspections. Needless to say, the response was rather terse to say the least.

The response was short, to the point, and rather heavy-handed to say the least, which prompted Mr. Brown to say that he was discouraged by officials in Washington, who gave him this reply: "We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be." So it would appear to be fairly obvious that all of those who have said, repeatedly, that this is not about partisan politics have pretty much been lying. And that lying, it would seem, goes all the way to the top. The very top, to our Liar-in Chief, Barack Hussein Obama!

To which Rep. Tim Griffin, a Republican from Arkansas responded to this little email by saying, "This email confirms what many Americans have suspected: The Obama administration is doing everything they can to make sure their worst predictions come true and to maximize the pain of the Sequester cuts for political gain." Mr. Brown the official who sent the email and who is the eastern regional director for wildlife services at APHIS, didn’t immediately return a call Tuesday afternoon seeking comment. He's probably been told to shut the Hell up! Anyway APHIS is an agency within the Agriculture Department, and on Tuesday department Secretary Tom Vilsack was challenged on the email at a House committee hearing by Rep. Kristi Noem, who said she hoped the department wouldn’t tie agencies’ hands.

And as is usually the case whenever dealing with anyone from this most corrupt of administrations, Mr. Vilsack, mostly likely lying through his teeth, said he hadn’t seen the email, he did go one to say that agencies are supposed to be trying to find ways to manage the impact of the cuts. "If we have flexibility, we’re going to try to use it to make sure we use sequester in the most equitable and least disruptive way," the secretary testified. "There are some circumstances, and we’ve talked a lot about the meat inspection, where we do not have that flexibility because there are so few accounts. The administration earlier had warned that supplies of beef, pork and poultry could drop this year because slaughterhouse inspectors will have to be furloughed, and under federal law meat can’t be processed without inspectors present.

As everybody should know, after all we've heard about it enough, $44 Billion in sequesters began last Friday and if you'll notice the word did not come to an end as foretold by Barry "Almighty." But even amid the cuts, that repeatedly descibed as being so dire, it that this silly APHIS agency is still hiring new employees as well as interns. Since Sunday the agency has posted 24 help-wanted ads including 22 student internships, one ad seeking a clerk in a New York office, and one ad was seeking, you're not gonna believe this, three "insect production workers" to grow bollworms in Phoenix. And Barry expected us to believe that there isn't $44 Billion that can be cut without civilization, as we know it, coming to and end. What a lying piece of sh!t this guy is. Are we just too stupid to see what's going on here?

FOR $500K, YOU TOO CAN HAVE A MEETING WITH OBAMA...

REMEMBER WHEN...

WHAT'S HAPPENING TO AMERICA?

What is it that's happened to America? That a guy like Henry Waxman, winner of every Phantom of the Opera lookalike contest he’s ever entered, can be the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and from his lofty position say something as insanely stupid as America does not need "dirty oil." Why is he not being dragged home by his constituents and taken out behind the woodshed for a good ass whoppin, politically speaking of course. This clown, in talking about the Keyston XL pipeline, said we just don't need the oil that would be imported through the pipeline from Canada, that same pipeline, by the way, which finally received long-awaited favorable environmental review from the U.S. government.

Speaking as the true 'climate change' zealot that he is, he said, "We don’t need this dirty oil. To stop climate change and the destructive storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires that we are already experiencing, we should be investing in clean energy, not building a pipeline that will speed the exploitation of Canada’s highly polluting tar sands." Waxman was none too pleased with the recent analysis of the project by the government. In its draft environmental review released Friday, the State Department said the construction of the pipeline through much of the Midwest would not have a meaningful impact on climate change. Gee, ya think? How exactly could it have an imapct on something that doesn't even exist in the first place?

In other words, State concluded that building the Keystone XL pipeline would not have any real effect on global warming because even if the U.S. blocked the importation of Canadian oil, that oil would find buyers elsewhere. It also found that even if the pipeline is blocked, the oil would find a different route to Gulf Coast refineries as global oil market conditions changed. The report comes after years of governmental delays for the project, proposed by the Canadian firm TransCanada and rejected by Barry "Almighty" back in 2011. The company reapplied for a State Department permit in 2012. A federal permit is required because the project crosses state and international boundaries.

The bottom line here is that the more we, the American people, demonstrate a willingness to tolerate such intolerable behavior as that most recently demonstrated by Waxman, the more we can expect our political leaders to perceive us all as being simply too stupid to see what's really going on. For whatever reason we seem to have forgotten who it is that's in charge here. And it most certainly IS Not clowns like Waxman. And yet we continue to find ourselves on the receiving end of some of the most idiotic policies imaginable. Things that simply don't make sense unless you look at them from the perspective of those who share in Waxman's vision. There is now a serious effort underway to destroy our country, and yet people just don't seem to care.

JAMES CARVILLE…WE AIN'T GOT NO SPENDIN PROBLEM...

So, you may ask, just how much of a nutty ideologue is James Carville? Well, far from mellowing in his old age, apparently, if his recent comments are any indication, Jimmy remains a pretty damn nutty one. And, as is no surpise, he's another one of those loony progressives who seem to think that we can simply go on spending like there’s no tomorrow. The Democrat campaign consultant and one-time advisor to ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton, went so far as to actually ask on Friday, in referencing the Republicans in Congress, "Why do they want to cut anything? The debt is going down." Earth to James, Earth to James, come in, James. The debt is going down? What numbers is he looking at? I mean it sounds to me like maybe old Jimmy he's been spending a bit too much time hanging out with his buiddy, and fellow loon, Paul Krugman. Because Krugman spews the same drivel.

Putting on quite the demonstration of the malignant form insanity that has so compleely permiated those on the left, to ask such a ridiulous question pretty much at the same time our national debt is ontrack to reach $17 Trillion, was a little odd. An amount which, by the way, reflects an increase of more than $6 Trillion just since Barry "Almighty" took office in 2009. So it just seemed to be a rather bizarre comment to make, even for a screwball liberal like Carville. During an interview by Sean Hannity on Fox News, Carville spoke as if he were living in some weird alternate universe, as he said there’s no need to cut spending. No need to cut spending? Really? Spoken like a true Democrat. Why it is, exactly, that he think we were forced to suffer the embarrassment of our credit rating being downgraded for the very first time in our history? SPENDING! We have a spending problem, and if it is not addressed, we're toast.

Obviously one of those who holds the opinion that all we need to do is to keep printing more and more money, this moron asked, "Why do they want to cut anything?" He then went on to make the insane statement, "The debt is going down. We can't have a long run problem. The health care cost numbers are looking good. Right now, we have to keep to the extent to have a recovery and keep it going. The best private forecasts, macroeconomic advisors, says it's going to take a half percent off of GDP. We don't half a percent to give right now, Sean." Ok, and why is it that we don’t have it right now? Might that be because of Barry’s reckless spending the likes of which we’ve never seen before? Sean should have asked him to name one policy, just one, that Barry has aggressively worked to put into place that had even the slightest purpose of stimulating the economy or encouraging job growth.

Proving once again that he’s obviously been out in the sun too long with that bald head of his, Carville actually claims that the economy is recovering and actually denies that even with our $16 Trillion debt, everything is just hunky-doory and we’re not robbing from our kids to pay for anything. He does nothing more than to spew the party line and sounds like a broken record as he repeats ad nauseam how all of the numbers are looking so good, right now. Even if he was right about the numbers, which he most assuredly is not, to assume that we can go on spending at current levels is nothing short of pure madness. And regardless of what this buffoon may say, the future of our children is truly at stake here. Guys like this senile clown like to refer to supply-side economic as "voodoo economics." Obamanomics is the equivalent of fairytale economics. Only there ain't no happy ending.

TAX REVENUES HIT NEW HIGH, AND STILL OBAMA SAYS SOME ARE NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE...

Ok, so the news is now on the street that federal revenue will return to its pre-recession levels in 2013, according to projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and actually set a record for the most money that our bloated government has ever managed to take in. And when you stop and consider the fact that nearly half of our citizens no longer pay any income tax, the amount mentioned appears to be all the more…impressive? In its latest Budget and Economic Update, the CBO forecasts that federal revenue will top $2.7 Trillion in 2013, slightly higher than the $2.6 Trillion the government collected in 2007, when the last recession 'officially' began. And while government revenues had fallen by nearly $500 Billion during the recession to $2.1 Trillion in 2009, they have been steadily growing since June 2009, with the CBO now projecting that they will slightly eclipse their pre-recession peak.

In fact, the $2.7 Trillion in revenue will be the most money the federal government has ever collected in history. So, at a time when our government will be taking in what is described as being a record amount of money, why is it that we need more? According to those who keep track of such things, the government has never collected more than the $2.6 Trillion it collected in 2007, meaning that if CBO’s projection is correct, it will set a new record for revenue collection in 2013. So at a time when we're collecting more in taxes than has ever been collected before, how is it that we have Barry, and the Democrats, demanding that we need to collect even more? Barry continues to say that we need a balanced approach to deficit reduction, one that must include more federal revenue in the form of "tax reform." But in light of these numbers, his claim seems to ring a little hollow. It would seem to me that now would be the time to cut spending.

"Now, I think this balanced mix of spending cuts and tax reform is the best way to finish the job of deficit reduction," Barry said in a speech as recently as February 5. Republicans on the other hand quickly counter that additional tax revenue is not necessary, citing the tax increases on wealthier Americans they agreed to as part of the January deal to make permanent most of the Bush tax cuts. Instead, they argue, the focus should now turn to making sizable, and real, cuts to our ballooning federal spending rather than raising further tax revenues. "Democrats say we should replace the president’s ‘sequester’ with revenue increases, or delay it. Republicans say we should replace [it] with responsible reforms that will help put us on a path to balance the budget in 10 years," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said at a news conference on Wednesday. Not often I find myself agreeing with Boehner, but I do here.

So the bottom line here is that at a time when the government coffers should be literally busting out at the seams, they are, instead, quite empty, with everything having been spent and then some. And still the Democrats, led by our 'Dear Beloved Leader,' say the rich simply are not paying their "fair share!" Oh really? Then I'm curious to know exactly what their fair share might be. The hypocrisy that we now see on display here and coming from both Barry and the congressional Democrats, should convince many that not only is their argument false, their stewardship of the people's money has been nothing short of abysmal. But I suppose that matters very little to those who don't pay taxes, which is what Barry and the Democrats are, most likely, banking on as they continue to demand that the evil rich be made to pay even more. Every time I think about how prosperous this nation could be were it not for Barry, I just get so pissed!

ARE STRICTER GUN LAWS A RETURN TO THE DAYS OF JIM CROW?

Well, both are the handiwork of the same political party, the Democrats.

OK, SO WHO’S PAYING THEIR "FAIR SHARE" AND WHO’S NOT?

I don't think there is anything that proves the point any better that we're now being forced to deal with a president who is nothing short of a devout socialist, and a fanatic when it comes to the redistribution of wealth, than his view on taxes and who it is that should be paying them. He's pretty much admitted, on any number of occasions, that he cares very little about the impact raising taxes may ultimately have on the economy. Because what it's actually about, as Barry has been so fond of saying, is creating the perception of fairness. But there is really nothing fair about the way that Barry insists upon robbing from those who work so that he can then turn right around give to those who refuse to work.


And, quite honestly, I've heard all of this "fair share" crap from Barry until I just want to puke! And he always seems to focus in on those us who pay more than our fair share, implying that what we pay is, somehow, simply not enough. And at the same time he seems to think it's perfectly fair, and quite acceptable, that nearly half of the people in this country are able to get away with paying absolutely nothing. And it's also these folks who, while they are permitted to pay nothing in income tax, continue to be on the receiving end of some pretty impressive 'refunds.' Personally I think the time has come to abolish that little thing referred to as the 'Earned Income Tax Credit.' It’s definitely outlived its purpose.


So looking forward to the coming year, just how is it that households at different income levels will pay their "fair share" of federal income, payroll, corporate and estate taxes? Like I said, despite Democrat claims that those at the top aren’t paying their "fair share," the Tax Policy Center reports that the often-maligned "1%" will have an average income of $1.4 million, and pay $514,144 in taxes. By themselves they will be footing over 30 percent of the total bill. Not fair enough for Barry? Meanwhile the top 20 percent of Americans will pay nearly 72 percent of the federal tax burden. And this too is not considered by Barry as being sufficient enough to be considered as being their fair share.

Here’s how the Associated Press breaks it down…

—

Bottom 20 percentAverage income: $10,552.
Average tax bill: -$284.
Average tax rate: -2.7 percent.
Share of federal tax burden: -0.4 percent.

–

Middle 20 percentAverage income: $46,562.
Average tax bill: $6,436.
Average tax rate: 13.8 percent.
Share of federal tax burden: 8.6 percent.

—

Top 20 percentAverage income: $204,490.
Average tax bill: $55,533.
Average tax rate: 27.2 percent.
Share of federal tax burden: 71.8 percent.

—

Top 1 percentAverage income: $1.4 million.
Average tax bill: $514,144.
Average tax rate: 35.5 percent.
Share of federal tax burden: 30.2 percent.

—

Then we come to the average family who is in the bottom 20 percent of households. These folks pay absolutely no federal taxes and that, according to the Democrats, is as it should be. For zero is their fair share. Weird, huh. Instead, many families in this group find themselves on the receiving end of some rather substantial payments from the federal government by claiming more in credits than they owe in taxes, giving them a negative tax rate. The Associated Press reports that the income, payroll, corporate and estate tax bills for the wealthy are among the highest since 1979. "Federal taxes for middle- and low-income households will stay well below their averages for the same period," they add.


Personally, I'm of the opinion that with our country now on the verge of complete financial collapse refunds going to those who have paid nothing just don’t make sense. I mean isn't it enough that they're not made to pay income taxes in the first place? Do they need to continue getting these bogus 'refunds' as well? What makes these people entitled to any amount of a refund? Refund means to give back, especially money; return or repay. How is it then that someone can pay nothing and yet still have money given back to them? Nothing about this is in anyway fair. I'm all for 'everybody' paying their fair share, and I mean 'everybody'. And these 'refunds' should be based on what you've paid in and nothing else!

THREE MEN WHO LEFT THEIR MARK...

WHITE HOUSE DRONE BENDS HIMSELF INTO A PRETZEL OVER THE SEQUESTER...

THE CONSEQUENCES OF "GUN CONTROL"...

JAMES CLYBURN…HYPOCRITE, LIAR, RACIST…ALL ROLLED INTO ONE…

You know, I’ve always considered Jim Clyburn, Democrat from South Carolina, to be one of the most racist members of Congress. And his most recent comments in which he described Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has little regard for a piece of landmark civil rights legislation because he’s "white and proud" only serve to confirm that opinion. Personally, I thought that was a bit too much even for him. It was on Friday that this senile old bigot told the Huffinton Post Friday he was "absolutely shocked" to hear the conservative justice describe to a key section of the Voting Rights Act as a "perpetuation of racial entitlement" earlier this week. The court heard arguments about the provision that requires the federal government to sign off on voting system changes in certain states that have a history of discrimination.

"I’m not easily surprised by anything, but that took me to a place I haven’t been in a long time," Clyburn, the third-ranking Democrat in the House, told the Huffington Post. "What Justice Scalia said, to me, was, ‘The 15th Amendment of the Constitution ain’t got no concerns for me because I’m white and proud.’" I’d like to take just a second here to explain exactly how it is that he became the third-ranking Democrat in the House in the first place. That would be, of course, because he’s black. You see, when the Democrats lost control of the House in 2010, there weren’t enough members who thought Clyburn was bright enough to hold a ‘real’ leadership position, so old Jimmy was about to pull the race card. So a ‘compromise,’ of sorts, was reached and the position he now holds as the third-ranking Democrat, was essentially created out of whole cloth.

Anyway, South Carolina and Texas have both been blocked from implementing new voter identification laws because they fall under the Voting Rights Act. Commenting on that, Clyburn said, "When you have in 2012…states making changes to their laws that you can look on their face and see that these changes will make it harder for minorities to have their votes affect the results that they intend, you say that we don’t need [the Voting Rights Act] anymore? Is this some kind of entitlement?" Adding, "Well, the Constitution of the U.S. is an entitlement for everybody." He said the law "had a positive impact on the voting rights of people traditionally denied the right to vote. To ignore that, to me, is beyond the pale. It means you went to the bench with an agenda." He said, "Playing around with the Voting Rights Act is playing with fire."

I always find it a bit disingenuous whenever Democrats start talking about anything related to our Constitution. And this attack on Scalia is just more of the typical brand of scorched-earth partisan attacks constantly employed by sleazy Democrats. I think we all realize that there’s nothing that matters to Democrats more than the acquiring, and maintaining for themselves, as much political power as possible. And in that quest there is absolutely nothing that they will not say or do. And this ignorant old hypocrite is a fine one to talk about anyone going to the bench with an agenda. The two faux justices appointed by Barry were sent to the court, not to uphold the Constitution, but to assist him in moving forward with his agenda to destroy America. And for Clyburn to place Justice Scalia in the same category as a Kagan and a Sotomayor should earn for him nothing but contempt from every American who believes in the Constitution.

STRICTER GUN LAWS MAY 'SOUND' LIKE A GOOD IDEA, BUT...

AND THE LIES CONTINUE...

 

 

What Barry really means when he says, "Congress must compromise," is the unconditionally surrender by the Republicans. They must drop all of their demands for the making if any meaningful spending cuts. That's really the only form of 'compromise' that Barry sees as being acceptable. Those are his terms, and he expects the Republicans to accept them. 

SEAN HANNITY EXPOSES THE 'REAL' KEITH ELLISON...

OBAMA FEELS THE NEED TO SAY HE'S NOT THE DICTATOR WE ALL KNOW HE LONGS TO BE...

OBAMA CONTINUES TO BLAME REPUBLICANS FOR SEQUESTER THAT WAS HIS IDEA...

'DINGY HARRY' REID TELLS MEDIA THAT THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO LIE

'Dingy Harry' Reid said, Thursday, that those considered to be players in the state-controlled media actually have an "obligation" to lie to the American people. Well, he may not have said it exactly that way, but what he said is that they should be reporting that the Republicans are "unwilling to do what the American people want done" on looming automatic, across-the-board budget cuts. What 'Dingy' is obviously counting on here is the fact that the American people are simply too stupid to know what they want. With Democrats, including Barry, lying to them on what as become now pretty much of a daily basis, combined with the fact that the state-controlled media has been lying to them for years, maybe even decades, I suppose you can't blame the people for being a bit confused.

During some silly news conference on Capitol Hill held on the eve of implementation of the cuts, known on Capitol Hill, and just about everywhere else, as "The Sequester," a reporter asked old 'Dingy,' "Can you understand the frustration of the American people that you’re blaming the Republicans, the Republicans are blaming you and nobody is talking until the day that these cuts kick in?" To which 'Dingy' replied, "You know I read an editorial today, and I don’t know whether it was the Times or the Post, where the op-ed writer said, ‘You know, let’s call it the way it is. The Republicans aren’t willing to deal with the Democrats.'" So if I've got this right, it would now seem to be 'Dingy's' opinion that the media must now become even more of a propaganda machine than it already is.

The doddering old boob went on to say, "So all this stuff -- Democrats aren’t doing anything, Republicans aren’t doing anything --I believe that you guys have an obligation to report it the way it is." Going on to say, "This isn’t something that happened yesterday, we’ve been fighting this for a couple years," Reid added. "They’re unwilling to do what the American people want done. And it’s as simple as that." Prior to his comments, Reid proposed dealing with sequestration in a "balanced" way by closing tax loop holes on the wealthy and asking "millionaires to pay a little bit more." And then in taking a parting shot he said, "I really believe the American people deserve better than what the Republicans in this building believe is the right thing." What a freakin crock!

Ya know, it should be pretty easy for any rational human being, which naturally excludes just about every Democrat, to see that the reductions we're talking about amount to only 1.2 percent of the budget, or $44 Billion in spending for 2013. Now when considered by itself that does sound like a rather huge sum, but when placed in the context of a $3.6 Trillion dollar budget and a nearly $17 Trillion debt, it's a mere drop in the fiscal bucket. So while the people may be having a tough time sorting everything out, no thanks to the Democrats and their media allies, they're going to have to figure out a way to do so. Now they can believe that we don't have a spending problem and that all we need to do is to further tax the so-called 'wealthy', or they can put their grownup pants on, and realize that where Barry has us headed is not a good place.

THE SCREECHING FROM DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS IS REALLY GETTING RATHER TIRESOME…

I gotta tell ya, I'm really getting tired of all of these screeching Democrats in Congress every time the subject of the sequester, or our spending problem, that they say isn't really a spending problem, or how the simple cure-all to all of our problems is to do nothing more than to raise taxes, comes up. If only we would raise taxes then ALL of our problems would simply go away and all would be right in the World. And this idiotic notion that it takes nothing more than to choose to disagree with Barry for one to be called a racist is nothing short of ludicrous. But that is what the Democrat Party has been reduced to, a bunch of screaming banshees. Everyday another wack job Democrat steps up to the microphone to decry these 'horrific spending cuts.

There seems to have been a rather dramatic increase in the intensity of their hysterics regarding their claims that civilization, as we have come to know it, will somehow meet an untimely end should the $44 Billion in spending cuts be allowed to take place. One of those crackpots who seems to be leading this pack of crazies is Donna Edwards, another Democrat who calls the People’s Republic of Maryland home, and who has been quite busy, of late, making some pretty wild, as well as unsubstantiated, claims. According to this dingbat, if the Barry-conceived sequester is allowed to become a reality it will mean that women who are victims of domestic violence will be "forced to stay in their homes with their abuser" at the "hands of the GOP."

The automatic across-the-board cuts, known as that much talked about sequester, are set to take effect on Friday, which would be today. It amounts to a 1.2% reduction in increased federal spending in 2013, or about $44 Billion out of $3.6 Trillion. Somehow this bonehead Edwards, calls the cuts a "Republicans failure," and said they are "taking a sledge hammer" to the nation’s domestic violence shelters and programs. "The harm is real," Edwards screeched. Someone possessing a little commonsense, and some brains, really needs to sit down with this moron and explain to her that what has brought us to this particular spot is the failure of her party to make the spending cuts that everybody knows need to be made!

But in doing what corrupt Democrats always do, the esteemed Ms. Edwards does nothing more than to pull bogus numbers out of what is essentially thin air and then expect us to take them as fact. Because according to this goof, "230,000 victims will be calling crisis hotlines and those calls will go unanswered. 230,000 calls to crisis hotlines around the country." She went on to say, "So can you imagine that in the middle of the night a woman is being battered, she has her two children, she wants to get to safety, she places a phone call to a hotline and that line goes unanswered." This would be funny if it wasn't so absurd. The only thing she accomplishes by such idiotic rhetoric is to make herself look like even more of a dope than she actually may be.

But, I guess, determined to make her point, she went on to say, "That’s what sequestration means to victims of domestic violence." Droning on she said, "So I think that this is shameful, we all do." Adding, "We also know that it can be stopped. And so here we are on a Thursday, set to go home for the weekend—first of all in America, working America doesn’t go home for the weekend on a Thursday. There’s time for us to stop this. The Republicans hold the gavel." I swear, have you ever heard anything more incoherent that the ranting of this obviously deranged kook? Ya know, if this loon is the absolute best that the folks of her district could come up with to represent them, they must be a pretty squirrelly bunch of people. Cause this bitch is flat out stupid!

And as she continued in her effort to put the entire weight of our budgetary mess upon the Republicans, she went on, "The Republicans have the ability to stop sequestration and the devastation to millions of women and children who are victims of domestic violence across this country." And on, "And it is really very shameful that they are going to go home this weekend without doing that." And on, "And so for the women who are forced to stay in their homes with their abuser because there’s no place to go, because shelters have been cut, because hotlines go unanswered, that is on the hands of the GOP here in the House of Representatives." I gotta tell you, whatever facility it is that Ms. Edwards escaped from most certainly has a rubber room laying empty.

Choosing to ignore completely the fact that taxes were already raised, and with no spending cuts made, Edwards went on to say that the solution to the sequester is to balance the "spending cuts with revenue." Edwards said $20 million in cuts will be made from programs funded by the Violence Against Women Act, as a result of the sequester. According to the Justice Department, however, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) operated on a budget of $412.5 million during fiscal year 2012, and has requested the same amount of funding for this fiscal year. The sequester would amount to a 4.5 percent cut to OVW. I'll tell you what has me pissed, it’s the fact that OVW has the outrageous budget of over $400 Million. That's absolutely insane!!!

I can't help but wonder where this crazy bitch was back when Barry first came up with the his sequester idea, and so many of her Democrat 'colleagues' thought it was such a shit hot idea. I don't recall hearing her saying anything then about how it might be a bad idea. Although I must admit I don't spend very much time trying to keep up with whatever it is that every mentally challenged member of Congress might be complaining about at any given time. But I do find it extremely hard to believe that somewhere in a massive $3.6 Trillion budget that there isn't AT LEAST, $44 Billion in waste. So when folks like Ms. Edwards here go off the deep end, as she has so hysterically done, they only succeed in further reducing what little credibility they may still possess.