.

.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

OBAMACARE…THE DEBACLE...


Yup, this thing referred to as Obamacare has already been such a resounding success, on just about every level, that Barry "Almighty" has already signed 14 laws that amend, rescind or otherwise change parts of his signature healthcare reform law. Also, he’s apparently felt the need to take no less than five independent steps to delay the so-called Affordable Care Act on his own. That information comes to us courtesy of a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) that was released on Wednesday.

The release of this report comes as many, but rumor has it nowhere near all, congressional Republicans are said to be pushing for a halt or outright repeal of the whole law, as Barry and his allies continue to decry that as being nothing but a waste of time and an effort to undermine Barry's signature political achievement. CRS, in the report to Sen. Tom Coburn, said all sides have already agreed to 14 laws that changed parts of Obamacare, though they were usually minor changes or clarifications.

The ink from Barry’s signature on this disastrous piece of Democrat inspired legislation was barely dry when, just a month later, Congress made the first change, specifying eligibility for veterans who are part of TRICARE. The point was to make sure the law recognized that coverage as meeting the individual mandate. And over the course of the last two years since this debacle was brought into being, Congress regularly tweaked those kinds of eligibility requirements. But it's still no better than it was when it was 'passed'.

But CRS said Barry and Congress also made some bigger changes, including repealing what all sides agreed to be a burdensome income reporting tax on small businesses, repeatedly dipping into provisions of Obamacare to use money for other spending. Those cuts included $6.25 billion from Prevention and Public Health and recapturing some of the money that was expected to be overpaid in subsidies to users of the health exchanges. And has Barry has been prone to do, he has acted on his own, declaring five separate delays this year.

And yet, despite all of the evidence that this thing remains completely unworkable, and will for the forseeable future, we still have Democrats out there who continue to claim that once Americans know more about it, they'll come to love it. That's just not the case. And what's even worse, is that we now have Republicans in Congress, who simply refuse to put forth the necessary effort to bring it to and end. That, even though, it is even less popular today that it was when it was first signed into law by Barry "Almighty."

So with out our being able to get any help from our members of Congress, we will have little hope of avoiding this blatant sabatoging of what was up until now, the best healthcare system in the world. In many respects, under the 'leadership' of Barry "Almighty" America has now been reduced to what is essentiually nothing more than a Third World country. And now, because of Obamacare, we will soon have a healthcare system that is commensurate with our new status. And both parties can be blamed for that being the case.

WHEN IS POVERTY NOT REALLY 'POVERTY'…

WHAT 'REAL' POVERTY LOOKS LIKE
So, what's it really like to be living in 'poverty' here in America? Well, apparently not nearly as bad as you might think, or would actually expect whenever listening to members of the Democrat Party describing it. Because Americans who live in households whose income is below the federal "poverty" level typically have cell phones, as well as landline phones, computers, televisions, video recorders, air conditioning, refrigerators, gas or electric stoves, and washers and dryers and microwaves. At least that's according to a newly released report from the Census Bureau.

In fact, it's 80.9 percent of those households below the poverty level who have cell phones, and a pretty healthy majority, or 58.2 percent, who actually have computers. Fully 96.1 percent of American households in "poverty" also have a television to watch, and 83.2 percent of them have a video-recording device should they be unable to make it home from the welfare office in time to watch their favorite Jerry Springer show and want to be able to record it so that they can watch it later. Also, 97.8 of households own a refrigerator and 96.6 percent own gas or electric stoves.

Also, microwaves seem to be standard equipment in 93.2 in the homes of those Americans in currently living in what's described as "poverty." And more than 83 percent also have air-conditioning. Interestingly enough, the appliances surveyed by the Census Bureau that households in poverty are least likely to own are dish washers (44.9 percent) and food freezers (26.2 percent). However, most Americans in "poverty" do not need to go to a laundromat. According to the Census Bureau, 68.7 percent of households in poverty have a clothes washer and 65.3 percent even have a clothes dryer.

The estimates on the percentage of households in poverty that have these appliances were derived by the Census Bureau from its Survey of Income and Program Participation. The latest report on this survey, released this month, published data collected in 2011. Here are the percentages of households below the poverty level that the Census Bureau estimates had the following appliances:
Clothes washer: 68.7%
Clothes dryer: 65.3%
Dish washer: 44.9%
Refrigerator: 97.8%
Food freezer: 26.2%
Stove: 96.6%
Microwave: 93.2%
Air conditioner: 83.4%
Television: 96.1%
Video recorder/DVD: 83.2%
Computer: 58.2%
Telephone: 54.9%
Cell phone: 80.9%

So, maybe, just maybe, it's not so rough living below that magic poverty line here in the good old U.S. of A. Especially when you start comparing the lives of those here to the lives of those in other countries who really are living in what can only be described as being abject poverty. I don't really have anything that any of those living in supposed poverty don't have. Sure I may have two cars but one them is 16 years old and the other one is 10 years old. When looking at things objectively, it is only a small percentage of the general population in America who actually lives in the kind of poverty experienced in other countries.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

DEMOCRATS MAKE FOR TERRIBLE COMMANDERS IN CHIEF...


It was just twelve years ago today that we were forced to watch as nineteen al Qaeda terrorists hijacked four U.S. commercial airliners and flew them into the World Trade Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania. And if you’re a patriotic American you remember exactly where you were that day, as well as what you were doing at the very moment you saw those planes fly into the twin towers. And in the war that Congress authorized against al Qaeda just three days later, we are witness to another tragedy. That of course, being the fact that the vast majority of the U.S. casualties from that war, have occurred in just the last four and a half years or, in other words, under the horribly misguided leadership of our current Commander-in-Chief, Barry "Almighty".

In fact, according to a database, recently put together, of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan, we now kow that 73 percent of all U.S. Afghan War casualties have occurred since Jan. 20, 2009 when Barry was inaugurated. And the 91 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan thus far in 2013 are more than those that occurred in the first two full calendar years of the war (2002 and 2003) combined, when 30 and 31 U.S. troops were killed there. On Sept. 14, 2001, Congress approved a resolution authorizing the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons."

By October 2001, U.S. forces were engaged in Afghanistan, seeking to remove al Qaeda from the sanctuary that had been made available to it and from which it had been able to launch the Sept. 11, 2001 attack. Since then, most of the leaders and participants in the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been either killed or captured. But the United States not only remains at war in Afghanistan, it continues to suffer significant casualties there. In total, 2,144 U.S. military personnel have given their lives fighting in and around Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom*. And a total of 1,575 of the U.S. military personnel have been killed during the presidency of Barry "Almighty". That means 73 percent of the casualties in the Afghan War have happened on Barry’s watch.

Under President George W. Bush, from 2001 until Jan. 20, 2009, 569 U.S. military personnel were killed in and around Afghanistan fighting in Operation Enduring Freedom*. So far this year, during the twelfth year of the Afghan War, 91 U.S. military personnel have given their lives in Afghanistan. The Department of Defense reported 17 casualties in May and 18 in June--the two deadliest months for U.S. troops in Afghanistan so far this year. Typically, the summer months from June to September are the deadliest for U.S. troops serving in Afghanistan. Among the 91 U.S. casualties reported so far this year, all but 9 have been combat-related. During the now 12-year-long Afghan War, the four deadliest years for U.S. troops were also the four years of Barry’s first term.

Total U.S. Combat Deaths in Afghanistan:
George W. Bush era:

2001: 5
2002: 30
2003: 31
2004: 49
2005: 94
2006: 87
2007: 111
2008: 151

The Barry "Almighty" era:
2009: 303
2010: 497
2011: 494
2012: 294
2013: 91 (From Jan. 1, 2013 to Sept. 10, 2013)

Barry "Almighty" also has had the distinction of presiding over the top five deadliest months of the war, which include: August 2011, when there were 71 deaths; July 2010, when there were 65 deaths; June 2010, when there were 60 deaths; October 2009, when there were 58 deaths; and August 2010, when there were 55 deaths. On Feb. 17, 2009, less than a month after taking office, Barry announced the deployment of 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, fulfilling his campaign promise to shift U.S. military forces to Afghanistan. During a speech to cadets at the United States Military Academy, at West Point, on Dec. 1, 2009, Barry announced an additional increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, stating that "it is in our vital interest" to send those additional troops.

Barry is just the most recent, in a long string of disastrous commanders in chief, with other disasters being "BJ" Clinton and Jimmy "The Moron" Carter. Democrats simply do not possess the skill set, nor the necessary aptitude, for the position. They tend to be rather reckless in throwing our troops into harms way with there, very seldom, ever being a stated mission or clear objective, nor with rules of engagement that minimize the danger that our troops are made to face. And whenever you place someone in charge of our military who has absolutely no concept of what's involved, what you have is nothing more than a recipe for disaster. And you can very plainly see the adverse effect that has on the battlefield. That being the dramatic increase of casualties, after Barry assumed his new role as commander in chief.

*Operation Enduring Freedom’s main battlefield is in Afghanistan but it includes smaller military operations in the Philippines, the Horn of Africa, Caribbean, and Trans Sahara, as well as support operations from aircraft carriers and other U.S. vessels.

GUTLESS REPUBLICANS WILLING TO DO NOTHING TO STOP OBAMACARE...


The Senate Conservatives Fund website shows that 1.2 million people have now signed a pledge to defund the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. But it would seem that a number of our top Republicans have, apparently, refused to sign the pledge. And I’m quite sure that no one will be all that surprised when they hear the names of at least some of those individuals. Because the list includes such notable RINOs as Mitch McConnell, as well as John "The Maverick" McCain and his trusty sidekick, Lindsey "Prissy Boy" Graham. I find it odd that even though no Republicans, in either the Senate or the House, voted to pass Obamacare, they remain so apprehensive about defunding it. WHY?

The senators’ website, which also features a stopwatch counting down the days, hours, minutes, and seconds until the end of the fiscal year and a proposed continuing resolution to keep the government funded, also names all 11 Republican Senators who, at least up to this point, "won't pledge" to sign the petition. And here again, there are no real surprises, because aside from McConnell, McCain, and Graham, the other Republican Senators who "won't pledge" to sign are Richard Shelby, Roy Blunt, Richard Burr, Tom Coburn, Jeff "Amnesty" Flake, Lamar Alexander, Bob Corker and Orin Hatch. All guys who like to refer to themselves as conservatives, but very obviously are not.

There are, however, 13 Republican Senators, dare I say actual conservatives, who have signed the pledge. And they are Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Chuck Grassley, Mike Crapo, Jim Risch, Pat Roberts, David Vitter, Deb Fischer, Jeff Chiesa, Jim Inhofe, John Thune and Mike Enzi. The remaining Republican Senators are listed as not having signed the pledge as opposed to those who have said they will not sign it. The senators in support of defunding Obamacare have said they will vote for a continuing resolution that will fund government operations but not the healthcare law. And that’s the "red line" that MUST be adhered to by many more of our congressional Republicans.

To me, those who refuse to sign this pledge to defund Obamacare, are just as guilty, if not more so, as those who worked so hard to shove this abomination through Congress courtesy of every political trick in the book. And while the Republicans can lay claim to the fact that they had nothing whatsoever to do with forcing this disaster onto the American people, by choosing now to do absolutely nothing to remove this tremendous burden off of the backs of those being forced, literally, to contend with it, makes their inaction far worse than the original act of passing it. And their unwillingness to take any action, makes them deserving of retribution to be delivered to them at the ballot box.

Look, the entire purpose of pushing this thing through Congress in the first place had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with actually ‘fixing’ our supposed "broken" healthcare system. Having the government in complete control of what healthcare is available to the American people has long been a proverbial wet dream of the Democrat Party, going all the way back to the days of FDR. And you would think that preventing such a thing from occurring would be sufficient motivation for the Republicans to do all that they can to kill it. Instead they seem quite content to simply let things ride, attempting to pacify the people with vague promises that really have so substance.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Right now the number one priority of our members of Congress should be to gut, severely limited, or kill completely, this debacle that is Obamacare. We ‘need’ members of Congress who are not afraid and who are willing to do ‘all’ that is necessary to put an end to that which they claim to recognize as being so damaging. And if that requires a government shutdown, which we all know is not really a shutdown, then so be it. I feel that they are only taking the easy way out. Because rather than working on how best to articulate why Obamacare must be scrapped, they choose to do nothing while making it appear, through political trickery, as if they are.

WE 'MUST' NEVER FORGET...




Tuesday, September 10, 2013

JOHN BOEHNER, ABOUT AS USELESS AS THAT MUCH TALKED ABOUT SCREEN DOOR ON A SUBMARINE…


Ok then, I think most of us have finally come to the realization that the only real chance we have of preventing Obamacare from going into full effect is for Congress to pass a continuing resolution that deprives it of money, even though a government shutdown would be the likely result. But that appears to be a step too far for many of our less than stellar Republicans, of which our very useless Speaker of the House, John Boehner, is one. It was on Tuesday that we heard Boehner telling reporters, "Listen, our goal here is not to shut down the government." He went on to say, "Our goal is to cut spending and to stop Obamacare. And I believe that the strategy that was outlined to members this morning accomplishes that." BULLSHIT!

I'm sure many of you have heard the various press reports flying around about the latest Republican 'strategy' that calls for the House to pass a continuing resolution that funds Obamacare, as well as a separate measure that would amend the CR to defund Obamacare. Look, this is nothing but yet another way for Republicans to have their cake and eat it too. It's less of a strategy than it is just another parlor trick, because as we all know, the Democrat-led Senate would never, in a million years, pass the second resolution. Yet such a shenanigan would allow House Republicans to claim, yet again, that they passed a measure to defund Obamacare. How many time does Boehner really expect people to fall for this kind of crap?

Boehner loves to tout the fact that the House has voted 40 times to defund or repeal Obamacare. This current strategy, he said, "is intended not to really satisfy the House -- we've already voted. It's to force the vote and force the fight in the United States Senate. That's where the issue is -- the United States senate. Let's get the issue over there and force them to actually have a vote on getting rid of Obamacare." How absolutely stupid is that? Ya know, it's laughable how Boehner thinks that we are actually stupid enough to believe his idiotic claim that the Republicans have been so determined in their efforts to protect us from the effects of a fully implemented Obamacare. But they have done jack-shit because their a bunch of damn cowards!

In his prepared remarks, before taking questions, Boehner promised, and with a straight face no less, to "do everything we can to protect Americans from this harmful health care law." He said the House will vote Wednesday on legislation that would require an income-verification system to be in place before people can get tax credits to pay for health insurance on the new exchanges. "We know the president’s health care law is driving up costs, it’s making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers," Boehner said. And yet he pussyfoots around it instead of doing all he can to kill it. He does nothing more than provide lip service, while with each passing day that it remains in existence, it becomes all the more difficult to kill.

Boehner went on to say, "Tomorrow we’ll vote on Congresswoman (Diane) Black’s bill that would require a verification for those who would be eligible for a voucher at one of these exchanges. The idea that you can go to one of these exchanges and just promise, ‘This is what I made last year,’ is problematic. Our job is to spend the American people’s tax money wisely, and I believe that this (lack of income verification) will lead to an awful lot of abuse and it really should not occur." Actually, John, what your damn job is, is to do what we tell you to do. And right now that's to get rid of this Democrat created nightmare of Obamacare by any means available, government shutdown or no government shutdown! Got it?

And then Boehner went on to tell what was nothing more than yet another one of his trademark whoppers when he said, "We’re going to continue to do everything we can to protect Americans from this harmful health care law." Adding, "This is not good for the country, it’s not good for the health care system. It will bankrupt us, and ruin the best health care delivery system the world has ever known." And yet he refuses to do all that he can to stop it because he's more worried about his own job than the effect this thing will have on the jobs of millions of Americans. This could be his shining moment, but instead, he has decided to, once again, take the coward's way out and do nothing. But remember John, God hates a coward.

OBAMA…JUST PLAIN PATHETIC...


Well, tonight is Barry's big night. When he goes before the American people to deliver what has been described by many as being one of the most important political addresses of his presidency. His mission tonight will be to convince a war-weary American public into supporting his call for military intervention in Syria. Having drawn that now famous red line in the sand, despite his claim to the opposite, on the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, it will be Barry’s credibility, or what's left of it, and not that of the United States, that is on the line here. But Barry faces what can only be called an uphill struggle in his effort to win over public opinion, and he is almost certainly headed for what can only be seen as a rather significant defeat on Capitol Hill, where opposition seem to be growing hourly. So is he up for the challenge?

In attempting to fully grasp the magnitude of the challenge that lies ahead for our 'Dear Beloved Leader', one really need look no further than a new poll released by Fox News (conducted by both Democratic and Republican pollsters), which shows that Barry’s approval rating has now fallen to 40 percent, or the lowest level of support in his presidency. Barry’s disapproval stands at 54 percent, which is the highest negative rating he has received since first taking office. I think that there can be very little doubt that it's Barry’s handling of the Syria crisis, and to be quite honest his handling of foreign policy in general, with the assistance of Hitlery Clinton and John Kerry-Heinz, that can be said to have played a significant role in driving down his popularity. And also, you can't continually go around apologizing for America and still expect our enemies to fear us. Just ain't gonna happen.

According to the previously mentioned Fox poll, we see that 68 percent of likely voters believe the US "should not be more involved in Syria," with just 26 percent in favor of greater involvement. Only 36 percent agree that "President Obama (has) adequately explained for you the reasons US military action against Syria is necessary," and just 27 percent "believe President Obama has clearly identified what the US goals and objectives would be in taking military action against Syria." 55 percent of those surveyed disagree with the assertion that "the reasons for taking military action in Syria are stronger than they are in Iraq," and 74 percent believe military action against Syria "is more likely to provoke additional violence in the Middle East." Overall, 60 percent of voters disapprove of Obama’s handling of the Syria issue, compared to just 29 percent who back him.

A large percentage of American voters have finally come to the realization that Barry’s style of foreign policy has accomplished little more than to severely weaken America’s standing in the world. And 48 percent agree that the United States is less respected now than it was five years ago when George W. Bush left office. And a mere 14 percent, probably those in the black community, say that America is more respected today. Also, 54 percent of US voters disapprove of Barry’s foreign policy, with just 39 percent expressing their support. Most significantly, Barry scores badly on the leadership front: 48 percent of those polled by Fox think Barry is "a weak and indecisive leader," six percentage points more than those who believe he is "a strong and decisive leader." In addition, 50 percent feel Barry "spends too much time blaming others."

So against the backdrop of plummeting public approval, and surging Congressional opposition, it is hard to see how Barry is going to be able to succeed in getting his Syria debacle turned around. The American people increasingly see him as being the weak leader that he is, one that has actually lowered America’s standing in the world instead of raising it. Frankly, President Bush’s record is looking better by the day, as a flailing Barry "Almighty" struggles to stand tall on the world stage while tripping over his own shoelaces at home. At least, with Barry’s predecessor in the White House, the United States was backed by its allies and feared by its enemies. That, most definitely, cannot be said today. Barry has succeeded in only making himself, and therefore our country, a laughing stock. Which does not bode well for the rest of the world.

WHY WE NEED ‘STAND YOUR GROUND’…


Well apparently we have had another case of where a rampaging negro, this one in Manhattan, pummeled a bus passenger so hard that he actually smashed the bones in the victim's face. The attack occurred after the assailant called the victim a "cracker". This latest incident marks the second time in only two days where people appeared to be randomly targeted in racial tirades against whites. The suspect here was said to be 5-foot-11, 185 pounds, black and believed to be in his late 30s.

Anyway, in this latest incident, the suspect passed a 31-year-old rider on the M60 bus as it was transiting through Harlem, on West 127th Street, between Amsterdam Avenue and Morningside Drive, around 2:45 p.m., Friday, when he shouted the racial slur and punched the victim in the face, breaking his nose and eye socket, cops said. The victim was treated for facial fractures at New York Presbyterian Hospital and released, police said. Too bad he didn't have a gun, but this is New York after all.

The incident occurred as authorities reported that Jeffrey Babbitt, 62, fell into a coma after being punched and knocked to the ground in Union Square Park on Wednesday. He was taken off life support and died Monday, sources said. In that case, a 31-year-old allegedly yelled that he was going to "f— up" the next white person he saw, before clocking Babbitt so hard that witnesses reported hearing his skull crack on the pavement. Somebody is going to need to get a handle on this stuff, and soon! Or else!

These random attacks of violence continues at the same time the race hustlers like Al 'Bull Horn' Sharpton, Jesse 'The Extortionist' Jackson and any number of others, continue to call for significant changes to be made to, or for the outright repeal of, current stand-your-ground laws. Had either one of these two victims been carrying a gun, there's a pretty good chance that there might be one, or even two, very dead blacks. You shouldn't have to be afraid to walk down the street or to ride a city bus.

You know, this is exactly the kind of racial violence that scumbags like Sharpton and Jackson were hoping for. But they need to be careful what they're wishing for. Because what you're likely to see starting to happen, and perhaps sooner rather than later, is for folks to be shooting first and asking questions later. And I’ll tell ya, once armed with my concealed carry permit, if I ever feel threatened when walking down the street, I’ll not be shy about brandishing my trusty 9mm. Sorry, but I'm not about to wait to be attacked.

Monday, September 9, 2013

IF ONLY WE COULD IMPEACH BOEHNER…


Ya, know, I’ve always thought of John Boehner as being much less of a leader than he is a used car salesman. He strikes me as being one those people who rather like to refer to themselves in public as being conservative, but once safely behind closed doors, make it very plainly known that they are really no such thing. But still, I've never really thought of him as being someone who would go so far as to actively coach someone on the other side, especially someone like Barry, on how best to circumvent our Constitution. And in now having apparently done just that, Boehner has now proceeded to take things to a whole new level.

Now I will admit that I have, on occasion, been guilty of giving Boehner the benefit of the doubt. But not anymore! Especially since he has now made it abundantly clear that he has absolutely no interest in doing what we all know needs to be done in order to prevent this president from further shredding our Constitution. And that Boehner can now so casually assist him in that endeavor, to me that's just the straw that broke the camel's back. After losing count of the number of times he has left me feeling as if stabbed in the back, my time of cutting him any amount of slack has officially come to an end. The time has now come for him to go!

And what it is that has got me so pissed? Well it's the fact that, at least according to National Review, Boehner’s staff has taken upon themselves the task of advising the White House on what Barry needs to say in order to win enough Republican votes for him to gain congressional approval for taking military action in Syria. Boehner said last week that he now supports Barry’s call for action, making him one of a relatively few Republicans to say so, at least, publicly. With Barry set to address the nation Tuesday, the speaker’s staff is advising White House chief of staff Denis McDonough on what he needs to say to win GOP support.

So while I really don’t plan on listening to what Barry might have to say on Tuesday, those who do listen might want to take what they hear with not much more than a grain of salt. Because I think it very safe to say that a majority of what you're likely to be hearing, may be nothing more than what he's been told, by Boehner, that he must say if he is to have any hope of enticing enough Republican members of Congress to once again ignore the voices of we the people who stand against taking action. And as it stands right now, it's well over half of the American people who now oppose that which Barry wants to do.

It's been more than just a little difficult in trying to keep up with all of the supposed reasons that have been thrown around in trying to come up with one that most would see as being sufficient justification for that which Barry seems so determined to carry out. And apparently, just today, there was another red line that was issued before being quickly dismissed as being nothing more than crazy rhetoric. We've been told that if we do not act, it will severely damage the credibility of our nation. But I would argue that if we were able to survive Carter and Clinton with our credibility intact, we can survive Barry. It's Barry's credibility that stands to sustain the most damage.

So, I guess the question that remains to be answered is the one that asks do we attack just because Barry stepped in it? And will those whom we've elected to Congress, side with the people, or will they choose to simply ignore us? Will enough on our side allow themselves to be swayed by Barry's, Boehner inspired, words? Or will they stand with we the people? Well if recent history provides us with any sort of an indication, the likely answer to that question may be fairly obvious! And the fact that Boehner has been busy assisting Barry on how best to, once again, pull the wool over our eyes, makes me even less confident that the will of the people will prevail.

Friday, September 6, 2013

OBAMA, A REAL BOON TO THE BLACK COMMUNITY? AH, NOT SO MUCH…


One more bit of evidence, as if we really needed any, that blacks will vote for absolutely anybody if they’re black, and as long as the candidate is a Democrat, is the current, and downright horrendous, state of black unemployment in this country. Because while there was most certainly enough bad news to go around for everybody in the August employment and jobs numbers released on Friday, the news was especially bad for black Americans, who voted nearly en masse for Barry "Almighty."

And what is it that they got in return? Well, out of every group listed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics report (age, gender, race, etc.) the unemployment rate among blacks increased the most, almost a full half-point, from 12.6% to 13%. This news is in line with a report released earlier this week that showed black homeownership levels are at an eighteen year low as well. And yet Barry "Almighty" still enjoys a fairly high approval rating among those in the black community. Why? Just because he’s black?

Now wouldn’t you think that after five years of the first black president, combined with being fifty years into the ‘War on Poverty’, and literally trillions of taxpayer dollars wasted, that by every relevant economic measurement, the gap between whites and blacks would have somehow narrowed at least a little bit. But instead, it’s remained pretty much unchanged, being today just as bad as it always has been. Perhaps if blacks were to just try voting for the other side they might see their fortunes change.

Ya, I know, it’s all the Republicans fault as to why blacks always vote for Democrats. Even though it has always been the Republicans who have proudly stood on the right side of race issues. Blacks seem to be determined to remain on the side of those who were the primary culprits behind slavery, dreamed up the Ku Klux Klan, created the disgusting Jim Crow law and who keep segregation alive until the Republicans joined with LBJ in passing the Civil Rights Act as well as the Voting Rights Act in the early 60s.

Well, if blacks ever decide that they’d like to try something different, we’ll be here. Because if they’re truly interested in improving their lot in life and in creating a better future for their kids, then they really only have one option. But if they’re only looking for someone who wants to keep the entitlement gravy train on the tracks, then they might just as well stay right where they are, there on the Democrat plantation. Because off the plantation they will be required to be a bit more self-reliant than maybe they’re used to.

ADMINISTRATION’S UNEMPLOYMENT NUMBERS, AN ABSOLUTE JOKE…


I think if there is one thing that we can all now, very safely, agree upon, it’s that the figure comically referred to as being our national unemployment rate, that has continued to be bandied about by this administration, and it’s many minions in the state-controlled media, can now be said to have been reduced to that which is nothing more than a sick joke. Because while we are once again being told how the national unemployment rate dropped from 7.4 percent to 7.3 percent in August, what’s being left out of the entire conversation is the fact that the number of Americans who actually held jobs during August also dropped, and by another 115,000 from July.

The simultaneous decline in both the unemployment rate and the number of people with jobs was possible because the "labor force participation rate", or the percentage of adults 16 years or older who either had a job or actively sought one in the last four weeks, dropped to 63.2 percent as of August. That is the lowest it has been since back during the Jimmy Carter years and is something of a continuing trend that can be said to be the direct result of Barry’s abysmal economic policies. When Barry first took office, it was 65.7 percent. I would argue the fact that we see that trend continuing, is no accident, as Barry has been quite purposeful in removing as many folks from the workforce as he can.

The number of Americans who are 16 years or older and who have decided not to participate in the nation's labor force has now pushed past the 90,000,000 mark for the first time in our nation’s history. That’s according to data recently released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The BLS counts a person as participating in the labor force if they are 16 years or older and either have a job or have actively sought a job in the last four weeks. A person is not participating in the labor force if they are 16 or older and have not sought a job in the last four weeks. And the odds are quite high that they are now a person collecting some form of disability payment.

In July, again according to BLS, 89,957,000 Americans did not participate in the labor force, in August, that number climbed to 90,473,000. In January 2009, when Barry took office, there were 80,507,000 Americans not in the labor force. Thus, the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by an incredible 9,966,000 during Barry's presidency. Granted, part of that can be explained by the fact that Baby Boomers are reaching retirement age and deciding to stop working, and not being replaced by an equal number of younger people reaching age 16 and thus becoming part of the BLS labor force population.

However, what is also true is the fact that the overall percentage of the non-institutionalized population over the age of 16 that is working or seeking to work in the United States, or something that the BLS calls the employment-population ratio, has declined, and rather significantly, in recent years. From July to August, it dropped from 58.7 percent to 58.6 percent. And again, in January 2009, when our 'Dear Beloved Leader,' Barack Hussein Obama, first took office, that number was at 60.6 percent. It reached an historical peak back in April 2000, when it was 64.7 percent. Further evidence of Barry determination to expand the welfare state.

But look, the fact of the matter is that, nationwide, full-time jobs are being cut just about everywhere and the new jobs that are now being created are 2 year temp jobs. Employers will give full-time hours, but not offer benefits because the full time hours won't always be guaranteed. This is how businesses intend to avoid certain aspects of the disaster that is Obamacare. They will get rid of full-time employees and hire a buttload of 2-year temps and give them just enough hours so they don't qualify for full-time benefits. If they are to remain in business, there's simply no alternative. And if they go out of business, then there's no jobs at all.

The sad truth here is that what has occurred under Barry's 'leadership' is nothing short of a national tragedy. The hope of being able to live out the American dream is fading faster than a black guy with a stolen TV in his hands. In this the most blessed country on the planet, what should now be painfully obvious to all is just how much devastation has resulted from the progressive/liberal agenda. And our useless state-controlled media is only too happy to play along as people are made to suffer, families are devastated because no one can't find work, taxes go up as Obamacare kills even more jobs, and our wasteful welfare system is literally choking us to death.

Sadly, we of this the most wasteful generation, have made the conscious decision to commit what can only be described as being the most unforgivable of sins. Because far too many of us have come to see our lives as somehow being more important than the lives of our children, overcome by the need to make our lives as 'easy' as we can. And in so doing, we choose not to rely on ourselves but, instead, on our government to 'take care of us'. And since the money needed to cover the cost of that 'care' must come from somewhere, unfortunately it will have to come from our children and, in all likelihood, from our grand children as well.

So it will be, then, all thanks to us, that our children's lives will very likely be so much less than what they could have been. Because they will be ones saddled with the additional responsibility of repaying the massive debt so cheerfully accrued by we, their parents. It just all seems kind of one-way to me. Personally, I wanted my daughter to be able to enjoy her life, to have as many kids as she wanted, and could support, to have a nice home and a steady job that she might actually enjoy doing. But the future that lays in wait for her is likely to be far different, and for no other reason than because her parent's generation got lazy, and more than just a bit stupid.

What we have done here equates to nothing short of having plundered our children's futures while at the same time squandering that which those who came before us handed down to us to safeguard and to improve upon, if possible, and to then handover to those who would come after us for them to fulfill that very same task. Well, to say that we dropped the ball on that one would be the understatement of the century. For whatever the reason, we allowed ourselves to be talked into ignoring the warning signs even though, I believe, deep down we knew better. And now it may very well be too late to get things turned around before the whole thing simply comes apart.

TURNS OUT NANCY WAS LYING…BIG SURPRISE THERE...


Ah yes, remember how it was back in those very heady days of 2010 when we all heard Nancy "Too Much Botox" Pelosi out in front extolling all of the great and wondrous benefits that all would be able to receive under Obamacare? Her exact words were: "Think of an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance." Well, as it turns out, old Nancy was doing just a little over-selling of this thing, and was doing nothing more than telling another one of her frequent whoppers.

The reason I say that is because, apparently, up until now professional organizations have worked with various insurance providers in an effort to craft reduced-rate plans for their members. But thanks to the fine print in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), otherwise known as that very same Obamacare that was so enthusiastically touted by our esteemed Ms. Pelosi, that's all coming to a very abrupt end. Because as of January 1, 2014, many of these plans will fail to pass legal muster. But is anyone really all that surprised?

The College Art Association website posted a notice this month: "The New York Life Insurance Company recently informed CAA that it will no longer offer catastrophic healthcare coverage previously available to CAA members." Why? Well because it "is no longer an option" for "associations whose members reside in different states" to provide such coverage. These members will now have to seek help from their home states’ newly formed Obamacare exchanges. Plans offered to Modern Language Association (MLA) members will suffer a similar fate.

Other insurance providers are also reporting cancellations. The Entertainment Industry Group Insurance Trust (TEIGIT) website posts the following notice: "All individual and/or Sole Proprietor Health Insurance will terminate January 1, 2014. This includes plans acquired as Members of our Affiliated Associations & their groups." Those affiliated associations include the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, the Dramatists Guild, the Graphic Arts Guild, NY Women in Film and Television, and many others. Many of these groups are, I'm sure, heavily infested with Barry voters.

So all of these flaming libs who, I'm quite sure, were thinking that they were being just oh-so-clever in casting their vote for Barry, as well as any other slimy Democrat, will soon be forced to contend with the very same Democrat created healthcare mess that many of the rest of us will also be forced to deal with. So I guess we will soon see just how committed these folks are to the whole notion of socialism once they are forced to deal with all that comes with having the government in charge of their healthcare. I can almost hear them whining already.

Thursday, September 5, 2013

OBAMA...THEN AND NOW…


I'm sure those us who were paying even the slightest bit of attention back then will have little or no trouble recalling how it was that then-candidate Barry "Almighty", focused solely on getting himself elected, proudly championed restraint and global cooperation when faced with security threats. My my, how things seem to have changed. Because now, as commander in chief, albeit a rather piss poor excuse for one, of a, used-to-be, world superpower, his rhetoric of the past is now coming into conflict with the reality of today as he now presses Congress to allow the United States to launch a military strike against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Despite the objections coming from most major U.S. allies.

Barry's current posture is one that stands in stark contrast when compared to those positions that he took as a senator, a presidential candidate and a first-term president, as he has always cast himself as being something of a counterweight to the more aggressive approach to national security embodied by his Republican predecessor, President George W. Bush. Barry has long advocated a whimpy style of foreign policy, one that prioritizes negotiation over confrontation, humility over diplomatic bravado and communal action over unilateralism. Those positions are now being questioned as Barry seeks the approval of Congress back home as he meets with skeptical world leaders abroad while at the G-20 summit in Russia.

So let us now take a brief stroll down memory lane in order to remind ourselves of just a few of Barry's more simplistic, and dare I say foolish, comments from the past so that we can then compare them to what we're hearing from him today, regarding the use of what's left of America's military might:

ON CONGRESS

THEN: "In instances of self-defense, the president would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the legislative branch." — Response to candidate questionnaire from The Boston Globe, December 2007.

NOW: "As commander in chief, I always preserve the right and the responsibility to act on behalf of America's national security. I do not believe that I was required to take this to Congress. But I did not take this to Congress just because it's an empty exercise. I think it's important to have Congress' support on it." — News conference in Stockholm, Sept. 4, 2013.

ON ACTING ALONE

THEN: "In a world in which threats are more diffuse and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. America alone cannot secure the peace." — Speech accepting Nobel Peace Prize, December 2009.

NOW: "I'm comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable." — Remarks in the White House Rose Garden, Aug. 31, 2013.

ON APPETITE FOR WAR

THEN: "It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward, to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path." — Speech in Cairo, June 2009.

NOW: "The American people, understandably, want us to be focused on the business of rebuilding our economy here and putting people back to work. And I assure you, nobody ends up being more war-weary than me. But what I also believe is that part of our obligation as a leader in the world is making sure that when you have a regime that is willing to use weapons that are prohibited by international norms on their own people, including children, that they are held to account." — Remarks at meeting with Baltic leaders, Aug. 30, 2013.

ON JUSTIFICATION

THEN: "We may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake. If we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in? ... And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible." — Presidential debate, October 2008.

NOW: "This kind of attack is a challenge to the world. We cannot accept a world where women and children and innocent civilians are gassed on a terrible scale. This kind of attack threatens our national security interests by violating well-established international norms against the use of chemical weapons. ... If we are saying in a clear and decisive but very limited way, we send a shot across the bow saying, 'Stop doing this,' that can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term." — Remarks at meeting with Baltic leaders, Aug. 30, 2013.

As I have said here before, and on a number of previous occasions, Democrats, more often than not, make for pretty lousy commanders-in-chief. And Barry has proven himself to be far worse than most of his Democrat predecessors. Because as much as we would all like it if all of the inhabitants of the world were able to get along, the reality of it is, to think that that's actually possible would take wishful thinking to a whole new level. Unfortunately, the world is not like that old John Lennon song, "Imagine." And like it or not the world works a whole better when the strongest kid on the block is the good old U.S. of A. But thanks to Barry, this country has already forfeited far too much of it's hard-earned credibility.

And the fact that we have to put up with this clown for another three years, does not bode well for our being able to remain as that strongest kid. And while national security is job one of the federal government, with Barry at the helm, job one has, instead, become getting as many people as possible addicted to government handouts, with national security having now been relegated to being nothing more than an after thought. Except of course, when Barry wishes to use our troops as nothing more than a way to distract the attention of the American people away from his many ongoing scandals. Then, it's full steam ahead, creating a need for our involvement where none currently exist. Yes, Barry is quite pathetic.

CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS…CHOOSES RACE OVER COUNTRY...

THE BRILLIANT MS. FUDGE
Once again in demonstrating their obvious need to put their race above all else, even their own country, the head of that bizarre little cadre of racists, bigots and outright imbeciles, fondly referred to as the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), has now come out and made it official by asking members of the group to remain largely silent on Syria using the excuse that lawmakers need to receive more information about Barry's supposed plan for missile strikes against the war-torn nation. But from what I hear, that may be awhile, because the last I heard, Barry didn't even have a plan.

The CBC Chairwoman of the group is some loon by the name of Marcia Fudge who, of course, is a Democrat. Apparently Ms. Fudge recently sent out an email on Tuesday to her fellow CBC members asking them "to limit public comment on the issue," Fudge spokesmoron Ayofemi Kirby said Thursday. Ms Kirby, at least I'm guessing that Ayofemi is a female, went on to say, "The chair believes Congress and the American public need more information, and she awaits more briefings between now and early next week before commenting further." What a pathetic crock.

So now with what would at least appear to be a growing number of rank-and-file Republicans now lining up in opposition to Barry's rather confusing intervention proposal, and obviously for no other reason than because they're all racists, Barry "Almighty" will likely need what's described as being a "very robust" show of support from his fellow Democrats to get a use-of-force resolution shoved through the House. Nancy 'Botox Eats Your Brain' Pelosi, who's emerged as one of the loudest proponents of a Syrian intervention, is working hard to maximize the number of Democrat votes.

But the liberals in her caucus, which I would think would be just about everybody, remain wary that Barry's plan for missile strikes against the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad could lead to widespread civilian casualties and entrench the United States in yet another prolonged conflict in the Middle East, all without having any meaningful effect on changing the direction of Syria's bloody civil war. But I'm quite confident that, in the end, the Democrats will get their priorities straight and support their guy in the White House over actually doing what's best for their country.

But the issue may prove to be an especially tough one for black Democrats, caught between a desire to support the bro in the White House and an inclination to avoid another military campaign overseas. For that reason, a number of prominent CBC members, including Jimmy 'The Tea Party Is Racist' Clyburn and John 'Dumber Than Dirt' Conyer have declined to weigh in on Barry's idiotic proposal. "Issues of war & peace require thoughtful consideration," Clyburn tweeted Tuesday. "I reserve judgment on Syria until a resolution and more details are forthcoming." Right!

Others, however, have not been so silent, and some have emerged as among the most vocal opponents of a Syrian intervention. "I haven't really felt that America's security's being threatened at all," is what Charles Rangel told MSNBC Wednesday. "Not even indirectly." House Democrats are scheduled to be briefed Monday on Barry's Syria plans by senior administration officials, including the ever-clueless Susan Rice, who's Barry's National Security Adviser. Wouldn't you like to be a fly on the wall for that one. That should be an entertaining little get together, to say the least.

 

OBAMA'S "FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION" OF AMERICA...


Well imagine my surprise, when it was recently pointed out to me, in my finding out that income inequality here in the U.S. actually grew four times faster during the first three years of the era of Barry "Almighty" than it did under Bush. And I was even further surprised, even shocked, to find out that that is according to figures published in, of all places, the New York Times. So here again we have yet another example, and right here at home, that socialism is nothing more than abject failure. And while it sounds all warm and fuzzy, it simply doesn't work. And make no mistake here, bringing socialism to America has been part of Barry's plan to "fundamentally transform" this country since day one of his presidency.

Now the Times reached this conclusion by comparing the median wage—which measures the income of a household in the middle of the income scale—and the average wage, which tallies all income and divides it by the number of earners. As society has grown more unequal, the average wage has grown relatively more quickly, while median wages have grown more slowly, and in real terms has actually stagnated. As the newspaper reports, "From 2001 through 2008, during the George W. Bush administration," the ratio of mean to median income "grew at 0.28 percentage point per year. From 2009 through 2011, the latest year for which the data is available, the ratio increased 1.14 percentage points annually, or roughly four times faster."

And it wasn't that long ago that the Census Bureau made note of the fact that there has been a rather significant growth in the percentage of households here in the US which now have at least one unemployed family member. The report, entitled America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2012, found that from 2005 to 2011, the number of households with children under 18 where at least one parent was unemployed rose from 2.4 million to 3.2 million. In some states, the increase was even more dramatic. Nevada, for example, had a 148 percent increase in families affected by unemployment, Hawaii had a 95 percent increase, and California had a 61 percent increase.

This same report also noted that the number of households with children that owned their own homes plunged by 15 percent during the same time period. There was also a significant increase in the number of young people living with their parents, resulting from a fall in incomes and reduced job prospects. The percent of men aged 25 to 34 living in their parents’ homes increased from 13 percent in the early 2000s to 17 percent in 2012. The report also noted that food stamp usage by children of married parents nearly tripled—from 4 percent to 11 percent—since 2002. We now have over 47 Million people who are receiving food stamps and over 100 Million Americans who really on some form of government subsistence.

The much-rumored economic "recovery" has led to falling wages, speedups and increasingly altered labor practices. The jobs which have accounted for the majority of employment since the end of the recession have been composed mainly of part-time and low-paying service industry work. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in the period from June to July of this year, over 148,000 full-time jobs were eliminated, while in their place over 534,000 part-time positions were added. A big reason for is that many employers are desperate to get out from under that wonderful little thing hysterically referred to as, The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. Another bit of socialism from Barry.

Last year the National Employment Law Project released a report finding that 60 percent of all positions added to payrolls since 2008 have been classified as "low-wage," paying between $7.69 and $13.83 per hour. Likewise, "middle-income jobs," those accounting for the majority of positions lost during the financial crisis, have made up barely 20 percent of jobs added during the "recovery." And something else that I think worth mentioning is the fact that since Barry first strutted his cool self into the Oval Office, those who comprise our national workforce has been reduced by roughly 10 Million workers. That that many people could have left the workforce in the span of 4 years is absolutely mind-boggling.

So I guess I'm more than just a tad bid curious about whether all of those geniuses who voted for this ass, not once but twice, if this is what they all had in mind went voting for "Hope and Change" and in favor of this country being "fundamentally transformed." Because this socialist hero of theirs has done absolutely nothing but to take what was an already struggling economy and to then drive a stake right through its heart. But I guess none of that really matters, since, by golly, we elected, and then re-elected, our first black president. Apparently, it seems to matter very little that he is the most corrupt and divisive individual to ever hold that office. Nor that he hates this country and seems to be hell-bent on destroying it. At least he's black!

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

TED CRUZ THROWS THE 'BULL SHIT' FLAG…


Well it would seem that as recently as this past Tuesday, my favorite senator, that pesky fella, Ted Cruz, was said to be at it yet again. That he was once again doing his best to earn the ire of so many in Congress on both sides of the political aisle. And just what was it that he was up to this time? It was all because of how Sen. Cruz chose to go about distilling the current debate over possible military action in Syria to its essential dilemma.

Now while I think that we can all agree on the fact that Syrian President Bashar Assad is certainly a pretty nasty guy, Sen. Cruz only sought to point out that the forces aligned against him are, at best, a rather mixed bag that can be said to be dominated by jihadis and elements of various other terrorist organizations. Cruz noted that Americans didn't enlist in the military to "serve as Al-Qaeda's Air Force." And I would agree with his assessment.

"We certainly don’t have a dog in the fight," Cruz said, calling it a civil war in Syria. "We should be focused on defending the United States of America. That’s why young men and women sign up to join the military, not to, as you know, serve as Al Qaeda’s air force." It should be obvious to all what's going on in Syria, and that which Barry is trying to insert us, poses no direct threat to this country, and as such there is no need for us to get involved.

Cruz noted that of the nine major rebel groups, seven have ties to Al-Qaeda. Cruz's colleagues, RINOs "Maverick" McCain and "Prissy Boy" Graham are pushing Barry and his boys to arm rebel forces with heavy weapons. It is unclear how the U.S. would ensure that its weapons would go exclusively to the "right" rebel forces. Even if they were, it's likely that any post-Assad regime would be dominated by elements loyal to Al-Qaeda.

"I’ll give you one of the simplest principles of foreign policy that we ought to be following," Cruz said. "Don’t give weapons to people who hate you. Don’t give weapons to people who want to kill you." That sounds like some rather sound logic to me. But sometimes I wonder if it's not some of these same folks that are the ones that Barry seems to be the most determined to assist. It's pretty obvious that he hates Israel.

Anyway, the good senator from Texas was really doing nothing more than what I would expect most congressional Republicans to be doing right about now. And that of course would be to stand with the roughly 60 percent of the American who remain very much opposed to Barry's proposal of lobbing in a few cruise missiles for, what would appear to be, no good reason other than so that he can make himself look good.

Democrat presidents always make the worst commanders-in-chief. They have possess absolutely no respect for those who serve, and therefore are not least bit hesitant about throwing them into harms way for their own self-gratification. Barry, like 'Slick Willie' and 'Bone Head' Carter before him, get off on being the commander-in-chief, even though they possess no real aptitude for the position. They treat our service people like toy soldiers.

Or as in the case of 'Slick Willie," as pawns to be used in the most distasteful manner, as a way of distracting the public away from his juvenile sexcapades in the Oval Office that involved a 'blue dress.' Who's to say that Barry isn't using them in the same manner now, to divert attention away from the many scandals that this most corrupt of presidents has now gotten himself involved in. And I don't doubt for a second that he would, at least attempt, to do something just like that.

HANK JOHNSON, LUNATIC FROM GEORGIA...


I'm hoping that someone might be able to enlighten me on something, because I'm a little confused. You see, I'm a little curious about what is it about blacks being able to get a decent education, that blacks in Congress continue to remain so opposed to. But I suppose the bigger question would be, why is it that those blacks who wish for nothing more than for their kids to get a decent education, continue to vote for those in Congress who seem to be so determined to prevent that very thing from taking place? Is race that important to these people? Is voting for someone because of their race more important than being able to do all that you can to ensure that your child goes out into the world armed with the best education possible?

What brings me to even ask these questions is the fact that once again we have that perennial moron from the state of Georgia, Hank Johnson, Democrat, who recently made the rather idiotic claim that our public schools are actually "being dismantled" by charter schools. Now, of course, those would be the very same charter schools that have come to be taken advantage of by many black parents as they view it as being an avenue outside of our disastrous public school system of making sure that their children are provided with an actual education. Johnson made his silly comments August 23 while attending the "Voting Rights Act" event hosted by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

It was while discussing the Civil Rights Act that Johnson said, "We got public education being dismantled. They used to talk about school vouchers but they’ve redone it and now it’s called the charter school movement, and a lot of us have fallen for that." And he went on to say, "The March On Washington back in ‘63 was largely about the discrimination that African-Americans experienced." Adding, "The stated demands of the March were first the passage of meaningful civil rights legislation, the elimination of racial segregation in public schools, protection for demonstrators against police brutality." I rarely understand any point that Johnson tries to make during his many random excertions to nowhere, and this occasion is no different.

And as is usually the case with this boob, Johnson, there's always an attempt to portray things not as they are, but how blacks in Congress would apparently like them to be. So I wasn't surprised to hear Johnson ask, "What do we have looking back now at the civil rights legislation?" And in answering his own stupid question, Hank said, "We have a situation where voting rights - civil rights, the most fundamental civil right - is under attack by an out-of-control, judicial activist Supreme Court." Which I thought was quite a reach even for him to make. But, as he has made pretty obvious on more than one occasion, this guy most certainly is far from being the sharpest knife in the drawer.

But old Hank was far from being finished as he then droned on saying, "We’ve got public education being dismantled. They used to talk about school vouchers but they’ve redone it and now it’s called the charter school movement, and a lot of us have fallen for that." The fact that Democrats lie old Hank here still I guess I still so riles up the Democrats makes the point better than I ever could that they stand firmly against educating our young, regardless of color, and very much in favor of using our public schools as little more than indoctrination centers. And what makes black members of Congress into even bigger hypocrites than their white counterparts, is that many in the black community actually favor vouchers.

Johnson is rather famous, or infamous, for never making absolutely any sense. I guess he doesn't recall that it was just this past May that we saw Barry "Almighty" issue a proclamation recognizing National Charter School Week. That proclamation said, "We need to equip all our students with the education and skills that put them on the path to good jobs and a bright future -- no matter where they live or what school they attend. Charter schools play an important role in meeting that obligation." Despite that, Johnson claims, "Many charter schools choose to locate in communities with few high-quality educational options, making them an important partner in widening the circle of opportunity for students who need it most."

So there you have it. The rather bizarre rationale for why charter schools are bad. It's a civil rights thing. At least according to this moron, Hank Johnson. Personally, I'm just not making the connection here, but then I'm not black, nor am I in Congress. But I think that I possess at least the average amount of commonsense, which, apparently, would preclude me from being a member of either of these two groups. Blacks are going to have to come to some sort of decision here, regarding what it is that's most important. Is it to have as many options as possible when trying to make sure your kids get educated, or is it to vote for blacks like Johnson, no matter how horrendous the outcome is likely to be for those same kids?

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

DEBBIE WIZZERMAN SCHULTZ...MORON, BOOB, LIAR...


Debbie Wizzerman Schultz, one more sterling example of the caliber of individuals that those here in Florida insist upon sending off to Congress, as well as being the Democrat National Committee Chairwoman, recently made the claim that the U.S. would be bolstered with support from what she referred to as being "dozens" of international allies if the United States makes military strikes against Syria. Now I don't want to appear as if I think she's lying, which I'm sure that she is, but I'd be more than just a little curious to know what she might be basing that assessment on.

You see, it was while appearing on what has become that CNN rating's juggernaut, "Piers Morgan Live," that we heard Ms. Wizzerman Schultz say to Wolf Blitzer, and quite matter-of-factly, "I mean we have, from the briefings that I’ve received, there are dozens of countries who are going to stand with the United States, who will engage with us on military action and also that back us up." You know, how many time does one have to lie to you before you just don't believe a word they're telling you anymore? I stopped believing anything that this bimbo has to say, a long time ago.

Now it was following Barry’s announcement on Saturday that he would now be seeking Congressional authorization, that Wizzerman Schultz, in demonstrating the fact that she was either considerably intoxicated or very high, made the claim that any U.S. intervention would most assuredly be met with wide international support. "In both military and diplomatic and political support, there are dozens of nations who had committed to back us up," she said. I think we all recognize old Debbie as being someone who's incapable of telling the truth, and this is just one more instance of that.

And the only reason I say that is because, as is usually the case whenever dealing with Ms. Wizzerman Schultz or any of her fellow Democrats, she made the point of saying that, even though she would like to, at the current time she was just not at "liberty to say" specifically what countries have expressed their support for missile strikes, because some of the information she received was classified. Being the upstanding Democrat that she is, she would never risk compromising classified information, unless of course there happens to be a Republican in the White House. Then all bets are off.

And in echoing the sentiments we heard coming from that well-known, yet little respected RINO, John 'The Maverick' McCain, Wizzerman Schultz has been vocal on her support of intervention adding "and voting this down would be catastrophic for our credibility." Wizzerman-Schulz also emphasized the need to support U.S. allies in the region. Look, I hate to be the one to bring this up, but am I the only one able to recognize the fact that after four and a half years of Barry being in charge, America has precious little credibility left? I would have thought that that was painfully obvious.

Debbie went on to say, "And we’ll make sure that not only that we can protect our allies in the region from the strengthening of Assad’s hands, if we don’t respond, like Israel and Jordan and Turkey, but also that we stand against moral obscenities, as Secretary Kerry rightly labeled this chemical weapons attack, and make sure that it’s understood that you will receive a severe and certain response from the United States and our allies when you violate international norms, like Assad has." Right, I bet Barry has the beanpole Assad shaking in his very expensive Italian made shoes.

For crying out loud, it's Barry "Almighty" who's the real moral obscenity here! He's succeeded in making us the laughing stock of the world and now just because he wants to make like he's 'Billy Bad Ass' in going after Assad, everybody is supposed to jump in the Barry bandwagon. Like I said, I'm not sure what old Debbie has been smokin, but I'd be willing to bet my paycheck that there's not even one country who's talking about standing with Barry, let alone dozens. She's just doing what Democrats have always done when it's one of their screw-up's is in the Oval Office, blowing smoke.

Personally, I'm just not in favor of getting involved in this one. I don't see where it is, in anyway, something that is critical to our national security. And these stupid halfway measures that Barry is touting are likely to do little more than to make matters very much worse. The time for taking action would have been months ago. But once again it's Barry inability to make any sort of decision that has resulted in the deterioration of things to the point where lobbing a few cruise missiles in, at about a billion dollars a pop, will accomplish little more than to further deplete our weapons stockpile.

THE IMPEACHMENT OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA…THE TIME HAS COME...


If ever there was a president who actually deserved to be impeached, that president is Barack Hussein Obama. I think it safe to say that we all knew very little about the 'man' before we chose to elect him, and I think that we can all agree that that was by design. He and his team, with the help of a complicit 'news' media, purposely hid his very questionable past from any and all prying eyes. But we did know that he was the least experienced individual to ever seek the office of president. But to far too many of us there was only one thing that really mattered, and one thing that trumped all others. And that was the fact that he was black.

Since being elected, the amount of damage that he has be able to, and very purposely, inflict upon this country, is something that we, in all likelihood, will never be able to fully recover from. The examples are numerous, the evidence that makes quite plain his reckless disregard for our Constitution, is plentiful. And so it is then, that it is Barry himself, who has left us with only one option. Action must be taken as soon as possible if there is to be any hope of limiting any further damage. He is without a doubt, the most corrupt, the most divisive and the most dishonest man to ever hold his office. And were it not for his skin color he have long ago been impeached.

And here’s why:

Barry has very purposefully, deliberately and repeatedly, lied to the American people about the atrocity which he permitted to take place in Benghazi. And it has been since that horrific incident that he has repeatedly instructed others to lie, going so far as actively intimidate whistleblowers who were guilty of doing nothing more than possessing a desire to see justice and truth prevail. While our ambassador was tortured and three others were slaughtered, Barry simply couldn't be bothered, choosing instead to toddle off to bed. Our commander-in-chief couldn't even be bothered to make a phone call as to the status of the seven hours of Hell.

Prior to the attacks there had been multiple requests for extra security in Benghazi, including from the murdered Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Those requestd were refused by this corrupt regime. And for over two weeks after the attack, Barry and his team of malcontents repeatedly lied about what it was that had occurred in Benghazi as well as about what they had identified as being its root cause. To further this charade, Barry used taxpayer funds to run TV ads in Pakistan, pushing and promoting the lie that the Benghazi attacks were caused by a YouTube video. He still has never actually called the event of that night was they were, an act of blatant terrorism.

And then we come to what's referred to as the "Sequester." The brain child of Barry himself which was intended as being his way of, once again, forcing the Republicans into raising our already too high debt ceiling. These so-called spending 'cuts', were, in truth, nothing more than an insignificant cut in the "rate of growth" of government spending. But Barry set out to make those ‘cuts’ as painful as possible. That was his little way of 'paying back' those who dared to refuse his request. As a result he closed White House tours, while at the same time he sent hundreds of millions of taxpayer funds to The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, including giving them F-16's and tanks.

He has treated our allies as if they are our enemies and rewarded our enemies as if they were some of our oldest friends. He has inflicted our nation with over 20,000 pages of incoherent rules, regulations, and mandates in the form of ObamaCare, which, for the first time our nation's history, gives the federal government the power to force its citizens to buy something that only the government approves of. He has unconstitutionally bypassed Congress at every turn by using the federal bureaucracy to inflict massive and crushing laws on our people. He has appointed dozens of unconstitutional "czars," who are free to operate unchecked, and who serve no purpose but to harass.

Barry is quite easily the most divisive man to ever lead our country. He has been very successful in his efforts to divide us, and to a level that has not been seen since the days of the Civil War. He has succeeded in pitting men against women, gay people against straight people, and has taken the standard Democrat tactic of class warfare to new levels. He has made alliances with such sleazy individuals as Al 'Bull Horn' Sharpton and Jesse 'The Extortionist' Jackson in his effort to bring about a level of racial strife reminiscent of the 1950s and 60s. And he has set about to unjustifiably label anyone who dares to disagree with his policies as being a "racist."

He has degraded our nation at every turn, repeatedly apologizing for America on foreign soil and actually bowing before foreign dictators. He has actually apologized to the Mexican people for U.S. sovereignty while inferring that the lower region of our country somehow still belonged to them. He has continually, and on numerous occasions, abused the power of his office on a level never before seen. In an effort to cover-up his regime's crimes in the Fast and Furious gun-running operation, in which his regime gave guns to Mexican drug gangs, there was an attempt to later attack our Second Amendment right, for which he would plead Executive Privilege.

In the span of four short years he has literally exploded our already gargantuan national debt, increasing it by approximately 60% during just his first term, while insisting that we must spend even more. He has bankrupted us to the point where our children and grandchildren will be unable to pay back what is owed. He has never had a budget passed failed even during the period where his own party held substantial majorities both houses of congress, when his budget was defeated without receiving a single vote from his own party. He burned-up nearly $1 Trillion on a bogus "stimulus" plan that was supposed to create "shovel-ready jobs". Later admitting that there was no such thing as a "shovel-ready" job.

He has actively promoted voter fraud on every possible occasion, and failed to convict, or even prosecute, proven voter intimidation cases basing the taking of any action solely upon the skin color of the lawbreakers. He has advertised and promoted America's food stamp program over Mexican airwaves to Mexican citizens, in an attempt to swarm our country with millions more in illegal aliens and further bankrupting our country with his use of "Cloward and Piven" tactics. He has rightfully been referred to as being the 'food stamp president' as today we have over 47 Million people on food stamps and 100 Million Americans now on some form of government subsistence.

He has utilized his blatantly corrupt Justice Department to sue several states in an effort to prevent them from implementing the voting ID laws that their citizens had approved, violating the Tenth Amendment in the process, while completely obliterating the constitutional principle of state sovereignty. He has repeatedly attempted to manipulate tragedy and crisis in his attacking of our constitutional freedoms, using the Sandy Hook shootings to infringe upon our non-negotiable Second Amendment rights. He used the Benghazi terrorist attacks, blaming them on the First Amendment which would allow a YouTube video critical of Islam.

He continues his unconstitutional attack our sacred freedom of religion, a God-given right guaranteed to us by our Founders in the First Amendment. Barry "Almighty" is easily the most corrupt president in U.S. history. His actions go against every principle that this country was founded upon and stands for. And he is not only a danger to America, but as his recent actions, or inaction, should make very plain, he is a danger to the entire world. I am therefore calling for his impeachment and removal from office at the earliest possible time. That which he has managed to get away with up to this point, makes Richard Nixon look like a mere rookie.

So the questions that we are now faced with are quite simple: If not us, who? If not now, when? While I am not, like many of Barry's known friends and associates, calling for outright overthrow of our government, what I am saying is that the time has now come for our politicians, on both sides to the aisle, to do that which they were elected to do, to safeguard our Constitution. Their priority must be to remove one of the greatest threats ever faced by this country, no other options remain. And if they refuse to act out of their own petty partisan politics, or some misplaced allegiance to this very corrupt president, then, sadly, we the people may be left with no other recourse than to take matters into our own hands.

Monday, September 2, 2013

JOHN KERRY-HEINZ AGAIN WORKS TO SELL ‘CLIMATE CHANGE’…


How in the Hell does ‘climate change’ have anything to do with the foreign policy of this country? I know I’ve asked that question before, and I’ll go on asking it until our secretary of state stops bringing it up as if it has anything to do with his job. Because as recently as Monday we again heard John Kerry-Heinz, who must fancy himself a scientist, working once again to perpetuate his idiotic claim that the fact that ‘climate change’ is occurring, is beyond dispute. But, he said, it is not too late for international action to prevent its worst impacts.

"The science is clear. It is irrefutable and it is alarming," Kerry-Heinz told a climate conference in Majuro in the Marshall Islands in a video address from Washington. He said, "If we continue down our current path, the impacts of ‘climate change’ will only get worse." Kerry-Heinz went on to say that without strong, and immediate, action, the world would, not could, experience major threats to critical infrastructure, regional stability, public health, economic vitality, and the long-term viability of some states. Wow, he didn’t leave out anything!

America's top diplomat, and if that little realization doesn’t cause you to feel even the slightest amount of panic, you’re dead, was addressing the meeting of supposed climate ‘experts’ meeting on the eve of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) in the Marshall Islands. Kerry-Heinz pledged, "I stand with you in the fight against climate change." He went on to add that the issue was a crisis on a global scale and that it is beyond the ability of one country to fix. He also stressed that it was in need of urgent global action. Maybe he should stick to those true matters of state.

While Kerry-Heinz did not attend the PIF this year, it was Secretary of the Interior, another big supporter of the myth, Sally Jewell, who was represented the United States. Another big supporter of non-existent ‘climate change’ in attendance was some loon by the name Connie Hedegaard, whose official title is the European Union Climate Commissioner. The what? She expressed concern that some countries may try to delay a 2015 deadline for implementing reductions in emissions and increasing reliance on alternative energy sources.

Ms. Hedegaard said Europe and the Pacific island nations would work together to push the international community to honor the deadline. "We have to make a joint pressure to say the world is already more than late," she told the conference in the capital Majuro. Adding, "2015 must be taken seriously." Hedegaard said that even though the Pacific islands are not responsible for ‘climate change’, they were willing to accept tough emissions targets, making it difficult for other nations not to follow suit.

The 15 PIF nations include islands states such as Kiribati, Tuvalu and the Marshalls, where many atolls are barely three feet above sea level. Such areas are constantly being used as supposed examples by those who work so feverishly to advance the myth of ‘climate change’ as being a very real threat, as areas facing the most risk of its supposed consequences. The PIF is set to finalize a "Majuro Declaration" on climate change this week, which aims to reinvigorate global efforts to contain global warming.

Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sopoaga said the situation was "dire" and the Pacific needed immediate action, not vague promises to do something a few years down the track. He said, "We need concrete action on the ground to save Tuvalu, Marshall Islands and Kiribati." Adding, "We have to send a very strong signal out of this panel and forum that we need a legally binding agreement (on greenhouse gas emissions)." The plan is to then present the declaration to, of course, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at the General Assembly meeting in New York at the end of September, "to reenergize the international community".

What should be seen as truly alarming and irrefutable is how something that should have been left up to science, has now become so thoroughly politicized and corrupted. The result is that these so-called 'experts' can no longer be trusted and all the polls and studies in the world will not convince a world that it is somehow about to cook. Even if global warming genuinely exists... and that is itself highly questionable, there is only spotty science to suggest that it could only be mankind who’s behind it all.

Look, the last time that we had not had an Atlantic Hurricane by August was 11 years ago and Antarctic ice is now at or near a record level. We are also now at a 60-year low for the number of tornadoes that occur in this country. And yet we’re supposed to believe that we are on the precipice of some climatic apocalypse? But there’s never any mention of those facts because they don’t support the myth. Perhaps if Kerry-Heinz were to devote as much of his time and energy to the Middle East, there might be other options than simply going to war.