DEBBIE ACCUSES GOP OF ROOTING FOR ECONOMIC FAILURE…

Demonstrating once again that she has all of the intelligence of your basic ice cube, that renowned mouth from the south, Democratic National Committee chair Rep. Debbie Wizzerman Schultz on Sunday came out and accused Republicans of actually “rooting for economic failure.” So, apparently, at least according to Ms. Schultz, those on our side are no longer permitted the luxury of offering any sort of a critique regarding Barry’s handling, or his lack of handling, of our economy without now being accused by nuts like Ms. Wizzerman Schultz of rooting for “economic failure”. Her idiotic remarks came on the heels of a weak jobs report which made the claim that supposedly 120,000 net jobs were created last month, down from more than 200,000 in each of the three previous months.

“What’s really bothersome to me Candy is that it almost seems like my Republican colleagues in Congress and Mitt Romney are rooting for economic failure,” Wasserman Schultz said, singling out GOP presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.” She added, “I mean, they’ve been hyper-focused on one job, Barack Obama’s, for really the last two years.” Instead, everyone needs to focus on moving the economy forward for “the middle class and for working families,” she said. “Mitt Romney’s plans, the Republican budget take they just put out in the House, they’re focused on making sure millionaires and billionaires can continue to do even better, and that’s a pretty huge contrast,” Wizzerman Schultz said.

So is this to be the new tack as we head closer to this year’s election, those who possess the nerve take exception to Barry’s socialistic policies and the damage they have wrought are to be portrayed as either being racist or as rooting for failure? You see, this is how the Democrats always try to intimidate their opponents in order to prevent them from exposing what it is that they, the Democrats, are up to. In this specific instance I think most of us have already come to recognize what the Democrats are attempting to do here. And that is to spend us into oblivion. So I think that there is reason for hope in that the more imbeciles like Wizzerman Schultz make these pathetic claims, the more they will fall on deaf ears. Because I think that those outside of such groups as the black community and the Occupy Wall Street crowd are slowly waking up and are now seeing this drivel for what it is.

COSBY TAKES THE EASY WAY OUT…

I used to have a great deal of respect for Mr. Bill Cosby. I thought he was the funniest guy on the planet. But with age, it seems, has come the need by Mr. Cosby to morph into just one more high profile black who seems to put race above all else. He’s one more black who sees as being Barry’s most important qualification for his being president, his race. It seems to matter very little to Mr. Cosby that Barry is quite literally destroying this country, what seems to be the most important thing is that Barry is black, and that he’s the president. All else is completely irrelevant.

During an exclusive interview this past Friday regarding the Trayvon Martin case, two words, “The Gun”, repeatedly flowed from the mouth of this former comedian now self-professed social commentator as he discussed what has been called by some the most high-profile, citizen-on-citizen U.S. slaying said to be facing the Barry “Almighty” administration. Trayvon was killed Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla., by neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman, who told police that it was a confrontation with the unarmed 17-year-old led him to shoot in self-defense.

With us still not knowing all of the facts, Cosby chose to take the easy way out, saying “the gun” empowered Mr. Zimmerman, whose actions have since been seized upon by the likes of Al Sharpton to create a firestorm of debate and protests and even brought some idiotic remarks from Barry. We’ve got to get “the gun” out of the hands of people who are supposed to be on neighborhood watch, said Mr. Cosby, whose remarks were the first he has made publicly about the case. I disagree with Mr. Cosby’s idiotic suggestion. And for Cosby to suggest that without a gun, Mr. Zimmerman would not have approached Trayvon by himself is nothing but conjecture in his part.

Cosby’s rationale is that the power-of-the-gun mentality had him unafraid to confront someone. And in a complete distortion of what occurred here, Cosby said when you carry a gun, you mean to harm somebody, kill somebody. Sorry, but I just don’t think that is anywhere near to being an accurate statement. I know several people who have a license to carry a concealed weapon, and not one carries a gun because he wants to, in Mr. Cosby’s words, “harm somebody” or God forbid, “kill somebody”. I think that it’s really a stupid statement for him to make and for him to say something like that exposes his willingness to ignore the real problem here while using Zimmerman as a scapegoat.

“HOPE AND CHANGE”, THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING…

I’m sure that when all of those infatuated, mind-numbed, naive morons all voted for Mr. “Hope and Change” back in 2008 they were all pretty proud of themselves. And I’m just as sure they we’re all patting themselves on the back the day of his coronation. But I’m curious, other than those in the black community, the state controlled media, those Occupy Wall Street simpletons and the many flakes in Hollywood, how many are there today that still honestly think electing this guy was really a good idea. I’m mean deep down inside.

Because I’ll tell ya something, since this Chicago thug came into office, the number of working Americans earning so little that they actually live in poverty actually reached 7.2 percent of the labor force in 2010, the highest level in at least two decades. And that’s not me saying it, it’s the U.S government saying it, just last Friday. The Bureau of Labor Statistics counted 7.6 percent of “women” among the working poor, compared to 6.7 percent of men. In 2009, the working poor rate was 7 percent.
  
Education, as always, made a huge difference. Among workers who had not graduated from high school, 21.4 percent lived below the official poverty line against only 2.1 percent of those with a university degree. The highest rate was amongst the unemployed looking for work during the year at 35.1 percent. The official poverty line in 2010 was an annual income of $10,830 for a single person and $22,050 for a family of four. Also today we have more people on food stamps and on some form of government assistance than ever before.
  
Overall, the United States had 46.2 million people living in poverty that year, or 15.1 percent of the population of all ages. The working poor totaled 10.5 million.  The Bureau of Labor Statistics conducted a special survey in 2011 which it is used to calculate the figures, based on those who were in the labor force for at least 27 weeks either working or looking for work. The rate for working poor was 5.5 percent in 1987, the furthest back that the BLS included in its report, and in 1999 it fell below 5 percent.

Now I’m quite confident that Barry already has a ready-made excuse for these numbers and I’m even more confident that it will somehow be related to George W. Bush, because this gutless wonder is totally incapable of accepting responsibility for absolutely anything. And still many Americans seem to remain so enthralled with this character who possesses no character. Now he thinks he can sweet talk and/or con women into voting for him, and who knows maybe he can. But if they do, they’ll be doing themselves, and the country, no favors.

THE STUPIDITY OF MAXINE WATERS IN HER OWN WORDS...

FULL FRONTAL ASSAULT ON SUPREME COURT LOOMS JUST OVER THE HORIZON...

With Barry having now exhibited the rather un-presidential behavior of taking yet another swipe at the Supreme Court, I think it quite reasonable to assume that our "Dear Beloved Leader," may now be in the beginning stages of laying the requisite groundwork that will enable him to carry out a full frontal assault against those labeled “conservative” members of the Supreme Court, should he choose to make them a campaign issue this fall. This emerging strategy appears to be one of attempting to paint those members of the court as being "extreme" which was touched on by some after a recent dustup resulting from Barry's assertion that overturning his health care law would be an "unprecedented" move by the Court. While the White House has now seemed to backtrack just a bit, stating that Barry was making a political case, not a legal one, Barry apparently remains ready to keep all options on the table including, as a central part of his campaign, attacking the high court's five-member majority if it does strike down or cut the heart out of his signature policy initiative. His will be a no holds barred campaign and one that will be hard for most of us to stomach.

The court also is likely to consider several other issues before the November election that, depending on the rulings, could be used by Barry in his efforts to stir the various groups that, together, make up the core of his entitlement addicted supporters and draw crucial independent voters as well. Among those are immigration, voting rights and a revisit of a campaign finance ruling that Barry has already criticized as being an outrage. "We haven't seen the end of this," said longtime Supreme Court practitioner Tom Goldstein, who teaches at Stanford and Harvard universities. "The administration seems to be positioning itself to be able to run against the Supreme Court if it needs to or wants to." And what should be so surprising about that? It should be painfully obvious that Barry has no record on which he can run, at least one that would endear him to a majority of rational thinking Americans. So the only thing he has left is the typical Democrat tactics of character assassination, slander and all manner of name-calling. And no one, not even members of the Supreme Court will find themselves being immune.

So in a move that I'm not sure was designed to convince himself or his many devoted followers, Barry decided to go out on a limb and predict victory in the health care case now before the court, going so far as to define any other decision as being "unprecedented." But I think it was also an effort by Barry to put himself in the position of being able to clame overreach by Republican-appointed justices if the law is rejected. At least that seems to the opinion of Mr. Goldstein, who actually wrote a brief supporting this bogus law's constitutionality. This can be dangerous ground, as Barry recently discovered. Since Democrat icon Franklin Delano Roosevelt, few presidents have directly assailed the Supreme Court. In Barry's case, he issued an indirect challenge, but the former constitutional law “professor” tripped over the details. Barry told a news conference on Monday that he was "confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." For Barry to make such a statement is to ignore completely the facts as they went down.

As anyone who is the least bit familiar with how our government is designed to operate knows, it is well understood that the Supreme Court has overturned numerous laws passed by Congress for being unconstitutional. That's its job. So Barry later attempted to "clarify" his comments regarding how, if Obamacare was overturned, it would in fact be setting some sort of precedent. He stated that he was referring to a narrow class of constitutional law, but even then Republicans and some court scholars took issue. What's not in question is the fact that this law was not passed by a strong, over whelming majority, but by the slimmest of margins, with the count being 219 to 212 in the House. And that came after much arm twisting, lying and all manner of legislative trickery. And still there remains a significant number, over two thirds, of Americans who are very much against it and want it repealed. But that feat may prove to be much easier said than done. Because Democrats have long sought this form of control over the populace, essentially ever since the days of FDR if not before. Now that they have it they won't be giving it up without a fight.

Barry also took the opportunity to cite Supreme Court case law supporting the premise that laws passed by Congress are "presumptively constitutional." While that may be safe to assume under normal conditions, to assume so when Congress is under complete control of the Democrat Party is a very high risk proposition because there is no fiscal restraint. Hence we have the rationale behind the Supreme Court hearing a rare three days of argument on the 2010 health care overhaul last week, with those who make up what is normally described as being the court's "conservative majority" appearing very skeptical of the key provision, a requirement for individual health insurance. A decision is expected by July and I am quite sure that both the frequency as well as the intensity of the rhetoric will continue to increase until then. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell weighed in saying, "The president did something that as far as I know is completely unprecedented. He not only tried to publicly pressure the court into deciding a pending case in the way he wants it decided; he also questioned its very authority under the Constitution."

The constitutional issue aside, Barry has made it quite clear that the thrust of his argument remains very much political. He ticked off "popular" elements of the law that are already in force, and has said the consequences of losing those protections would have grave consequences for young people and the elderly, in particular. And we all know how questioned that an "unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law." After which his spokesman spent the next two days explaining and defending both statements on both legal and political grounds. As a former law professor, "the president understands judicial precedent. He has a little experience with it, and the importance of judicial review," White House press secretary Jay Carney said Thursday. That dolt Carney just loves to refer to Barry as having been a "professor", but as near as I can figure he never actually attained that designation. And according to FactCheck.org, Barry's formal title was "senior lecturer" but the University of Chicago Law School says he "served as a professor" and was "regarded as" a professor. WHAT?

A fella by the name of Lucas Powe, who I might add is an actual professor at University of Texas Law School and not someone merely "regarded as" a professor, or "serving as" a professor, and who is also a Supreme Court scholar, said Barry's original statement suggests he probably knows the law is in trouble and is seeking political high ground. "My instinct is that he was laying predicate for a campaign statement," Powe said. "People said he was threatening the court. You can't threaten the Supreme Court." Barry rarely if ever seeks out the political high ground, preferring instead to operator out of the gutter. That said, I'm sure we're all aware that this wasn't the first time Barry chose to criticize the court. He blasted the court's then-fresh campaign finance ruling in his 2010 State of the Union address. It was then that Barry lied, saying, "The Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections." That earned an on-the-spot rebuttal from conservative Justice Samuel Alito. Alito, sitting in the front row, was seen to mouth, "Not true."

I think we have seen enough of Barry to now be able to fully recognize that there is absolutely nothing that he will not stoop to in his effort to get reelected. Everything and everyone is to be considered as being fair game. And if necessary, he will literally destroy this country to meet that end. And if he does get re-elected all of what we have been witness to over the course of the last three years may be proven out to be only the tip of a very substantial iceberg. Because can you possibly imagine a Barry "Almighty," who won't have to worry about another election, and can therefore operate completely off the chain. This country would never recover. So from this point on, Supreme Court Justices included, anyone who dares to oppose Barry will be painted as being nothing more than the most extreme of extremists. We've now gotten to the point where nothing Barry says is something that can be believed. Whenever listening to Barry your first assumption must always be that he's lying to you. To do otherwise is to likely run the risk of being taken advantage of or inadvertently allowing yourself to be manipulated into becoming an unknowing accomplice in the destruction of your own country.

OBAMA THROWS EVERYTHING BUT THE KITCHEN AT PAUL RYAN'S BUDGET...

Really?  And yet his budget proposal receives not one Democrat vote.

SO, HOW FAR IN THE TANK IS THE MEDIA FOR OBAMA? JUST WATCH...

JAY TRIES TO EXPLAIN OBAMA'S REMARKS ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT...

According to one of the more stellar White House spokes-persons to come along in quite some time, Jay "I'm a freakin Moron" Carney, those of us who chose to interpret Barry "Almighty's" recent comments directed at the Supreme Court as being rather controversial, were, quite simply, mistaken. Because what Barry said was actually "the reverse of intimidation." Gee, how silly of us. Of course, they were just harmless comments expressed by a well intentioned president. At least that's what this dim bulb told reporters on Wednesday. Barry was "simply making an observation about precedent and the fact that he expects the court to adhere to that precedent," Carney said. Is that not some of the lamest BS you've ever heard? I mean, really, just how stupid are we, the American people, perceived to be by this group of freakin psychopaths? Here we have a president, who has once again seen fit, and who apparently thinks it's perfectly acceptable behavior, to malign the Supreme Court.

Our old buddy Jay went on to say, "What the president said both yesterday (Tuesday) and the day before -- well, what he did was make an unremarkable observation about 80 years of Supreme Court history -- the fact that since the Lochner era of the Court, since the 1930s, the Supreme Court has, without exception, deferred to Congress when it comes to Congress’s authority to pass legislation, to regulate matters of national economic importance such as health care." Adding, "That is an observation and not a particularly remarkable one. It is a statement of fact. And he also expressed his faith that the Supreme Court would keep to that 85-year history of judicial precedent, and uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act." Well there's just one thing wrong with that little theory. And that is, there is nothing about the so-called Affordable Care Act, least of all the individual mandate, that can be considered as being even remotely constitutional.


I'm sure most of us, at least those of us who have been paying attention, wondered how the topic even came up as it did on Monday when Barry proceeded to express confidence "that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." Shortly thereafter there was mention made that there might have been a leak from one of Barry's recently appointed justices that provided to him news that maybe wasn't so good. Hence his hurrying to fire a shot over the bow of the Court courtesy of his comment reminding "conservative commentators that for years, what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. For an unelected group of people to somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law is a good example of that, and I’m pretty sure this court will recognize that and not take that step.” The absolute arrogance of this guy.


Barry's comments coming as the did, from a former constitutional law instructor, although Barry has been described as being professor it is my understanding that he never actually attained that designation, amazed many people, some of whom accused Barry of trying to intimidate the justices ahead of their ruling on Barry's signature legislation. Others flatly rejected the notion that the Supreme Court would be doing something considered as being "unprecedented" or "extraordinary" in overturning a law that was only marginally passed by Congress and that is so obviously unconstitutional. The court's authority to conduct "judicial review" was established in 1803 in the case Marbury v. Madison. One reporter, from Fox News, pointed out Barry's reference to a law "passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," and how that characterization was a bit of a stretch reminding Carney that the health care law passed the House by a mere five votes, 219-212 with not a single Republican voting for it.


I would tend to agree with Rush Limbaugh when he says that Barry knew full well what he was saying and how he meant his words to be taken. Limbaugh believes Barry is doing nothing more than to try to prepare his supporters, the "stupid" ones, for the possibility that the Supreme Court will take their health care away, and if it does so, the court somehow will be breaking precedent and engaging in judicial activism. "Let's be perfectly clear," Limbaugh said on Wednesday's show, "He (Obama) knows what he's doing. He knows he was lying. He knows about judicial review. He knows that the Supreme Court has thrown out many laws. He knows all this. People that have never gone to law school know this. It's absurd, folks, to think that he doesn't know this. His audience, for those comments that he's made the last two days on Obamacare and the Supreme Court, is the ignorant population of America who he wants to believe that the court is going to do something it's never done before." Here! Here!


Also this past Wednesday, Jay "The Moron" Carney explained that Barry "did not suggest -- did not mean and did not suggest -- that...it would be unprecedented for the Court to rule that a law was unconstitutional. That's what the Supreme Court is there to do." Jay added, "But it has, under the Commerce Clause, deferred to Congress's authority in matters of national economic importance." Carney said it is clear that Barry was talking about cases dealing with the Commerce Clause that "involve Congress passing legislation to deal with issues of national economic importance -- national economic matters like health insurance, which is clearly a national economic issue. That's what he was referring to." Oh really? Clear to whom exactly? Because what Barry said certainly wasn't all that clear to most of us who were actually listening. But I gotta give old Jay an 'A' for creativity, that was some pretty good spin even though it was nothing but pure bullsh!t, and everybody knows it, especially Jay.


Carney said Barry clarified his Supreme Court comments on Tuesday "only because a handful of people didn't seem to understand what he was referring to: "Of course, he was referring to the fact that it would be unprecedented in the modern era of the Supreme Court, since the New Deal era, for the Supreme Court to overturn legislation passed by Congress designed to regulate and deal with a national economic -- a matter of national economic importance like our health care system." Of course! Jay went on, "That is a fact. Since the Lochner era, which ended when the Court began to defer to Congress on New Deal legislation, the Supreme Court has not done that, has not broken the precedent set there. And that's a number of years now. That's what would be unprecedented about it." Is anyone really buying this line of bullsh!t? Granted, the parasites among us, those who make up one of the primary Democrat constituencies, will eat this stuff up, if for no other reason than they are terminally ignorant.


So Jay describes Barry's remarks as being nothing more than a harmless and rather unremarkable observation. And he says that those of us seeing it as an attempt to intimidate or to threaten the Court are simply mistaken, either because of our own political opposition to this president or our dislike of him. So once again it's all about us. I'm surprised Jay didn't simply come out and accuse us all of being racist. But knowing as we do how Barry's remarks are always very well scripted, how could we come to any other conclusion? Because in this particular instance, just like every other, he knew exactly what he was saying, and exactly how he intended his words to be taken. All this other superfluous crap is just that, crap. Crap meant to be diversionary tactic and nothing more. And I think it very safe to say that between now and when the decision is finally made public we can expect a lot more of this caliber of rhetoric. Because this is Chicago thug style of politics that Barry practices. He sees himself as being above how it is that our Constitutional Republic is designed to work.

MORE FROM THE UN-FUNNY JON LEIBOWITZ...

After reading a tweet from Palin she was “going rogue” and “infiltrating some turf,” Stewart unloaded:

“I think it means you’re cynically exploiting a manufactured notion of yourself as a crusader against a monolithic exclusionary activist liberal media, whilst actually enjoying a mutually beneficial, symbiotic relationship with them — only to the detriment to the rest of the country.”
“It’s the Today Show!” he added. “Do you really believe co-hosting the Today Show is is entering the lion’s den, armed only with some Jesus fish earrings and an Iwo Jima sized flag pin?”


But he wasn’t done there: Governor Palin acts like she needed to protect herself from the lamestream liberals like garlic to a vampire when the truth is, you’re at the Today Show! You’re there to talk about party planning with Tori Spelling! To pretend that you remember who Wilson Phillips is, or to hang out for some light-hearted couch banter with Matt and Ann and Al — instead of acting like you’re sitting with which Che and Lenin and Saul Alinsky. You’re pretending this whole appearance is some uncommonly ballsy way of sticking it to the lamestream media. It’s just another place for you to tout your brand of homespun nonsense unchallenged!

WELCOME TO OBAMA'S WORLD...WHERE NOTHING CAN GO WRONG, GO WRONG, GO WRONG...

BIDEN SAYS, ENERGY-WISE, WE'RE IN GREAT SHAPE...

THE NEVER-ENDING LIES OF BARACK OBAMA…

Ok folks, Barry appears to be getting more and more desperate and seems to be losing touch with reality in his efforts at distract attention away from his lack of having any record on which to run. Either that or he has now decided to embark on a campaign based on nothing more than some of the most outrageous lies imaginable. The most recent of these came while speaking to the American Society of Newspaper Editors at a luncheon in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. It was then that Barack Hussein Obama went so far as to actually accuse the Republican-controlled House of Representatives of attempting “to impose a radical vision on our country” through the budget proposal it passed last week. For him to actually make such an accusation was really quite remarkable, especially when it is so obvious that the only one taking great pains to do just that is…Barack Hussein Obama. In his delivering this “speech” Barry attempts to perpetuate the campaign theme of late with it being pretty much in line with a “speech” he delivered at a campaign event in Vermont on Friday. It was there that he argued that “you’re-on-your-own economics” has not worked in the United States, called for more redistribution of wealth, and declared: “I am my brother’s keeper.” Despite his idiotic claim, the "you're-on-your-own economics" to which he referred has worked far better than anything that has been tried.

In this last phrase, Barry was apparently alluding to the book of Genesis, and spinning to fit his own definition, in which Cain, after killing his brother Abel, tells God: "Am I my brother's keeper?" Barry told the newspaper editors, “This congressional Republican budget is something different altogether.” Adding, “It is a Trojan Horse. Disguised as deficit reduction plans, it is really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country. “It is thinly veiled social Darwinism,” Barry lied. “It is antithetical to our entire history as a land of opportunity and upward mobility for everybody who’s willing to work for it; a place where prosperity doesn’t trickle down from the top, but grows outward from the heart of the middle class. And by gutting the very things we need to grow an economy that’s built to last--education and training, research and development, our infrastructure -- it is a prescription for decline.” Can anyone look back over the last three years and not come to the conclusion that what has occurred during that time has not been an attempt to impose on this country a very radical agenda? Is there a better definition for "social Darwinism" than what Barry has repeatedly shoved down our throats since assuming office? As well, if there is anything that can rightfully be described as being a prescription for decline, it's the Barry presidency in its entirety. Because were it not for the polices Barry has put into effect we'd now be in a much better place, both economically and financially.


The budget the Republican House passed just last Thursday, at least according to Congressional Quarterly Today, would spend $5 trillion less over the next 10 years than Barry "Almighty" proposed and flattens income taxes to just two rates, 10 percent and 25 percent. Amazingly, Barry, in his little theatrical address to the newspaper editors gathered, proceeded to issue a blistering attack on the entire notion that excessive government regulation and taxation are what is actually hindering job growth in the United States. “They keep telling us that if we’d just strip away more regulations, and let businesses pollute more and treat workers and consumers with impunity, that somehow we’d all be better off,” lied Obama. “We’re told that when the wealthy become even wealthier, and corporations are allowed to maximize their profits by whatever means necessary, it’s good for America, and that their success will automatically translate into more jobs and prosperity for everybody else. That’s the theory.” This class warfare stuff is all he's got, and he's out there giving it his all. It's the standard nonsense we always hear from Democrats when they have nothing else. Their ability to achieve electoral victory rests entirely on how successful they are in deceiving the American people. And Barry is quite pathological in his efforts to assign the crimes of the Democrat Party to the GOP.


Barry has repeatedly attempted to paint a picture of America where it is the Republicans in government who have repeatedly failed to 'use' government to stop “insurance companies or credit card companies or mortgage lenders” from taking “advantage” of American citizens, while recklessly handing out tax cuts to the “wealthiest.” “So we tried this theory out,” lied Barry. “And you would think that after the results of this experiment in trickle-down economics, after the results were made painfully clear, that the proponents of this theory might show some humility, might moderate their views a bit. You'd think they’d say, you know what, maybe some rules and regulations are necessary to protect the economy and prevent people from being taken advantage of by insurance companies or credit card companies or mortgage lenders. Maybe, just maybe, at a time of growing debt and widening inequality, we should hold off on giving the wealthiest Americans another round of big tax cuts.” Look, lets not forget who it was that literally forced those evil mortgage lenders into making loans to people who had absolutely no hope of ever being able to pay them back. It was the Democrats in Congress together with two Democrat presidents, Carter and Clinton, courtesy of a little something called the "Community Re-Investment Act (CRA).


“But that’s exactly the opposite of what they’ve done,” Barry lied yet again. “Instead of moderating their views even slightly, the Republicans running Congress right now have doubled down, and proposed a budget so far to the right it makes the Contract with America look like the New Deal. Ya know, I find quite appalling that Barry could actually stand there, and with a straight face accuse the Republicans of doubling down and of not being willing to moderate their views. It's really pretty amazing. When, over the course of the last three years, has our socialist zealot of a president EVER chose to moderate his views as he has gone about his stated mission of "fundamentally transforming" our country? Can anyone provide to me just one instance where he has shown any desire whatsoever to compromise without resorting to name calling. He's not a leader, he's a bully and a thug! And worse than that, he's a liar. Every single action that he has taken or policy that he has put into place since he first came into office has done nothing but to makes matter very much worse. Whether your talking about our employment situation, our economic situation, our financial situation or our energy situation, all are in very much worse condition because of Barry and the Democrats, not the Republicans. That is his record. Hence his resorting to his current tactics.


And it was also in this very same “speech” where we heard Barry accused the House Republicans of being extremist that he also went on to accuse journalists of being, what he called, "too balanced" at least when it comes to their reporting on his conflict with Republicans over the federal budget. Too balanced? I'm curious, just who the Hell is it that he's he been watching or reading? I'm pretty sure it isn't Fox News. Saying, “I guess another way of thinking about this--and this bears on your reporting--I think that there is often times the impulse to suggest that if the two parties are disagreeing that they are equally at fault and the truth lies somewhere in the middle, equivalence is presented, which reinforces people’s cynicism about Washington in general,” Barry said. “This is not a situation where there is equivalence.” Adding, “I’ve got some of the most liberal Democrats in Congress were prepared to make some of the most significant changes in entitlements that go against their political interest and who said they were willing to do it,” Barry lied. “We couldn’t get a Republican to stand up and say we’ll raise some revenue or even to say we won’t give more tax cuts to people who don’t need them.” So I guess he's now asking these folks to assist him a bit more aggressively in his efforts to convince the American people that it is the Democrats who are willing to compromise and the Republicans who remain stubbornly intransigent, even though it's the complete opposite that's true.


“So, as all of you are doing your reporting, I think it’s important to remember, the positions I’m taking now on the budget and a host of other issues, if we’d been having this discussion 20 years ago, or even 15 years ago, would have been considered squarely centrist positions,” Barry told the editors. Centrist? And again in his attempt to place all of the blame squarely on the GOP, Barry claimed that, “What’s changed is the center of the Republican Party. That’s certainly true with the budget.” Is this not some of the incredible drivel you've ever heard? Then why is it that a version of Barry's $3.6 Trillion budget, when voted on in the House last month, didn't receive a single DEMOCRAT vote and therefore died a very deserving death, 0-414. Barry seems to be living in a world that's very far removed from any semblance of reality. And it would seem that the level of blatant dishonesty possessed by this man, our president, knows no bounds. He will say whatever it is that he feels he needs to in order to justify his subversive activities. He will lie, mislead and distort to the extent he deems as being necessary in his effort to paint the opposition as being the primary cause for this country being in the shape that it is. And unfortunately, there remains in this country a significant portion of our population who is either too stupid or too lazy to recognize the fact that they are being lied to again and again and again.

MORE ELECTION YEAR BULLSH!T FROM OBAMA...

In what has become pretty much standard election-year fare for Barry "Almighty", you know, where he expresses just how concerned he is about us struggling middle-class voters, Barry "Almighty" has set about denouncing a House Republican budget plan describing it as being nothing more than, what he calls, a "Trojan horse." He warns us all that it represents "an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country" that would hurt the pocketbooks of working families. And believe me, if there's anyone that knows a thing or two about foisting on us a radical vision, it's our "Dear Beloved Leader", Barry. It was in a speech to newspaper executives, that Barry sharply criticized the $3.5 trillion budget proposal pushed by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and which passed by near-party-line vote last week and has now been embraced by all of the GOP presidential hopefuls. Naturally the plan has faced fierce resistance from spend-crazy Democrats, who make their usual claims about how it would gut Medicare, slash taxes for the wealthy and lead to deep cuts to crucial programs such as aid to college students and highway and rail projects. Which is a little ironic since the Democrats have already pretty much gutted Medicare in their effort to pay for Obamacare, so that's pretty much an empty claim.

"It's a Trojan horse. Disguised as deficit reduction plan, it's really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country," Barry loudly proclaimed. Adding, "It's nothing but thinly veiled social Darwinism." Social Darwinism? If it is anyone who should be accused of practicing such a thing, it’s Barry himself. Barry's message comes as Republican Mitt Romney looked to solidify his grip on his party's presidential nomination in primary contests in Wisconsin, Maryland and Washington, D.C. The White House has now appeared to be increasing its focus on Gov. Romney, with Barry's campaign now actually criticizing the former Massachusetts governor by name in an energy ad as the president's team seeks to frame the election as a referendum on the economic security of middle-class voters. As a middle class voter I don't see Barry offering anything that would suggest that I'm to be on the receiving end of any "economic security." Anyway, White House advisers billed this latest speech as being an important marker for Barry as he seeks re-election. Senior administration officials said the address would build upon themes the president delivered in Kansas last fall, in which he called the nation's economic challenges a "make-or-break moment" for the middle class.


Rep. Ryan's proposal aims to slash the deficit and the size of government while offering sharply lower tax rates in return for eliminating many popular tax breaks. GOP front-runner Mitt Romney and his Republican rivals have said they would support Ryan's budget plan, which has little chance of passing the Democrat controlled Senate, where "Dingy" Harry refuses to even bring it up for a vote, but lays out the GOP's fiscal priorities. Barry "Almighty" has been busy trying to make the case that whoever wins the White House will face an economy still recovering from the "worst economic calamity since the Great Depression" and many Americans will still be looking for jobs and lacking financial security. Well yeah, thanks to Barry and his socialist policies. He actually claims that by next year, "a debt that has grown over the last decade, primarily as a result of two wars, two massive tax cuts and an unprecedented financial crisis, will have to be paid down." That’s pure unmitigated BULLSH!T and he knows!! He argues that Ryan's budget plan would stall the economic recovery. What economic recovery? "By gutting the very things we need to grow an economy that's built to last, education and training, research and development, it's a prescription for decline," he says.


And as is his usual stand on taxes, Barry continues to rant about what he so fondly refers to as economic fairness encapsulated by his so-called "Buffett Rule," arguing that the wealthy shouldn't pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than middle-class taxpayers. Many wealthy taxpayers earn investment income, which is taxed at 15 percent, and Barry has proposed that people earning at least $1 million annually, whether in salary or investments, should pay at least 30 percent of their income in taxes. This is nothing more of the same old Democrat tactic of class warfare. I am not a believer of having anyone pay nearly half of everything they make to the government. It's just wrong. And Barry's plan ignores completely the fact that the money that these people have invested has already had taxes paid on it and now they're being told that they need to pay even more taxes. So where's the incentive to invest? All that will be accomplished by this cockamamie redistribution of wealth scenario, dreamed up by Barry, will be to essentially create the equivalent of a financial domino effect. Because when folks stop investing, money needed to start up new business or to modernize existing ones very quickly dries up with the net result being even more people unemployed.


It's kinda funny, funny strange, not funny ha ha, that the one thing that is never mentioned by our state-controlled media complex is the fact that for the past three years, congressional Democrats have failed to produce a budget of their own. As House Speaker John Boehner said last week, the Republican budget “is a serious effort to deal with the fiscal crisis that we’re facing. We make the real tough decisions that need to be made. And I find it interesting that the people who are criticizing our budget are people who have not done a budget. We’ve been waiting now for over 1,000 days for the United States Senate to act on a budget.” In February, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters, "We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year." Such is the mentality of the Democrats. Without any form of a budget there’s even less restraint on spending and we all know how these sleazy Democrat love to spend the money that we, the middle class work so hard for. Between what I pay in taxes, to fill up my car once a week, on my weekly grocery bill, and after watching my utilities go up by roughly 300 percent over the course of the last few years, I’ve got nothing left. Barry is the one I hold responsible for my essentially now having pretty much zero disposable income. None!!!

"BJ" CLINTON…THAT POLITICAL SAGE, OPINES ON 2012 ELECTION AND THE GOP...

In a recent interview with ABC our old friend "BJ" Clinton, "Slick Willie" to some, offered up what it is that he sees as being his humble opinion as well as a little critique on who it is that he sees as being the eventual GOP nominee, Mitt Romney. His claim is that the likely Republican nominee will face the challenge of wooing voters already wary of what "BJ" referred to as being Romney's flip-flopping on issues. Now ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. Speaking of black, I've lost count of the number of instances where our "Dear Beloved Leader," Barry has "flipped-flopped" and yet "BJ" seems to be of the opinion that that is of very little consequence. I mean, when you count up the number of times that Barry has out and out lied to the American people, it would seem to far out weigh anything that can be said about Romney. Barry seems pathological regarding his need to lie.

In speaking about Romney, old "BJ" said, “He started this campaign in the aftermath of that tea party victory in 2010, when all the people on the far right of the Republican Party actually believed a majority of the voters had embraced the specific things they were saying." Going on to say, "So it created a horrible dilemma for Romney. And the poor man got in trouble for the Etch A Sketch remark. That’s like the saying, ‘There is nothing more damaging in politics than telling the truth.’ I mean, the truth is, that’s what he’s got to do.’” Don’t you think "BJ" talking about telling the truth is more than just a little ironic. I still remember him looking me in the eye while wagging a boney finger and lying to me. And while our state-controlled media was only too happy to blow out of proportion the Etch A Sketch remark, they bend over backwards in their effort to make sure Barry's lies go unreported.


Old "BJ" said it's his firm belief that Romney must “convince the swing voters that he’ll be moderate enough and open enough and inclusive enough to be an effective president, and hope that the Republican base voters say, ‘Well, okay, so he maybe wasn’t as right-wing as he claimed to be in the primary, but he’s still more conservative than President Obama. I guess I’ll vote for him anyway, and I won’t stay home.’ Adding that, “I doubt if he can do it.” I think he underestimates how badly those of us on the right want to rid ourselves of Barry. And really, who on our side really gives a flying f#*k what this letch has to say about anything. Granted there remain many in the Democrat Party who still view this creep as some political sage, but the reality of it that he is nothing more that the proprietor of a Porn Shop/Massage Parlor disguised as a presidential library.


Old "BJ" went on to tell ABC that he actually had an easier time in 1992 than Romney does now, because Clinton faced challenges only about his character, while Romney must answer questions about his flip-flopping on issues. “I named Al Gore. We introduced our economic plan. Then we introduced ourselves to the American people,” "BJ" said. “But we never had to change what we were saying from primary to the general.” The problem Romney faces, old "BJ" added, is that voters “don’t really know what he believes.” And what exactly did we know about Barry leading up to the 2008 election? NOT MUCH! The media was desperate in its effort to hide anything and everything that would have shown just how radical this guy is. It's only been since he was elected that we have come to know just how much of a devoted socialist this guy is. So at this point ANYBODY would be better than Barry.


And again, if you can believe any of the polls, Romney’s prospects in the November election also appear grim based on the results showing that Barry appears to be leading Romney by a margin of 51 percent to 42 percent among registered voters in 12 battleground states. Last month, Barry trailed Romney by two points. And supposed even more ominous for Romney, Barry leads him by what described as a whopping 18 percentage points among women voters in the 12 states, which include Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. And among women under age 50, Obama leads widens further, beating Romney by a 2-to-1 margin, 60 to 30 percent. As I have stated earlier, if all women want to do is to be able to go in search of the perfect f@#K at the expense of all else, then I guess they'll vote for Barry. But that says much more about the women in this country than it does about Romney.


And in closing I'd like to add that I'm really sick of this old pervert who, like Jimmy Carter, has a rather over inflated sense of importance. Together with Carter, these two were the most disastrous presidents since FDR, and "BJ" did more to denigrate the office than anyone in recent memory, other than Barry. "BJ" seems to be operating under the misguided notion that because he successfully dodged impeachment he is now someone whose opinion should be valued. And, for whatever reason, there remains a significant number of Democrats who remain loyal to the Clintons. Personally I just don't get the draw. Because they're both just as far to the left as is Barry, they're just a little more clandestine about it, even devious. But make no mistake about it, these two, together with Barry, are all birds of a feather. They all possess the same deep-seated loathing for this country and for capitalism.

JUST WHAT IS THE TOP PRIOIRTY OF WOMEN?

Apparently, if you can believe some recent polling data, Barry has now opened with what's been described as the first significant lead of the 2012 campaign in the nation's dozen top battleground states. And supposedly that lead has been brought about because of a huge shift of women having now moved over to his side. Again, at least according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. In the fifth Swing States survey taken since last fall, Barry now leads Republican front-runner Mitt Romney 51%-42% among registered voters just a month after the president had trailed him by two percentage points. The biggest change came among those women under 50. In mid-February, just under half of those voters supported Barry. Now more than six in 10 do while Romney's support among them has dropped by 14 points, to 30%. The president leads him 2-1 in this group. Which, I suppose you could say, doesn't paint a very pretty picture regarding where we are, morally, as a country.

Romney's main advantage remains among men 50 and older, swamping Barry in that demographic by a margin of 56%-38%. Republicans' traditional strength among men "won't be good enough if we're losing women by nine points or 10 points," says Sara Taylor Fagen, a Republican strategist and former political adviser to President George W. Bush. "The focus on contraception has not been a good one for us … and Republicans have unfairly taken on water on this issue." In the poll, Romney leads among all men by a single point, but the president leads among women by 18 points. That reflects a greater disparity between the views of men and women than the 12-point gender gap in the 2008 election. Which makes me kinda wonder, just how screwed up must the priorities of our female population really be. It's a little scary that the fate of the country may actually come down to how it is that a bunch of horny women will choose to vote.


Barry campaign manager, some clone by the name of Jim Messina, says Romney's promise to "end Planned Parenthood" — the former Massachusetts governor says he wants to eliminate federal funding for the group — and his endorsement of an amendment that would allow employers to refuse to cover contraception in health care plans have created "severe problems" for him in the general election. "Romney's run to the right may be winning him Tea Party votes," Messina said in an interview, but he says it's demonstrated that "American women can't trust Romney to stand up for them." He adds: "It would be hard for them to win if you have this kind of gender gap." If women are actually stupid enough to think and their health care will somehow be placed in peril because of the demise of Planned Parenthood then they haven't got the requisite brain power to be able to ascertain the truly important issues that we face as a nation.


Romney pollster Neil Newhouse predicts the gender gap will narrow as Romney moves from the pitched battle of the GOP primaries, Wisconsin, Maryland and the District of Columbia vote Tuesday, to a fall election focused on economic issues. "If there's a gender gap, it goes beyond Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum to a partisan gender gap," Newhouse said in an interview. "It's not Romney-specific. I would argue that it's broader than that." While women typically are more likely than men to identify themselves as Democrats, that difference widens to a chasm in the USA TODAY poll. By 41%-24%, women call themselves Democrats; men by 27%-25% say they're Republicans. The survey of 933 registered voters, taken March 20-26, has a margin of error of +/- 4 points. The swing states surveyed are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.


OK, I admit it, I just don't get it. Is the ability to have near endless sex without fear of becoming pregnant really the top priority of the majority of women in America today? Is that what they view as being the single most pressing problem facing this country? If so, my friends then we are officially in, what's commonly referred to as being, a world of shit! I am curious about something though, do any of these women ever intend to have families? And if they do, do they see Barry's vision of America as being the ideal country where they would wish to watch their unaborted children to grow up? Are women so consumed with living for today that they care so very little of what will happen to this country in the very near future if Barry is re-elected. Are they really that shallow? Hey, I'm all for having a good time, but what happens when everything, and I mean everything, comes to a screeching halt? And we're damn close to that becoming a reality.

BIDEN…VERY FIRMLY STUCK ON STUPID…

It was during a recent appearance on that poor imitation of a political/commentary television show, "Face the Nation," that our stellar vice president, "Slow Joe" Biden stated that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is “stuck in a Cold War mentality” when it comes to working with Russia. Biden defended President Barack Obama’s “open microphone” remark to his Russian counterpart, Dmitry Medvedev, last week, and focused on Romney’s reaction. The former Massachusetts governor said last week that Russia was, “without question, our number-one geopolitical foe.” “He acts like he thinks the Cold War’s still on,” Biden said. “I don’t know where he’s been.” I might add here, if it were up to morons like Biden, the "Cold War" to which he refers would either still be going on or it would have been the U.S.S.R. who would have been victorious instead of the U.S. which would have been their preferred outcome.



I'm sure most of us, by now, have all seen how it was that microphones on March 26 recorded Barry "Almighty" asking Medvedev to let Russian President-elect Vladimir Putin know that he needed to “give me space” to deal with objections to the U.S.’s missile-defense plan. “This is my last election, and after my election I have more flexibility,” Barry told his buddy Dmitry. “I understand,” Medvedev replied in English, adding that he would “transmit this information to Vladimir.” In his interview with CBS, taped March 29 and broadcast yesterday April Fools Day, Biden said that Barry “just stated the obvious” and that “it’s going to be difficult” to work with Congress on further reductions of the U.S. nuclear arsenal between now and the November elections. Boy, I sure am glad we had old "Slow Joe" there to interpret for us what Barry meant. For a second there I was worried Barry was throwing us under the bus.


Romney, who has been criticized by his Republican rivals for shifting positions, has accused Barry of having a hidden agenda for his second term, calling the president’s words “alarming and troubling.” “This is no time for our president to be pulling his punches with the American people,” he said at a campaign stop in California. In an March 26 interview with CNN, after Obama’s comment to Medvedev was reported, Romney said that Russia was, “without question, our number-one geopolitical foe.” Biden told CBS that Russia was helping the United States get supplies to troops in Afghanistan and would increase oil supplies to Europe if there was an oil shutdown in the Gulf. “This is not 1956,” Biden said. “It exposes how little the governor knows about foreign policy.” Singling a similar tune to Biden's, last week Medvedev said that Romney’s description of Russia as his country’s enemy “smacks of Hollywood.”


Sounding like someone straight out of the Democrat Party, Medvedev stated to reporters on March 27 at the conclusion of a two-day nuclear security summit in Seoul, that the Republican candidates should “use their brains and check the clock,” refraining from obsolete attitudes. Now it goes without question that the Russians would much rather deal with impotent Democrats than with nearly any Republican who would be much more apt to take a harder line toward enemies of this country, of which Russia is undoubtedly one. No matter whose definition you choose to use, Russia is not to be considered a "friend" of this country. And it is nothing but foolish to consider them as being such. And while there may have been an end to the "Cold War" there has never been an end to the level of hostility directed at this country by what used to be the Soviet Union. And to pretend that there has been, is extremely dangerous.


Personally speaking, when considering who it is that I would want to see as my president, I'm much more comfortable with someone who possesses a much better grasp of the situation and is much more attuned to how it is that the world presently exists. And I appreciate the honesty in presenting a much more accurate assessment regarding the relationship between these two countries. And therefore, I think in that regard, Romney is dead on. I would also prefer to have as my president a man who maintains a certain level of distrust and one who is more than a just little leery of past adversaries. To my way of thinking it is always better to be safe than sorry and the Russians, whether it was during the "Cold War" or today, have never been worthy of any significant level of trust. And to ignore that fact, as does our current White House duo, does not make it any less real. But that is how Democrats operate, they ignore the dangers in hopes that they’ll simply go away.

OBAMA TRIES HIS HAND AT INTIMIDATING THE SUPREME COURT...



Unprecedented?  Really?  Hey Barry, that's their role in our republic, remember?  You're supposed to be some constitutional "expert."  Ya know, this type of blatantly dishonest behavior is beneath contempt and is quite un-presidential.  It's the type of behavior one would normally expect to see coming from someone like Barry's bud, Hugo Chavez.  Let's be honest, what's really "unprecedented" here is the fact that Barry is now trying to "force" people to buy something or face a substantial fine.  And a vast majority of people remain against this entire premise.

"BJ" CLINTON JUMPS ON THE BASH BUSH BANDWAGON...

BIDEN ADVOCATES USING DEATH OF BLACK TEEN TO SQUASH 2ND AMENDMENT...

YOU JUDGE A MAN BY THOSE WHO HE ASSOCIATES WITH...



Radical left-wing activist and friend of Barry “Almighty”, Bill Ayers, apparently stopped by Occupy Union Square in New York City on Friday and shared a little bit of what gets him going each day: Ending capitalism.

“I get up every morning and think, today I’m going to make a difference,” Ayers said in a video clip posted online. “Today I’m going to end capitalism. Today I’m going to make a revolution. I go to bed every night disappointed but I’m back to work tomorrow, and that’s the only way you can do it.”

I think it would be very easy to assume that, after having watching him for the last three years, our “Dear Beloved Leader” is pretty driven by that same desire. After taking every a cursory glimpse that all and transpired since January 20. 2009, how could anyone come to any other conclusion. You know what they say about birds of a feather.