The late great Richard Jeni explains it perfectly

The late great Richard Jeni explains it perfectly - I am in 100% agreement with him on this subject.

Richard, you are missed.  Rest in peace.

Lying Liz Warren gets slammed by Senator Scott Brown in debate

It's about time Senator Scott Brown puts this pathetic liar and tool of the Libs away.

Fauxcahontas found out last night her lies will not carry her into office. Take a look at the picture from last night. Prof. " Blame America First" Warren who doesn't wear an American Flag on her lapel, just like her boss/mentor President Doofus.

Scott Brown charges out of gate, slams Liz Warren on ‘truthfulness’ By Hillary Chabot and Joe Battenfeld Friday, September 21, 2012 - Boston Herald

U.S. Sen. Scott Brown turned aggressor in his first debate clash with rival Elizabeth Warren, questioning her character for claiming to be Native American and scolding her for “scaring women” to win votes.

“She checked the box claiming she was a Native American, and clearly she’s not,” Brown said in the opening minute of the debate, referring to law school directories where Warren listed herself as a Native American minority.

“When you are a United States senator, you have to pass a test, and that’s one of character and honesty and truthfulness,” Brown said. “And I believe and others believe that she’s failed that test.”

Read the whole thing -

http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1061161946&position=1

Dennis Miller nails PELOSI

Pelosi... man. How'd you like to go through life looking like you were perpetually witnessing the docking of the Hindenburg?

— Dennis Miller Show (@DennisDMZ) August 28, 2012

Follow Dennis Miller on Twitter - He is a riot

The $50 Lesson

Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbors stopped to chat as they returned home fromwalking their dog. During our friendly conversation, I asked their little girl what she wanted to be when she grew up.

 

She said she wanted to be President some day. Both of her parents, Liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, "If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?"

 

She replied... "I'd give food and houses to all the homeless people."

 

Her parents beamed with pride!

 

"Wow...what a worthy goal!" I said. "But you don't have to wait until you're President to do that!" I told her.

 

"What do you mean?" she replied.

 

So I told her, "You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I'll pay you $50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house."

 She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked,

"Why doesn't the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?"

I said, " Welcome to the Republican Party. "

Her parents aren't speaking to me anymore.

The HYPOCRISY of the LIBERAL MEDIA knows no bounds

If you read this blog, you know I am big about the definition of words as the definition is important.

Today's word is:

hy·poc·ri·sy - Noun:The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

As in MEDIA HYPOCRISY.

The idjits who sit in the ivory towers at the NY Times and other bastions of LIB stupidity will condemn Ann Romney for wearing a $990 shirt, but lavish praise on the First Lady for wearing a $6800 outfit.

Pathetic. The worst part is they think you and I are stupid and will not catch on to the way they try to scam us.

Both Presidential Candidates are Millionaires.  Both have more money than common sense.  Both are far above the majority of average Americans.

To think the Media can be so partial and basically be cheerleaders for one candidate and condemn another is the surest sign that things are not what they should be in reporting.

The Journalists who act this way are lying to you.  I see it, and others see it.  They should be ashamed to show their faces as things have gone downhill for what passes as reporting the news.

Edward R. Murrow must be spinning in his grave. 

VOTE and show the idjits in the media you know that they are liars.  Buck the system and put the liars on the losing side as that is the best way to show them you know their game is up.


Ann Romney slammed for $990 Shirt, Michelle Obama praised for $6,800 jacketBy Hollie McKay
Pop Tarts
Published August 01, 2012

Back in May, Ann Romney, wife of Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, wore a $990 Reed Krakoff silk shirt for a media appearance. The item of clothing set off a media firestorm, with the Romneys widely accused of being “out of touch” with average Americans.
In particular, the Washington Post wrote that the $990 blouse “will not help her husband change those perceptions, no matter how many Laundromat photo ops are on the campaign’s itinerary.”

Fast forward to last Friday, when First Lady Michelle Obama attended an Olympics reception for heads of state at Buckingham Palace, donning a J. Mendel cap sleeve jacket from the 2013 Resort collection.

The price-tag? $6,800.

This time, the Washington Post simply described the intricacies of the jacket and noted that Mrs. Obama has previously been criticized for “not dressing up enough for Queen Elizabeth II, so she stepped up her game.” No snide remarks, no outrage over the cost, no suggestion she was “out of touch.”

“The media’s overabundant love affair with the Obamas has become increasingly blatant as this election draws nearer. Scrutinizing Mrs. Romney for a fashion choice that cost considerably less than that of the First Lady is yet another example of the media being purely sanctimonious,” former political publicist Angie Meyer told FoxNews.com. “The media continues to relish their roles as liberal bullies, and have relentlessly bullied the Romneys from the beginning. It is pure hypocrisy at its finest.”

Glenn Selig of The Publicity Agency concurred.

“The media will not stay quiet on the issue because wealth remains a big issue with the Romneys. It is not his fault that he's wealthy, but the media is portraying it as a liability,” Selig said.

Dan Gainor, VP of Business and Culture for Media Research Center in Washington DC, said it’s “just the latest example of a consistent media theme that somehow Romney is too wealthy and out of touch because he's a millionaire. Except of course that Obama is also a millionaire. “

Some also highlighted the apparent hypocrisy on Twitter. “And you thought the Romneys were out of touch?” tweeted one, while another wondered who had to pay for the almost $7,000 dress, and another balked that the “jacket would put a lot of food on the table of one of the 25M unemployed people in USA.”

Not everyone’s nose was out of joint, however. Media commentator Jenn Hoffman told FoxNews.com that “Americans need to face the fact that with our current system, politicians need to have money. That is how they get into the office in the first place. If you are near the White House, you have access to serious cash and much of that cash is spent on honing your image.”

Mark Joseph, producer of “Wild Card: The Promise & Peril of Sarah Palin,” added that “Mrs. Romney's wardrobe expenses are certainly fair game, but so are Mrs. Obama's, and political reporters have got to do a better job of being even-handed."

The Missing Piece

The DEMS and their sycophants at the NY TIMES must be hitting the Kool-Aid pretty hard.

Take a look at this article - " Do Democrats Have A Shot At The House" by Nate Silver

Here's the link - http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/do-democrats-have-a-shot-at-the-house/

He talks about a number of factors like all polling shows the GOP handily keeping control of the House, redistricting, hope that an improving economy will boost DEMS chances, blah, blah, blah....

What is CURIOUS to me as a reader is that he doesn't talk about the one factor that will compel all NOT to vote the DEMS into control of the HOUSE of REPS - NANCY PELOSI.

No one wants the Wicked Witch from SAN FRAN back in charge of the HOUSE.....no one.  That is because she presided over the most screwed up sessions of Congress on record.  The crap that went on under her "leadership" was pathetic.

So blather on DEM Dummies - Especially the NY TIMES idjits.

NO ONE is going to put that witch back in the roll of Speaker.  No how, no way.

Now maybe we can get Dorthy to drop a house on her......

The truth - Obama has failed and doesn't deserve re-election.

Earlier this morning, I thought there was nothing worth writing about this morning.

Guess I was wrong. Looks like the "Village Idiot from Chicago" gave me what I needed.
The President's re-election team has set up " truth teams ' to make sure the truth gets out about his record.

Here is the truth - He has been the worst President ever. We needed leadership and all we got was lefty looney politics. That's the truth. He has spent us into a larger hole and rewarded his political allies.

The truth - it hurts. I hope he gets that when he is voted out of office as the truth is no one needs another term from this poser.

OMG - Obama Must Go.

Feb 13, 2012
Obama campaign sets up 'Truth Team'

By David Jackson, USA TODAY
AP - President Obama's re-election team is seeking help from Internet and on-the-ground backers to spread the word about Obama's record in office, and to bash his Republican critics.

The purpose of the "Truth Team" is to "promote the President's achievements, respond to attacks on his record and hold the eventual Republican nominee accountable," said the announcement from the Obama re-election team.

A Good Question....

Rich LIB POLS & Celebrities seek political gains by supporting the OWS crowd....Can you say " Hypocritical"?

An enlightened and thoughtful overview of the OWS issue - On one hand, OWS says that the 1% are the issue - simultaneously, you have POLS & other LIBS like Micheal Moore (Millionaries all) saying they support the OWS goals.

None of the rich LIB supporters are putting their $$$ where their mouths are...They only like that the OWS causes havoc and unrest. None of the LIB celebrities is willing to give out their own money or change their lifestyles...They just want to protests to continue as they are trying to make political gain off of the unrest.

If you spent $100K for a degree in ancient civilizations and feel upset that you can't find a job with that degree, you obviously made a poor choice in spending 4 years studying a subject that has very limited career opportunities. We all make choices and we all need to be responsible for our own decisions.

VICTOR DAVIS HANSON makes some good points.....well worth reading.


Occupy What?
November 4, 2011 - 11:35 am - by Victor Davis Hanson

Playing With Fire - PJMEDIA

Occupy Wall Street follows three years of sloppy presidential name-calling — “millionaires and billionaires,” slurs about Las Vegas and the Super Bowl, profit-mad, limb-lopping doctors, introspection that now is not the time for profits and at some point we should cease making money, spread the wealth, punish our enemies, and all the old Obama boilerplate. Someone finally got the message about the evil 1%.

When Ms. Pelosi and President Obama voice support for the protestors, we enter 1984. Does that mean that the Pelosis now pull their millions out of Wall Street, that the First Family eschews the 1% at Martha’s Vineyard and Vail? That Obama turns his back on Wall Street cash, and, for once, accepts public funding for his 2012 campaign? Postmodern class warfare is an insidious business, and hinges on its advocates not looking in the mirror.

No wise politician should invest in the bunch like those rampaging in Oakland. Their nocturnal frolics are a long way from Woody Guthrie’s Deportee, the Hobos’ “Big Rock Candy Mountain,” and the world John Steinbeck fictionalized. It is the angst of the wannabe class, overeducated and underemployed, which chooses to live not in Akron or Fowler, but in tony places like the Bay Area or New York, where annual rents are far more than a down payment on a starter house in the Midwest. Being educated, but broke and in proximity to the wealthy of like upbringing and background, are ingredients for riot.

I saw videos of youths burning things in Oakland, but was told that it “was a small minority” and atypical of the protest. Not long ago I saw no clips of anyone spitting at black congresspeople wading into the Tea-Party demonstration, but was told they did and that it was typical of tens of thousands of racialists on the Mall.

But Some Are Less Equal Than Others

I don’t think the protests are really much over the Goldman Sachs bailout, or jerks like revolving-door Budget Director Peter Orszag starting back up at Citigroup, or Solyndra crony capitalism. Apparently, most middle-class and upper-middle class liberals—many of them (at least from videos) young and white—are angry at the “system.” And so they are occupying (at least until it gets really cold and wet) financial districts, downtowns, and other areas of commerce across the well-reported urban landscape. As yet there is no definable grievance other than anger that others are doing too well, and the protestors themselves are not doing at all well, and the one has something to do with the other. I am not suggesting union members and the unemployed poor are not present, only that the tip of the spear seems to be furious young middle class kids of college age and bearing, who mope around stunned, as in “what went wrong?”

Then there is a wider, global phenomenon of the angry college student. In the Middle East, much of the unrest, whether Islamist, liberal, or hard-core leftist, is fueled by young unemployed college graduates. Ditto Europe in general, and Greece in particular: The state subsidizes college loans and the popular culture accepts an even longer period between adolescence and adulthood, say between 18 and 30 something. Students emerge “aware,” but poorly educated, highly politicized, and with unreal expectations about their market worth in an ossifying society, often highly regulated and statist.

The decision has been made long ago not to marry at 23, have two or three kids by 27, and go to work in the private sector in hopes of moving up the ladder by 30. Perhaps at 35, a European expects that a job opens up in the Ministry of Culture or the elderly occupant of a coveted rent-controlled flat dies.

Students rarely graduate in four years, but scrape together parental support and, in the bargain, often bed, laundry, and breakfast, federal and state loans and grants, and part-time minimum wage jobs to “go to college.” By traditional rubrics—living at home, having the car insurance paid by dad and mom, meals cooked by someone else—many are still youths. But by our new standards—sexually active, familiar with drugs or alcohol, widely traveled and experienced—many are said to be adults.

Debt mounts. Jobs are few. For the vast majority who are not business majors, engineers, or vocational technicians, there are few jobs or opportunities other than more debt in grad or law school. In the old days, an English or history degree was a certificate of inductive thinking, broad knowledge, writing skills, and a good background for business, teaching, or professionalism. Not now. The watered down curriculum and politically-correct instruction ensure a certain glibness without real skills, thought, or judgment. Most employers are no longer impressed.

Students with such high opinions of themselves are angry that others less aware—young bond traders, computer geeks, even skilled truck drivers—make far more money. Does a music degree from Brown, a sociology BA in progress from San Francisco State, two years of anthropology at UC Riverside count for anything? They are angry at themselves and furious at their own like class that they think betrayed them. After all, if a man knows about the construction of gender or a young woman has read Rigoberta Menchu, or both have formed opinions about Hiroshima, the so-called Native American genocide, and gay history, why is that not rewarded in a way that derivatives or root canal work surely are?

Class—family pedigree, accent, clothes, schooling—now mean nothing. You can meet your Dartmouth roommate working in Wall Street at Starbucks, and seem for all appearances his identical twin. But when you walk out the door with your environmental studies degree, you reenter the world of debt and joblessness, he back into the world of good money. Soooo unfair for those of like class.

Then there is the sad hypocrisy of the Occupy Wall Street mess. Are Oprah and George Soros enemies of the people? Are the criteria that one must both be rich and right-wing to exempt a John Kerry, Warren Buffett, or Nancy Pelosi? Multimillionaire Michael Moore dresses like a buffoon, spouts his usual silly Flint, Michigan, shtick, and earns an indulgence? Are former New Jersey Governor Corzine and the BP and Goldman Sachs execs, who were so eager to fund Obama’s campaign, also class insects? Why not an occupy White House for near three years of 9.1% unemployment, an occupy Hollywood for John Depp’s $50 million last year, or occupy the LA Lakers gym for obscene basketball salaries? Why not occupy Sacramento for the $200,000 plus retirement pensions from a bankrupt state? Or for that matter, why not occupy dad’s house?

And then there are the sloppy rubrics “millionaires and billionaires.” A software engineer who makes $150,000 a year, and has a $850,000, 1200 sq. foot bungalow in Menlo Park (= one million in net worth) is to be in the same category as those worth 1000x more—or even a Bill Gates or Jay Rockefeller? The young radiologist who brings in $250,000, but pays the full tab for his two kids at USC and Occidental ($100,000 per year) is analogous to the late billionaire Steve Jobs, or is he that much better off than the DMV supervisor at a $65,000 salary, with less taxes, and whose three kids are all on state grants at CSUs? We need a government Department of Assessing Net Worth to factor in locale, entitlements, dispensations, cost of living, and housing to adjudicate who is what.

Are we back to reckoning relative rather than absolute wealth? Mr. Victor Hanson is poor and mows his own lawn, and Donald Trump has 1,000 gardeners? My Accord has fake leather seats and those in Leonardo DiCaprio’s Mercedes are real hide? My 140-year old frame house is worth only $150,000 in Selma, and something that looks just like it is worth a million in Palo Alto? Is the roof better on that account?

The whole point of globalization was to extend the simulacra of the aristocratic class to the common man. It succeeded brilliantly. Go to Wal-Mart and get fitted with “outdoor wear,” walk out and to the untrained eye (like mine) it looks about the same as the stuff at ten times the cost at REI or Eddie Bauer. I spoke at a financial group of zillionaires not long ago. Afterwards a young woman complimented my garish “black and gold watch band.” I replied, “A great deal at Walmart at $19.00.” What great wealth brings today is not elemental advantage, but optional delight in the sense of flying private rather than coach, six homes instead of one, a week in Tuscany rather in Pismo Beach. In absolute terms, not all that much; in terms of highly aware younger people, cosmically unfair! I was riding my bike the other day: a farm worker emerging from an almond orchard was on his iPhone, not unlike the ones I see in Occupy Wall Street clips. Weird world.

These are upside down times. The EU that was to be our model is in shambles. The supposedly white right-wing champions a Herman Cain, with deep South baritones and youthful experience with Jim Crow. Yet both are considered suspect, while a Hawaiian prep school, Ivy League graduate, with contrived black cadences, is the better representative of the African-American experience. Never have Americans’ prospects seemed brighter—vast new energy reserves, an unmatched military, disarray in Russia, the Middle East and Europe—and never have been Americans been more conditioned and readied for decline. In such surreal times, we see the anguish of the upper-middle class at Occupy Wall Street, championed by multimillionaires, whose overt liberalism is offered as some sort of exemption.

Senator Scott Brown has the support of Massachusetts Voters - Elizabeth Warren (and her pal Nancy Pelosi), not so much...

Massachusetts Senator Scott brown has been taking heat from the DEMS due to something that started on the Democratic Primary Debate. I don't feel it is worth rehashing here as it amounted to two off hand remarks, one made by Warren, and a response Brown made to a radio station DJ's inquiry. The media blew it up and if you weighed the importance of this pair of remarks to the real issues ( jobs, economy, etc.), this issue is laughable.

Well Rep. Nancy Pelosi decided to weigh in.

As a Massachusetts voter, I can say without a doubt that Nancy Pelosi can stick to her own business before she tries to say anything about anyone else. Her credibility is a shallow as water on a flat rock. Americans gave her a clear message on what they thought about her "whacky" ideas of what is needed in America.

Senator Scott Brown was elected because even the citizen of Massachusetts are sick of the LIBS version of America and all it represents. While Elizabeth Warren has supporters, she'll find that Senator Brown has more here because he represents the real needs of the citizens of Massachusetts. Elizabeth Warren is a Harvard elitist and has no idea what the average family in Massachusetts is facing these days.

Senator Brown is a decorated Veteran and has served his nation. That alone makes him highly suited for the position of US Senator as we need more Veterans in Congress.

Senator Scott Brown, you have our support & votes. Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi and the other LIBS, you can't leave the stage quick enough as you don't have a clue.


Pelosi says senator's comment 'disrespectful to women'
CNN Political Unit
(CNN) -– House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Sunday that comments made by Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown about a Democratic rival showed a “disrespect for women.”

Brown made the remarks Thursday, when asked about candidate Elizabeth Warren’s statement that she had “kept her clothes on” while paying for college. Warren was making reference to a nearly nude 1982 Cosmopolitan magazine photo shoot that Brown did to earn money at age 22.

When asked about the comment during a radio interview with WZLX in Boston, Brown said only, "Thank God.”

Pelosi said Sunday on the ABC program “This Week” that the comment was disrespectful.

“The response you just gave, 'Thank God,' really, I thought spoke volumes about how clueless Senator Brown is,” Pelosi said. “It really spoke volumes about, really, disrespect for women that he may not even realize. I bet you he'd like to take that comment back.”

Pelosi acknowledged that the comment was likely meant to be a joke, but maintained that it was still revealing of Brown’s character.

“I hope it's joke-y. And if it is, then hopefully he will take that comment back. But women know. They hear a comment like that, it tells you a lot about somebody,” Pelosi said

San Francisco is going to the Dogs.....literally.

San Francisco is going to the Dogs...literally.

The home of Nancy Pelosi and known bastion of all things lefty-looney-liberal has a group of dedicated dog owners (puppy parents is the new term), forming a PAC to take on the city in making more parks open to our 4 legged friends.

This is a good thing and in a city where dogs outnumber children, they are a politically strong group. Data shows that pet owners spend just as much on their 4 legged children as parents do on human children. We are a country of dog lovers.

Now if we can just get a muzzle fitted to Nancy Pelosi, all will be well.


Dog Lovers Form PAC in San Francisco
Published October 03, 2011 Associated Press

There are more dogs than kids in the City by the Bay. So it stands to reason dog owners carry a lot of clout -- so much so they believe their endorsement can sway the upcoming mayoral race.

Dog lovers have formed a political action committee to promote the interests of their four-footed friends, namely space to run free in one of the world's largest urban national parks. And they are calling on mayoral candidates to defend their stands on canine affairs.

"We expect the dog vote to be a game-changer," said Bruce Wolfe, president of DogPAC, which held a forum attended by several mayoral hopefuls Saturday.

There are an estimated 150,000 dogs in the city, compared with some 108,000 children, according to the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the 2010 U.S. Census. More than 800,000 people are sandwiched into 7-by-7 square miles in the city named for St. Francis, patron saint of animals.

As more parents seeking new schools and lower housing costs move out of the city, more straight and gay couples, as well as aging baby boomers, are choosing canines over kids. San Francisco is renowned for its dog parks and, like Paris, many of its restaurants and shops welcome pampered pooches in their leopard-print sweaters and bling-ringed dog collars.

City officials typically can be found at animal fairs and forums. Debates over the funding of the city's Animal Control department and bans on the sale of shark fins and pet-store hamsters can turn into big brouhahas.

"Our four-legged family members and companions are some of the most important partners in life," said Wolfe, who has a disability and recently lost Charlie, his service dog of 10 years. "San Franciscans take their dogs very seriously."

Seven of the 16 candidates vying for City Hall's top job in the Nov. 8 election attended Saturday's DogPAC forum, where candidates were asked about the cost of dog licenses, trash cans in parks where owners can dispose of dog waste and pet-friendly rental housing for people who want to adopt foster animals.

Candidate Joanna Rees -- a venture capitalist with two dogs, Jack and Jill -- held her own "Bark in the Park" forum several weeks ago.

"Dogs are an important part of many families and neighborhoods across our community," said Rees. "Open lines of communication between City Hall and pet owners -- as with merchants, educators, parents, working families and other stakeholder groups -- are the foundation of good policy."

Some campaign websites even note where candidates stand on puppy policy.

"Making San Francisco a family friendly city means recognizing the multitude of ways in which we define families," City Attorney Dennis Herrera says on his site. "And in the city of St. Francis, that includes dogs and companion animals."

Herrera made national headlines in 2002 when he sued Petco Animal Supplies Inc. for the alleged mistreatment of animals after lengthy city investigations. The pet supply chain settled the lawsuit, and the rock star Pink sent her thanks in a photo pasted on his website.

Candidate John Avalos, a city supervisor, took the chance to take a swipe at his chief competitor, incumbent Mayor Ed Lee, who was not attending the forum and has been criticized for skirting some public events where he's thrown impromptu questions.

"As a mayoral candidate, I would ask the current mayor whether his Rose Garden strategy of avoiding debates and forums is keeping him from engaging with a group of real, engaged, and powerful San Francisco voters," Avalos said.

The big issue that has the city's dog owners on edge is an investigation by the National Parks Service as to whether it should close down great swaths of parkland in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties where dogs are allowed to run off leash. The Golden Gate National Recreation Area, some 75,400 acres of open land and water, is nearly two and a half times the size of the city of San Francisco itself. The Park Service's proposed dog plan, which will be finalized next year, has elicited about 4,700 public comments on its website.

The Park Service is considering mandating leashes in some open spaces and fencing off some popular dog-walking areas. They and environmentalists want to protect some 1,200 native plant and animal species, including the Snowy Plover, a federally endangered shorebird.

The Golden Gate Audubon Society is working with the Park Service to find the right balance. Measures they're recommending would mandate that dog walkers be limited to three dogs each and that professional dog walkers be required to carry permits.

"It's hard to show people what's not there," said Mark Welther, executive director of the society. "But our people have been doing bird surveys in the Bay Area for 75 years, and time after time our bird-counters will tell us that in the areas opened up to dogs -- the birds have disappeared."

Fort Funston, a former military outpost of sand dunes and eucalyptus groves on cliffs that overlook the Pacific Ocean, is one of the most beloved dog parks in America. Dogs run free in joyous packs through trails that line the 35 acres of wilderness.

Wolfe and Sally Stephens, president of the dog owners' association, SF Dog, walked the Fort Funston trails last week and handed out leaflets to the dog walkers, urging them to attend the forum and help them decide which mayoral candidate they should endorse.

"It is miles and miles of smiles out here," Stephens said, as dog walkers cheered on Fritz, a plucky Dachshund who needs wheels on his hind legs to get around and keep up with his pack. "It's such a great community out here -- and people who don't have dogs just don't get that."

Ted, White & Blue.....Or how to make a Liberal Weenie Scream....

On a regular basis, I like to post something like this just to hear the sound of the Liberal Tree-huggers screaming....Ted is like a cartoon character but he does actually make sense....not that I would support all the things TED does but the man makes a few good points here and there....

So for all you Lefty Looney Liberal, (Progressive)Spotted Owl tongue kissing, Al Gore loving, Prius driving Greenie, PETA worshipping, Nancy Pelosi SF Voting, Obama supporting freaks -

This bit of "Ted, White & Blue" is for just for you !


NUGENT: You have the right to remain stupid
Fedzillacrats are oblivious to self-evident truths
By Ted Nugent

The Washington Times
July 13, 2011

You have the right to remain stupid, and what you say and do can and will be used against you in the court of public opinion. Unfortunately, the court of public opinion is expanding into a stupid-is-as-stupid-does joke. And it has a president and gang of thieves in the United States government to represent it.

So goes the sheeping of America. Welcome to Euro II.

With the level of dishonesty, fraud, abuse of power, corruption, rampant irresponsibility, downright criminal behavior and vehement refusal to be accountable, our government has clearly lost its collective mind - and its soul.

The brain-dead, zombielike nonsense blurting out of Democrats' pie holes is mind-boggling as they feebly attempt to rationalize raising the debt ceiling, scrambling mindlessly to explain how increased runaway, criminal spending on gluttonous, wasteful, superfluous stuff is a good thing.

"Honey, we're in debt up to our asses. Let's go shopping and increase our gluttonous indulgences. Yeah, that's the ticket."

Is there a Dr. Phil or an Oprah to counsel psychotic bureaucrats? Somebody has to put a halt to this insanity as quickly as possible. We the people of the Tea Party are trying with all our might but there must be somebody in government that can stop this. Somebody?

The separation of legislative, executive and judicial branches of government has turned into one big gang of complicit goons, scratching each other's backs and scheming to increase their own dishonest assault on we the people. Oh, how they have forgotten their oath to the U.S. Constitution. Oh, woe are they.

A nasty, unclean gaggle of Americans read the nonstop reports of mass graves in Mexico, the mountains of dead bodies, the unending exhuming of slaughtered innocents and decapitated citizens and public officials at the hands of evil drug cartels, then nonchalantly purchase another load of the mind- and life-destroying dope that these subhuman heathens peddle. You have to be on dope in order to fail to admit how your illegal or "medical" marijuana consumption creates wanton death and mayhem in your own communities and country. Thanks for nothing, idiots.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and their complicit gang of America-hating snake-oil salesmen represent the most clear and present economic raping and pillaging in our country's history. Instead of ending the tragedy, the perpetrators are given bonuses and hired by our already-criminal-infested government. And they call it "creating jobs." Mao Zedong and Al Capone would be proud.

In the American West, where inhabitants have been raising hell for 20-plus years about how grizzly bears pose a serious and constant threat to people's lives and livelihoods, inept, ignorant bureaucrats enforce dangerous policy by calling these overpopulated bears an endangered species. A hiker gets killed by a grizzly again and these geniuses respond by reminding people to whistle and bang on pots and pans.

In the middle of a war on terror, invaders infiltrate our southern border with impunity and instead of living up to their oath to protect America, soulless Fedzillacrats erect signs on American soil not warning the invaders to leave but rather warning American citizens to stay out of the invaded territory. Meanwhile, the feds sue Arizona for enforcing American laws.

Charlie Rangel, Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle and God knows how many other criminal tax cheats get caught red-handed, and none of them are brought to anything resembling justice. Are you kidding me?

Former Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and current Mayor Rahm Emanuel, along with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, forbid their subjects to protect themselves but charge their subjects higher taxes to pay for their own heavily armed security detail.

Texas rightly decides to execute a convicted murderer-rapist of an innocent little girl and the president and secretary of state side with the murderous, rotten-to-the-core United Nations goons instead of with their own country. Are you kidding me?

I end up in a state-of-the-art emergency room at a Canadian hospital with a serious blood-gushing dog bite and wait 6 1/2 hours to see a doctor. In Waco, Texas, I wait less than a minute. Our fearless community-organizer-in-chief wants to fundamentally transform American health care into Canadian health care - unless, of course, you qualify for a crony-payoff waiver of this diabolical scam shoved down the throats of we the people. Are you kidding me?

Food stampers increase their fraud and criminal abuse of an already-failed welfare slavery system, and our numbnut politicians let President Obama increase it fourfold. Are you kidding me?

Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven write the ultimate America-hating guideline on how to bring down the greatest quality of life in the history of mankind, and the Obama administration puts their ideas on the fast track in broad daylight, yet no one stops him. Are you kidding me?

Unions continue to demand more compensation for less productivity or quality control. The list of jobs Americans are not willing to do gets longer by the day as soylent-green foreigners continue to kick our butts because they don't allow such a list. Are you kidding me?

With another glaring, smoke-and-mirrors defiance of the pledge to government transparency, the No. 1 cop in America, aided and abetted by the vehemently anti-gun president, knowingly breaks the law and his oath to the Constitution by running illegally begotten guns to Mexican murderers, then tries to blame legitimate American gun dealers. Nothing like a good backfire to spotlight the cockroaches.

I could go on, but I'm getting sick to my stomach, as are an increasing number of American citizens sickened by the flagrant criminality of our government. I would like to go on record that the U.S. government is now more offensive and in violation of self-evident truths and God-given individual rights and liberties than the British government was in 1775.

Make note, bureaucrats. We have had enough, are completely fed up with the insanity and we officially put you on notice: You're fired. When we go to the polls in 2012, we are committed to give most of you a good dose of what unemployment feels like. And from now on, you will have to create your own jobs because governments - especially a bloated, criminally abusive government like we have in America today - is unforgivable, unsustainable and will not be tolerated any longer.

I would highly recommend you all seek treatment for your allergies to logic, truth, good will, decency, accountability and the American Way. If you don't get help soon, God only knows what will become of you.

Ted Nugent is an American rock 'n' roll, sporting and political activist icon. He is the author of "Ted, White and Blue: The Nugent Manifesto" and "God, Guns & Rock 'N' Roll" (Regnery Publishing).

The Liberal Left Loonies want to make nice-nice with the Taliban after OBL's Death

The enclosed article is about as dumb as Pakistan saying, " We didn't know OBL was in our country.."

Are you flippin' kidding me?? OBL is dead so we'll call the AFGHN War "over" and just go home??? The idjit who wrote this tripe from the Boston Globe must be a "People's Republic of Cambridge, MA" Tree-Hugger.

OK - I understand that AL Qeada used Afghanistan at the start of the the war as a base of operations BUT the people we are fighting RIGHT NOW are NOT Al Qeada....The total number of AL Qeada fighters in AFGHN are estimated to be near 100..... Most of the AL Qeada forces are in Pakistan.

We are fighting the Taliban.....They are not someone we should "negotiate" with as they are Narco-Terrorists, plain & simple. These Bastards use terror against the people of Afghanistan and the idjits in Washington DC want to negotiate with these fools???? They don't want to negotiate, they want us to leave so they go back to doing things like hanging a 7 year old child (which they did in Kandahar last year) and treating women like they were cattle.

We need to see this action through and not allow the liberal "Blame America First" crowd to use OBL's death as a wedge to undue all the hard work and sacrifice we made to set Afghanistan free go to waste....

I know people are weary and the task is large but we as Americans cannot give into the "path of least resistance". We are much better than that. The people of Afghanistan are looking to us to follow through with what we promised. We told them we would provide them with freedom and security.....To "cut & run" now would be as bad as when the same Liberal Lefties wants to do in Iraq....and we all now see that Iraq is a free country, and in a much better condition than we found it.

The LEFT was wrong then and they are wrong now.

Calls grow for Afghan pullout
Bin Laden demise changes the debate

By Theo Emery
Boston Globe Staff / May 4, 2011

WASHINGTON — Osama bin Laden’s death fueled demands yesterday for a hastened drawdown of US forces in Afghanistan, despite warnings that a rapid withdrawal could lead that nation into chaos.

Fewer than 100 Al Qaeda fighters are believed to remain in the country, according to CIA assessments, and bin Laden’s death is the most dramatic illustration of how attacks have decimated the terrorist group’s leadership.

“With Al Qaeda largely displaced from the country, but franchised in other locations, Afghanistan does not carry a strategic value that justifies 100,000 American troops and a $100 billion per year cost, especially given current fiscal constraints,’’ Senator Richard G. Lugar, an influential Republican voice on foreign policy for decades, said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing yesterday.

The death of bin Laden, the Americans’ primary target at the onset of the war 10 years ago, comes at a key juncture. President Obama has vowed to begin withdrawing forces in July and is awaiting an assessment by the outgoing coalition leader, General David H. Petraeus, before revealing how deep the cuts will be and whether combat troops will be included.

The White House said yesterday the killing of bin Laden early Monday morning in Abbottabad, Pakistan, would have no bearing on that decision. “The pace of that drawdown will be determined by conditions on the ground,’’ said Jay Carney, White House spokesman.

[Off the record, some in the administration spoke of a dramatic shift, according to the Washington Post.]

[The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghanistan war, according to US officials involved in war policy, the paper reported.]

[Administration officials think it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with Al Qaeda, a key US requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists, the story said.]

[“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the end game in Afghanistan,’’ the article quoted a senior administration as saying. “It changes everything.’’]

Several lawmakers were outspoken.

The time has long passed for any incremental shifts or symbolic cuts, said Representative James McGovern, a longtime critic of the war.

“Enough is enough. This is an incredible blow to Al Qaeda that Osama bin Laden is no longer on the scene, and let’s focus like a laser beam on Al Qaeda [in other countries], and let’s get out of Afghanistan,’’ said the Worcester Democrat, who plans to introduce legislation this week calling on the president to provide an exit strategy

Bin Laden’s death and the dispersal of his terrorist network from Afghanistan are expected to forge antiwar alliances among unlikely partners. Representative Ron Paul, conservative Republican from Texas, and Representative Barney Frank, liberal Democrat of Newton, have jointly called for troops to be pulled from Afghanistan as part of a global effort to reduce US missions and cut costs.

“You’ll see everybody from the libertarians like Rand and Ron Paul to even the old gray beards like Lugar beginning to express that we’ve done this for 10 years, it’s a bottomless pit, we can’t afford to keep doing it, and this is a good occasion to start to withdraw,’’ said Robert L. Borosage, codirector of Campaign for America’s Future, a Washington group that promotes liberal causes.

Rand Paul, the Texas lawmaker’s son, is a senator from Kentucky.

In October of 2001, there was also an across-the-political-spectrum consensus. The United States, sending CIA operatives and special forces on the ground and bombers to control the skies, had broad support for its campaign to help rebels rout the Taliban, which sheltered Al Qaeda’s leaders in Afghanistan.

The World Trade Center lay in ruins, and the Pentagon building had a gaping hole. President Bush said the goal was to capture or kill bin Laden, the prime suspect in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, deny a safe haven to his Al Qaeda network, and drive the Taliban from power.

With the death of bin Laden and the dismantling of the Al Qaeda’s Afghan network, two objectives have been met. Yet, after being ousted in 2001, the Taliban have reemerged, taking large swaths of the country back. Their strength prompted Obama to bolster US forces in the early days of his presidency.

The US cost of the Afghan war is $444 billion so far, according to a Congressional Research Service report in March. In all, more than 2,350 coalition forces have been killed, including about 1,500 Americans.

Several prominent members of Congress on national security warned yesterday that using bin Laden’s death as a justification for a more rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan would only accelerate the advances by the Taliban and embolden Al Qaeda.

“Bin Laden is a historic moment, but it’s not the end of the struggle,’’ said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. “Trust me, nobody wants our guys to come home — and gals — any more than I do. I just don’t want them to have to go back.’’

If anything, said Senator Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, the death demonstrates that the United States should continue its mission with other targets, including leaders of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

“The killing of bin Laden gives us a certain momentum in Afghanistan. That’s all to the good,’’ Lieberman said. “If I was a Taliban leader, all the way up to Mullah Omar, I would be frightened today.’’

Polling released yesterday show Americans remain sharply divided over the war. A USA Today-Gallup poll indicates that 45 percent of the 645 respondents believe the United States has accomplished its mission, while 53 percent said that important work remains to be done. A separate Washington Post-Pew Research Center poll found that after bin Laden’s death, approval of President Obama’s handling of Afghanistan rose substantially.

Lugar’s counterpart on the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator John F. Kerry, acknowledged bin Laden’s death could be a game-changer in neighboring Afghanistan but suggested that Congress and the administration carefully consider the possible repercussions of ending the fight against the Taliban too soon.

“Some people are sure to ask why don’t we just pack up and leave Afghanistan,’’ said the Massachusetts Democrat, who plans to visit Afghanistan in the next few weeks on a fact-finding mission. “So it’s even more compelling that we examine carefully what’s at stake, what goals are legitimate and realistic, what is our real security challenge, and how do we achieve the interests of our country.

Such a methodical, far-reaching evaluation is vital before there’s any change in strategy, agreed Senator Scott Brown, who asked for permission to serve in Afghanistan for his annual summer training as a member of the National Guard. Intelligence and military experts need to careful review how to move forward in the aftermath of bin Laden’s death, including examining evidence gleaned from his compound, he said.

“Apparently, it was a treasure trove of information and intelligence. If that leads to drawing down quicker, amen to that,’’ the Massachusetts Republican said. “But we’re not going to do it prematurely. We need to keep the pressure on.’’

Theo Emery can be reached at temery@globe.com

© Copyright 2011 Globe Newspaper Company

A picture is worth a thousand words....

The Mid-Term Elections of 2010 - The year voters saw the left's unvarnished agenda and said " NO"

I have to agree as the Wall Street Journal calls this one spot-on....The Voters saw it too and that was why POTUS described the mid-term elections as a "shellacking"


WSJ REVIEW & OUTLOOK
DECEMBER 31, 2010
The Liberal Reckoning of 2010
The year voters saw the left's unvarnished agenda and said no.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sent out a press release last week headlined "111th Congress Accomplishments." It quoted a couple of Democratic Party cheerleaders calling this the greatest Congress since 1965-66 (Norm Ornstein) or even the New Deal (David Leonhardt), and listed in capital letters no fewer than 30 legislative triumphs: Health Care Reform, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a Jobs Package (HIRE Act), the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, Food Safety, the Travel Promotion Act, Student Loan Reform, Hate Crimes Prevention, and so much more.
What the release did not mention is the loss of 63 House and six Senate seats, and a mid-December Gallup poll approval rating of 13%. Never has a Congress done so much and been so despised for it.

While this may appear to be a contradiction, it is no accident or even much of a surprise. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party had been waiting since the 1960s for its next great political opening, as we warned in an October 17, 2008 editorial, "A Liberal Supermajority." Critics and some of our readers scored us at the time for exaggerating, but in retrospect we understated the willful nature of that majority.

Democrats achieved 60 Senate votes by an historical accident of prosecutorial abuse (Ted Stevens), a stolen election (Al Franken) and a betrayal (Arlen Specter). They then attempted to do nearly everything we expected, regardless of public opinion, and they only stopped because the clock ran out.

The real story of 2010 is that the voters were finally able to see and judge this liberal agenda in its unvarnished form. For once, there was no Republican President to muddle the message or divide the accountability. The public was able to compare the promise of 8% unemployment if the government spent $812 billion on "stimulus" with the 9.8% jobless result. They stood athwart liberal history in the making and said, "Stop."

Note well, however, that the Democrats still standing on Capitol Hill remain unchastened. In her exit interviews, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she would do it all the same way again, and her colleagues have seconded her lack of remorse by keeping her as their leader despite their November thumping. Her consolation to defeated Democrats was not to invite them to the House caucus meeting when she denounced President Obama's tax deal with Republicans.

Note, too, that the organized left and its media allies are also beginning to rewrite the story of the 111th Congress as an historical triumph. The same people who claimed that ObamaCare was a defeat because it lacked a public option are suddenly noting it will put 32 million more Americans on the government health-care dole. It won't be long before liberals and the press are defending the 111th Congress's every achievement as historic.

There is a lesson here both about modern liberalism and for Republicans who will soon have more power in Congress. For today's left, the main goal of politics is not to respond to public opinion. The goal is to impose the dream of an egalitarian entitlement state whether the public likes it or not. Sooner or later, they figure, the anger will subside and Americans will come to like the cozy confines of the cradle-to-grave welfare state.

This is the great Democratic bet with ObamaCare. The assumption is that once the benefits start to flow in 2013 the constituency for "free" health care will grow. As spending and deficits climb, the pressure for higher taxes will become inexorable and the GOP will splinter into its balanced budget and antitax wings. A value-added tax or some other money-machine will pass and guarantee that the government will control 40% to 50% of all economic resources.

If the price of this bet was losing control of the House for a moment in time in 2010, Mrs. Pelosi's view is so be it. You have to break a few Blue Dog careers to build a European welfare state. Liberals figure that as long as President Obama can be re-elected in 2012, their gamble will pay off and the legacy of the 111th Congress will be secure. The cheerleaders will write books about it.

The lesson for Republicans is to understand the nature of their political opponents and this long-term bet. The GOP can achieve all kinds of victories in the next two years, and some of them will be important for economic growth. But the main chance is ObamaCare, which will fundamentally change the balance of power between government and individuals if it is not repealed or replaced.

While repeal will no doubt founder in the Senate in the next two years, Republicans can still use their House platform to frame the debate for 2012. They can hold hearings to educate the public about rising insurance costs and other nasty ObamaCare consequences. And they can use the power of the purse to undermine its implementation.

***
The difference between the work of the 111th Congress and that of either the Great Society or New Deal is that the latter were bipartisan and in the main popular. This Congress's handiwork is profoundly unpopular and should become more so as its effects become manifest. In 2010, Americans saw liberalism in the raw and rejected it. The challenge for Republicans is to repair the damage before it becomes permanent.

Copyright 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

EZRA KLEIN...Domestic enemy of the US Constitution and Fool

Ezra Klein of the Washington Post went on MSNBC and showed us his true colors. In the military, we have a term for this kind of action - " self identification"

Identification is defined as " the act of claiming an identity, where an identity is a set of one or more signs signifying a distinct entity. "

Now we have a case of what I call, "self identification", defined as "when someone (a friend, a colleague or a combatant on the battlefield) performs an action, either verbally or otherwise that shows their "true self ". "

This is never more important than when you have a person who portrays themselves as one thing and then by opening their mouth or doing something else, reveals to you who they REALLY are and what kind of person they TRULY are.....

So back to Mr. Ezra Kelin, self described wonk, Washington Post staffer and member of the Looney Liberal Left who goes on MSNBC to discuss the occasion of the new House of Representatives beginning their term by taking the action of reading the US Constitution into the record at the start of their first session in the next few days. I feel it is best to let him make the statement as he did live on MSNBC and then afterwards, I will make comment on it. Watch the video, it is about 1 1/2 minutes long....

Hold on - Whiskey-Tango-FOXTROT?? What was that he said??

“.... I mean, you can say two things about it. One, is that it has no binding power on anything. And two, the issue of the Constitution is not that people don’t read the text and think they’re following. The issue of the Constitution is that the text is confusing because it was written more than 100 years ago and what people believe it says differs from person to person and differs depending on what they want to get done.”

Are you kidding me - This is " the Mother of All Self-Identifiers". Ezra not only told us that he has no flippin' clue as to what the US Constitution means, he just walked all over it and wiped his feet on it !

WHAT A HORSE'S ARSE !

He has done us a favor in reality, (like most "self identifiers"), as he has shown us all his true colors....He is what we in the military would call a "domestic enemy" of the US Constitution as he says " that it has no binding power on anything.."

Oh yes it does, you twit. It means the difference between what the USA stands for along with all that millions of Veterans gave their lives to defend.

What an empty headed dilettante....what a self absorbed idijit....

He has told us EXACTLY what he thinks by telling us what he thinks with all but a sneer....

Well, I am glad for one, to highlight him for the idiot he is and make sure that many others know that this is what we are fighting when true Patriots rail against the Lefty Looney Liberals who hate the US Constitution and all that it stands for....Freedom and all that has made us a beacon of Liberty since the US Constitution was ratified.

The Constitution is a well-crafted document meriting a particular interpretive approach: “where the language of the Constitution is specific, it must be obeyed. Where there is demonstrable consensus among the Founders and ratifiers as to a principle stated or implied in the Constitution, it should be followed. Where there is ambiguity as to the precise meaning or reach of a constitutional provision, it should be interpreted and applied in a manner so as to at least not contradict the text of the Constitution itself.” The most interesting debates then, focus on the application of constitutional principles-not on whether these principles exist. This approach does not “remove controversy, or disagreement, but it does cabin it within a principled constitutional tradition that makes real the Rule of Law.”

Take that Ezra Klein...you have shown us your true colors and that you are a loser....and one who should be relegated to the dustbin of history, where we have deposited all others who have tried to take the US Constitution from the people.

" We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. " - US Constitution Preamble

And just in case a few of you are feeling I have been a little harsh with Mr. Klein, let's read a posting he made on his own blog....again, I feel you will be able to draw your own conclusion.

Nazi Ideas by Ezra Klein

" I'm with Jane Galt on this one: Not everything the Nazis touched was bad. Hitler was a vegetarian. Volkswagen is a perfectly good car company. Universal health care is a perfectly good idea. Indeed, the Nazis actually did a pretty good job increasing economic growth and improving standards of living (they were, many think, the first Keynesians, adopting the strategy even before Keynes had come up with it), pushing Germany out of a depression and back into expansion. Unfortunately, they also set out to conquer Europe and exterminate the Jews. People shouldn't do that. "

Posted by Ezra Klein on September 11, 2006 3:21 PM

Again, all is have to say is " Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot???"