Week in Review
People in the IRS used their vast powers to harass people they didn’t like. People who opposed the Obama administration. Or the liberal cause. In general conservatives. In particular Tea Party conservatives. People who donated money to the Mitt Romney 2012 election campaign felt the full wrath of the federal government. Being audited by both the IRS and the Labor Department. Scary stuff. Now imagine the IRS being in charge of your health care. And you’re a political enemy of the liberal cause. Well, you won’t have to imagine for long. Because the IRS will soon have that power under Obamacare. Very soon.
What makes this a frightening prospect is the nature of a more nationalized health care system. Where limited resources are stretched to cover more patients. Resulting in shortages. The need for rationing. Even the need to deny services to some. Because the budget just can’t afford it. Such as being unable to provide health care services after the workweek is done because they don’t have enough doctors available. So they farm out after-hours work to moonlighting doctors. Like the NHS is doing in Britain (see Doctors being offered £1,350 per shift for out-of-hours cover by Claire Carter posted 5/14/2013 on The Telegraph).
GPs are being paid £150 an hour for nine-hour shifts to plug holes at times when regular staff are not working.
The firm, Harmoni, is also offering bonuses to doctors for referring a friend in a desperate attempt to staff the service, reports suggest.
The new revelations follow claims that Harmoni is struggling to find doctors to run the service and has resorted to using senior nurses to provide cover. It is claimed that GPs are reluctant to work for the provider because of concerns over care standards.
Despite questions over out-of-hours care, Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, said GPs should not necessarily be on call at evenings and weekends because they work hard and have lives of their own.
Under Labour’s 2004 renegotiation of their contracts, GPs were allowed to hand responsibility for out-of-hours care to private firms such as Harmoni, which has contracts in London, the south east, the midlands and the west country…
It was also claimed terminally ill cancer patients had to wait eight hours for a doctor to visit them to give them pain relief.
The disclosures come amid concern that an extra four million patients are flooding A&E units each year due to insufficient out-of-hours services.
Flooding the A&E units (i.e., emergency rooms)? People in pain waiting for 8 hours for pain relief? This is national health care. Now imagine a government using their powers to distribute these limited health care resources based on one’s political leanings. Member of the Tea party? Come back when we open on Monday for your pain relief. A member of a public sector union and supporter of the liberal cause? We’ll see you now.
Don’t think this can happen under Obamacare? Only a year ago people were saying that the IRS wasn’t targeting conservatives in general. And Tea Party conservatives in particular. It turns out that the IRS was targeting these enemies of the liberal cause. So it is likely we’ll be having the same discussion in a few years. That it turns out the government was using its authority over the health care system to punish their political enemies. Just like they used the IRS and the Labor Department years earlier to punish their political enemies. If these past actions are any indication of future actions of an even more powerful federal government.
And the spirit of Thomas Jefferson weeps. For he would see little difference between what the federal government became and what the British monarchy was. Oppressive. And arbitrary. Where those connected to the ruling elite did well. While those who dared to speak up against the ruling elite found their names on a list. And faced persecution. This is not Thomas Jefferson’s United States. But what he feared. If Thomas Jefferson were alive today he would be a Tea Party conservative. Only he would be more aggressive in trying to reduce the strength and power of the federal government. As he was more radical than conservative. And would be unwilling to be as peaceful in his protests as the Tea Party conservatives are.
Tags: A&E units, conservatives, doctors, federal government, GPs, Harmoni, IRS, liberal cause, National health care, Obamacare, out-of-hours care, political enemies, Tea Party, Tea Party conservatives, Thomas Jefferson
The Right should Rubberstamp Everything the Left wants Just like the Left did for George W. Bush
If you ever have watched the Daily Show with Jon Stewart you’ve probably noticed a recurring theme. He gets exasperated. A lot. When it comes to the lack of bipartisan cooperation on the side of the Republicans. And by bipartisan he means just giving the Democrats what they want. Just to give up their core beliefs. And vote for things that violate everything they stand for.
It’s the conservatives that really annoy him. And Democrats in general. Especially Tea Party conservatives. Who just won’t buckle under. And give the Democrats what they want. Like the Republican establishment. RINOs. Who like the ruling class in Washington. And want to be a part of it. Unlike those Tea Party conservatives. Who sound like a broken record. We need limited government. And lower tax rates. Not an expanding federal government. Paid for with higher tax rates. And their opposition to Obamacare despite it being law really gets stuck in their craw.
President Obama’s reelection was a mandate. At least that’s what the Democrats thought. That the people approved of the president. And everything he did in his first term. That shellacking the Democrats took in the 2010 midterm elections? Causing the rise of the Tea Party in the first place? Because of those backroom deals? That the Democrats made to pass Obamacare into law? That was just an anomaly. It meant nothing. That was only some tin-hat wearing crazy people. Tea-baggers, they called them. No. Real America reelected President Obama. Because they wanted him to do more. So the conservatives should just accept that. And rubberstamp everything the Democrats want. Just like they did for George W. Bush.
Based on the Demographic Numbers one Must Question if the Obama Presidency is Legitimate
Oh, wait a minute, they didn’t do that. They fought him relentlessly. Especially after the Democrats won big in the 2006 midterm elections. Taking back both the House. And the Senate. For they hated George W. Bush. And never accepted him as legitimate. What with the debacle of the 2000 election. Where to this day they say the Republicans stole that election. Thanks to the Supreme Court. Making Al Gore a millionaire in the process. Peddling his global warming fear. But poor Al Gore got robbed in 2000. Because the Republicans cheated. And suppressed voter turnout. The only way Republicans can win elections. Or so say the Democrats.
Of course the numbers don’t agree with that. The demographics. Then. And now. In 2001 liberals were at 17%. Moderates at 38%. And conservatives at 43%. Today liberals rose to 20%. Moderates fell to 32%. And conservatives rose to 46%. Conservatives are the majority. Then. And now. (See In U.S., Nearly Half Identify as Economically Conservative posted 5/25/2012 on Gallup). So conservatives can win elections. Based on these numbers. And should be able to do so easier than liberals. So it must be the liberals. They must be the ones cheating. And suppressing voter turnout.
So Bush was legitimate. Based on the numbers. And it is doubtful the people want the Republicans to rollover. Or rubberstamp the Democrat agenda. For they did retain the House in 2012. As they should have won the Senate. And the White House. Based on the horrible economy. The killing of 4 Americans in Benghazi. And Obamacare. That the majority just doesn’t want. Which begs the question. Is the Obama presidency legitimate?
This Bipartisan Spirit of the Left is Fear and Intimidation of their Political Opponents
So how did President Obama win reelection? And how did the Democrats hold onto the Senate? Well, there was the mainstream media. Which is liberal. Following in the tradition of their godfather. Walter Cronkite. Only out of the closet. For there are no closet liberals these days. There’s Hollywood. Television. The music industry. The public schools. And our universities. All liberal. Just a small sliver of the population. But a highly leveraged sliver. As they have greatly amplified voices. Which gives them legitimacy. As television and movies sway a lot of people. Especially the young. Who our teachers program in our public schools. And our professors brainwash in our universities. Despite all of this, though, we’re still a conservative people. While liberals still hold at 20%. So there must be something else.
Which brings us back to cheating. And voter suppression. Liberals hate the Tea Party. And conservatives. Blaming them for their loss of the House. In that 2010 shellacking. Ever since then liberals have slandered the Tea Party. Called them racists. And every other dirty name in the book. Including tea baggers. They hated these people. And were not going to allow a repeat of 2010. With President Obama in the White House it put the liberals in charge of the executive branch of government. Giving them power. Which they used. By having the most feared agency of the federal government harass the conservatives. Especially the Tea Party. As groups applied for tax-exempt status the IRS harassed them. Asking them for a lot information. Personal information. That they could use against them. Such as releasing the names of their major donors to liberal websites. Who destroyed and intimidated these donors as best as they could. Some of these people faced costly audits by the IRS. Even suffered through costly audits from the Labor Department. The message was clear. If you tried to exercise your First Amendment right against the Obama administration beware. For you will feel the wrath of the federal government. Muzzling the opposition. Making it easier to win. Despite the horrible economy. Benghazi. And Obamacare.
This is the bipartisan spirit of the left. Fear and intimidation. And when that doesn’t work they speak in an exasperated voice. Of Republicans. And their refusal to work with the Democrats. In a bipartisan manner. Expressing their frustration. That 46% of the population won’t just give in to 20% of the population. Giving up their core beliefs. And to just vote for things that violate everything they stand for. Something the Democrats never did for George W. Bush. But it is a moral outrage when the Republicans won’t do it for President Obama.
Tags: 2010 midterm elections, Benghazi, bipartisan, cheating, conservatives, Democrats, federal government, First Amendment, George W. Bush, House, IRS, liberals, limited government, midterm elections, moderates, Obamacare, President Obama, Republicans, Senate, suppressing voter turnout, Tea Party, Tea Party conservatives, White House
The Democrats lost Big in the 2010 Midterm Elections because of Tea Party Conservatives and Citizens United
“Trust us. We’re the federal government.” Two sentences that really don’t go together these days. Something more appropriate would be, “Do as we say. And think like we think. If you don’t, trust us, we will make your life unpleasant. Such as targeting excessive IRS scrutiny on your sorry ass.” Yes, that sounds more appropriate. At least, based on the actions of the federal government.
The 2010 midterm elections really shocked and dismayed the liberal Democrats. In 2010 approximately 21% of the population identified themselves as liberals. About 35% identified themselves as moderates. And about 40% identified themselves as conservative (see Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S. posted on Gallup). Which is why after passing Obamacare on pure party lines the Democrats loss was so big in the 2010 midterm elections. And it became clear to liberal Democrats that they cannot win the debate in the arena of ideas. No. If they were to maintain their power and transform the country against the will of the people they had to rig the game in their favor.
The Democrats lost big in the 2010 midterms because of Tea Party conservatives. Those people who admired the Founding Fathers. The Constitution. Limited government. Laissez-faire capitalism. And the rule of law. The things that made the United States of America great. And things the current administration is NOT a big fan of. For they want to expand the federal government into European socialism. With a great and mighty federal government. So those in the ruling class can shape the nation into their image. Not the Founding Fathers’ image. And to do this they have to eliminate public enemy number one. No, not al Qaeda. But the Tea Party. And denying their right to free speech using the power of the IRS was one way to achieve that.
The Obama Administration ordered Military Forces in Tripoli to Stand Down because it Wouldn’t Fit the Narrative
Ever since the Supreme Court decision Citizens United (2010) ruled that corporations were people the liberal Democrats had a bug up their backside. Because they enjoyed collecting huge sums from unions who were, apparently, people, too. And the liberals’ favorite tool for attacking business interests. As unions supported them in their anti-business agenda with lots of cash. To help the liberals regulate and transfer more wealth from private sector to the public sector. While forcing union-friendly policies on businesses. To protect their friends in the unions. To keep a large portion of those unions dues flowing to Democrat coffers.
Liberals blame Citizens United for the rise of the Tea Party which led to their defeat in the 2010 midterms. After 2010 it was payback time. When liberal nonprofits filed for their tax-exempt status the IRS granted them within months. Whereas the IRS delayed the application process for conservative groups. Especially any with ‘Tea Party’ in their name. Demanding a list of their political donors. What books they read. Who they associated with. Whether they would attack Planned Parenthood. Etc. Inappropriate. And illegal. This harassment went on for months. Preventing these organizations from collecting donations and exercising their First Amendment right of free speech. And when the IRS collected any information on donors they gave it to liberal websites to publicize and attack. Discouraging further contributions. And limiting opposing political ads in the run-up to the 2012 election. Helping President Obama and Democrats. While hurting Mitt Romney and Republicans.
The Democrats have a perception that they are strong on domestic issues but weak on national defense. Which is why President Obama made the decision to kill Osama bin Laden when the opportunity came. To show he was strong on national defense. In fact, with the killing of bin Laden President Obama said al Qaeda was in retreat. Because he fought the War on Terror better and smarter than George W. Bush did. The 2012 campaign narrative was ‘Osama bin Laden is dead. And General Motors is alive’. Which is why the Obama administration told Ambassador Stevens he could not have more security in Benghazi. Because it wouldn’t fit the narrative. It’s why the Obama administration ordered military forces in Tripoli to stand down and not assist those under attack in Benghazi. Who probably could have saved the two Americans killed some 7 hours after the White House Situation Room received word of an attack in Benghazi. Because it wouldn’t fit the narrative.
Like-Minded People don’t Need Orders when they Share the same Burning Passion to Defeat Conservatism
Benghazi is a political nightmare for the administration. First of all they ignored the deteriorating conditions in Benghazi (it was so unsafe that the British pulled their people out just before the attack on the American mission). Then four Americans died. Because this administration was weak on national defense. There was the stand-down order. President Obama disappeared during the attack. And, of course, there was the YouTube video the Obama administration blamed. Not a terrorist attack. Because, again, that wouldn’t fit the narrative. We should reelect president Obama because al Qaeda was in retreat. So they weren’t assaulting Americans in Benghazi. It was just people protesting that YouTube video that got out of hand. And pulled rocket propelled grenades and mortars from their pockets and started killing Americans with them.
At press conferences reporters ask questions on Benghazi and the IRS harassment of conservatives. Which the Obama administration doesn’t answer. Because there is an ongoing investigation. Or they simply state they don’t know. But they insist that they will get to the bottom of it. Figure out what happened. And make sure it doesn’t happen again. As well as insisting that there is no political bias in any of these scandals. Just a rogue employee or two. Which is hard to believe. Because whenever there is a scandal there is a common element to them. They hurt conservatives. Making it more difficult for them to win elections. While helping liberal Democrats. Making it easier for them to win elections. Without fail. So it’s hard to believe that there is no political motive behind them. Especially considering the 2010 midterm elections. The rise of the Tea Party. And liberals’ inability to win in the arena of ideas. Requiring them to cheat wherever they can to win elections. To maintain their power and transform the country against the will of the people.
The president doesn’t govern. He only campaigns. Always fighting those who are against his policies. And everything bad that ever happens is because of this opposition he is fighting against. As if he hasn’t been president for the past 4+ years. But these scandals are bad. Especially the IRS scandal. Where people on the Left are even comparing it to the Nixon administration. So his defenders say it’s not him. It’s some people in the vast federal government. That is just too big for the president to know everything that’s going on. No one could. This is the defense of the president that wants to make the federal government even bigger. The government is too big.
The president hates the Citizens United ruling. And the Tea Party. Blaming both for the Democrats losing the House in the 2010 midterms. These are his feelings. And he hires people who think and feel like he does. So even if he didn’t direct his administration to do these things he might as well have. For these are universal feelings among liberal Democrats. Where no orders are necessary. Because like-minded people will take initiative. Either eager to please. Or because they share the same burning passion to defeat conservatism and enlarge the federal government. So more smart bureaucrats can manage every aspect of our lives. Even breaking the law to help their cause. Because they feel the administration will approve of their actions. Even protect them if they get caught. So these scandals are not so much a reflection of an administration out of control. But of a political party out of control. Who have grown the federal government so large that no one person can know what it is doing. So the defenders of President Obama are right. The government is too large. And we need to reduce the size of it. Just as the Tea Party would have said. Had the IRS not hindered their ability to exercise their First Amendment right during the 2012 election. Which may be the only reason why the Democrats retained control of the Senate. Or why President Obama won reelection. Because they cheated. Which may be the only way they can win elections when only 21% of the people think like they do.
Tags: 2010 midterm elections, 2012 election, Al Qaeda, Benghazi, bin Laden, burning passion to defeat conservatism, Citizens United, conservatism, conservative, Democrat, federal government, First Amendment, Founding Fathers, free speech, IRS, Liberal Democrats, liberals, like-minded people, national defense, Obama administration, Osama bin Laden, President Obama, scandal, Tea Party, wouldn't fit the narrative
Week in Review
President Obama’s Treasury Department’s IRS is caught harassing perceived enemies of the Obama administration. To help stifle their free speech during the 2012 election. But they deny it was political. And apologize (see IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups by STEPHEN OHLEMACHER posted 5/10/2013 on the AP).
The Internal Revenue Service apologized Friday for what it acknowledged was “inappropriate” targeting of conservative political groups during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.
IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their exemption applications, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said…
About 75 groups were inappropriately targeted. None had their tax-exempt status revoked, Lerner said.
The IRS is an independent agency within the Treasury Department that enforces the nation’s tax laws. Revelations that the agency was targeting political groups because they were affiliated with a movement that is critical of President Barack Obama could become a new headache for the White House…
IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman told Congress in March 2012 that the IRS was not targeting groups based on politics.
How can this be anything but politics? And a gross misuse of power?
The Obama administration would identify organizations with ‘Tea Party’ and ‘patriot’ in their name as enemies of the Obama administration. For with every shooting or bombing on American soil the go-to people are the ‘anti-government’ Tea Party and patriot people. Radical conservatives as they call them. Of course it hasn’t yet turned out that a mass murderer was a radical conservative. They have been either radical Islamists. Or people with mental health problems.
After what we’ve learned about the Benghazi cover-up this past week is it really hard to believe that the Obama administration used the power of the IRS against political opponents? President Nixon did that. So why not President Obama?
Both President Obama and President Nixon lied to the American people to improve their reelection chances. Who would have thought that the guy who wanted to be compared to FDR would actually be more like President Nixon? Of course, with President Nixon there was a crime. A break-in. But no one died. As they did in Benghazi. Because the Obama administration just couldn’t grant the requests of Ambassador Stevens for more security after President Obama declared the War on Terror was over. For the 2012 campaign message was that ‘Osama bin Laden was dead. And General Motors is alive’. With bin Laden gone al Qaeda was defeated. At least that was what the Obama administration was saying. After bin Laden’s death there were no more radical Islamists trying to kill Americans. This was why we needed to vote for President Obama. For he made the world a safer place. And beefing up security in Benghazi wouldn’t help that message before the election. So they denied Ambassador Steven’s request. For what could possible happen?
A full-scale military assault. That’s what. Which was even worse to the Obama campaign than beefing up security. The Obama administration couldn’t have this. So they concocted the story about the anti-Islamic YouTube video and a spontaneous uprising. And when the intelligence reports came in identifying an al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group they took their talking points and edited them down. Pulling anything ‘militant Islamist’ out of them. This despite the president of Libya confirming the al Qaeda connection. This kept the Benghazi mess quiet through the election. And what’s to say they might have set the IRS on their political opponents to help keep the Benghazi mess quiet through the election?
They lied about Benghazi. So they’re probably lying about the IRS. The very same people they’re putting in charge of the funding of Obamacare. Who will be looking ever more closely at our employers. And our personal lives. But there’s nothing to worry about. For the IRS would never use their power for political purposes. Not with the most transparent presidency since the Nixon administration. Well, perhaps not quite as transparent as the Nixon administration. Then again, it’s probably one of the least transparent administrations in U.S. history. In fact, the Nixon administration was probably more transparent and honest than the current administration. Nixon may have lied. But he didn’t leave his embassy staff unprotected. So enemies of the United States could kill them. And then lie to cover it up.
Tags: 2012 election, Al Qaeda, Ambassador Steven, Benghazi, bin Laden, enemies of the Obama administration, IRS, Nixon, Osama bin Laden, Patriot, President Obama, radical conservative, radical Islamists, Tea Party
Democrats Quickly Politicized the Boston Marathon Bombings to attack Conservatives
What’s the difference between conservatives and liberals? Well, for one, they respond to horrific tragedies differently. Conservatives are sickened and saddened. While liberals salivate with a potential opportunity to blame conservatives for these horrific events. Which they are quick to do. Even before the dead are identified and laid to rest. As we can see in the Boston marathon bombings.
We don’t know anything yet. But the media has been reporting on what we don’t know 24 hours a day since the bombings. And on the day of the attack there have been those in the media already making the case that the bomber is possibly a ‘radical’ conservative. Because it happened on April 15. Tax Day. During the Patriots’ Day holiday in Boston. Not far from the anniversary of the fiery end of the Waco siege. Even someone in the media wrote that they were hoping that it was the actions of an angry white man. So it wouldn’t hurt the liberal political agenda. More gun control. And less restrictions on immigration. So if the bomber(s) entered the country illegally (i.e., they’re not angry white men) that could hurt their attempts at creating new Democrat voters by giving illegal immigrants amnesty.
Former Democrat Congressman Barney Frank was quick to politicize the bombings, too. He said the response of the first-responders proves the value of big government. For no tax cuts or limited government would have made the response any better. Another Democrat Congress person blamed the bombings on the sequester. The cut in federal spending allowed these bombers to detonate these two bombs. So on the one hand you have one Congress person saying how well the government handled the situation because we don’t have limited government or tax cuts while you have another saying the government was so weakened by the sequester that they were unable to stop these bombers. Positions on opposite ends of the spectrum. But with one thing in common. They both attack conservatives.
The Left Gleefully reports a Conservative Connection in any Horrible Act of Violence even when there is None
They blamed the massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, on radical gun-toting conservatives. Anxious to prove that the shooter was a card carrying member of some conservative organization. And were quite disappointed to find the shooter was just someone with mental health problems who the state should have institutionalized. Who lived in his mother’s basement playing violent video games and earning high-scores with high kill numbers. Some have even suggested that he was living in the fantasy world of the videogame when he started shooting. Scoring points with each kill. Reloading even before his magazines were empty (like during lulls in a videogame so you had a full magazine for the next shooting encounter). And killing himself before the cops could kill him, resetting his game points to zero. There are a lot of theories. But with his suicide we can’t know for sure his motive.
Nothing would have prevented this shooting other than locking him up in an institution while he was learning about past mass shootings. Planning his crime. And playing hours of video games in his basement. Adam Lanza was sick. He was mentally unsound. He had trouble interacting with people. And separating the real world from the fantasy world of his video gaming. But one thing he wasn’t was a radical conservative. But it didn’t stop the liberal Democrats from blaming the Sandy Hook massacre on a conservative gun culture. And using it to try and pass long-desired gun control legislation. Instead of addressing mental health problems. The cause of the Sandy Hook massacre. In fact, during the last few decades the Left has made it more difficult to commit someone who is a danger to society. And they exploded the use of drugs to treat a laundry list of childhood developmental problems. Such as drugging a generation of kids for having attention deficit disorder. Trusting in medication to make them safe and well behaved. Leaving dangerous people free to hurt people. Dangerous people like Adam Lanza.
Mental health problems are a main theme in many mass killings. Before Newtown there was the 2012 Aurora theater shooting. Where the shooter was a mentally sick individual. James Holmes. Who the state should have institutionalized. As soon as his name was released a person in the media reported he was a member of the Tea Party. Because he found a James Holmes in Aurora that was a member of the Tea Party. Which they gleefully reported so they could show this horrible act of violence was by some gun-toting conservative. Only it wasn’t THAT James Holmes. The Aurora shooter had no connection to conservative politics whatsoever.
When Emotions are Running High the Left can Pass Legislation they’ve never been able to Pass Before
In Tucson in 2011 Jared Loughner went on a shooting spree. Killing six. And shooting Representative Gabrielle Giffords in the head. The media immediately started blaming conservative Sarah Palin for inciting this rampage. Because she had a bulls-eye on her website showing certain Congressional districts in the cross hairs. Including Giffords’. But was Jared Loughner incited to his crime by Palin? No. For he wouldn’t have gone on her website. He was a registered Independent. He hated George W. Bush. He even believed that 9/11 was a government plot. And was a paranoid schizophrenic who abused drugs and alcohol.
Nidal Malik Hasan shot and killed 13 people and wounded 30 at Fort Hood in 2009. He was a major in the Army who had recently converted to Islam. Was in communication with Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki who was a known security threat. And reportedly shouted what Islamist terrorists shout before they start killing. Allahu Akbar! Which translates to “God is great.” But instead of calling this an act of terrorism President Obama called it workplace violence. Because he was trying to wind down the War on Terror. So he could use that money to pay for Obamacare. And having an act of terrorism on a U.S Army post didn’t help with that agenda.
Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people and wounded 17 at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in 2007. He also suffered from mental disorders going back to middle school. Who had problems similar to Adam Lanza. Something his college knew nothing about because of federal privacy laws. Laws that protected the individual by putting the public at risk. As an adult Cho chose to discontinue his therapy. And his behavior became similar to how James Holmes would later act when he was in college. Which is when the state probably should have committed him. After the shooting rampage the Left blamed easy access to guns as the cause of the shooting. Not their failed mental health policies.
One can see a general pattern. The Left likes having these atrocities happen. At least based on how they politicize these atrocities. And why do they politicize these atrocities? Because they can’t beat their political opponents in the arena of ideas. So they turn to character assaults. To destroy their political opponents. By trying to blame these atrocities on conservatives. And their cruel and unfeeling policies. That kill school children. And when emotions are running high they can pass legislation they’ve never been able to pass before. Like gun control. And they don’t run higher than when children die.
Tags: act of violence, Adam Lanza, angry white men, atrocities, Aurora, Boston marathon bombings, conservatives, Democrat, Fort Hood, gun control, gun culture, gun-toting conservatives, institutionalized, James Holmes, Jared Loughner, Liberal Democrats, liberals, limited government, mass killings, massacre, mental health problems, Newtown, political agenda, radical conservative, radical gun-toting conservatives, Sandy Hook, shooting spree, tax cuts, Tea Party, terrorism, Tucson, videogame
The Power Brokers in Washington dismiss the Rand Paul Filibuster as another Kook Libertarian/Tea Party Thing
The Rand Paul filibuster caused quite the stir. For it’s been a while since we had an old-school talking filibuster on the Senate floor. Senator Paul was delaying a vote on confirming John Brennan as CIA director. Over the drone policy of the Obama administration. He talked for about 13 hours. All to get an answer from the Obama administration. He wanted the administration to answer definitively that the U.S. would not kill American citizens on U.S. soil with a drone strike without due process if that American citizen posed no imminent threat. But getting that admission was akin to pulling teeth.
Rand Paul is the son of Ron Paul. Who is a libertarian. And a bit of a kook to the Washington establishment. Both on the Left and the Right. Because he goes on and on about the gold standard. The Constitution. And America fighting wars we shouldn’t be fighting. If it were up to him he would bring all American forces home. And he would stop those drone strikes. Both Ron Paul and Rand Paul are/were members of the Republican Party. Constitutional conservatives. And libertarians. Who the Washington establishment looks at as kooks. Rand Paul is even worse. For he is a member of the Tea Party movement. A group of people the Washington establishment also looks upon as a bunch of kooks.
So the power brokers in Washington look at Rand Paul as just another kook. And were quick to dismiss this filibuster as another example of how crazy these libertarian/Tea Party kooks were. But there was only one problem. Was someone who was trying to get an evasive government to admit that they wouldn’t kill Americans on U.S. soil without due process even if that American posed no imminent threat a kook? This was something the Left was supposed to do. Speak truth to power. To protect American citizens from an out of control federal government. And here was Rand Paul fighting that fight. A Tea Party Constitutional conservative libertarian.
The Republican Old Guard is trying to Distance Themselves from the Tea Party and the Constitutional Conservatives
The Left attacked the Bush administration over the Patriot Act. Which included those warrantless wiretaps on Americans who were speaking to known terrorist threats in a foreign country. They assailed George W. Bush and Dick Cheney over the water-boarding of three terrorists. Including one who gave up information that led us to Osama bin Laden. Now it was their president whose administration appeared out of control. Whose attorney general would not come out and say that they would not kill Americans on U.S. soil with a drone strike without due process even if they posed no imminent threat. Something was very wrong with this picture.
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart owes its success to the Republican Party. For the show’s one purpose in life is to attack and belittle Republicans. Which their liberal audience enjoys. Responding with enthusiastic applause and laughter whenever Stewart skewers any Republican. Or any institution or cause that is important to them. However, Jon Stewart, even though he disagrees with pretty much everything Rand Paul stands for, did not ridicule Senator Paul for his filibuster. For the Obama administration’s unwillingness to state for the record that they would not kill Americans on U.S. soil with a drone strike without due process even if they posed no imminent threat clearly bothered him. Even if it didn’t bother the Washington establishment. Including the Old Guard of the Republican Party. Who did ridicule Senator Paul.
The Republican Old Guard is trying to distance themselves from the Tea Party. And the Constitutional conservatives. Instead they endlessly bend over backwards to try to get the opposition to like them. Always unwilling to rock the political boat. They won’t criticize the president. Or do anything that may upset the Independents and moderates. Such as saying the president is going to kill Americans on American soil with drone attacks. Which really wasn’t the issue of the filibuster. It was the administration’s apparent desire to have the legal right to do so. This is what upset Senator Paul. As well as Jon Stewart. The ACLU. Code Pink. And Amnesty International. Who found the Obama administration’s evasive answer on the subject disturbing. Putting the Republican Old Guard on the wrong side of this issue.
The Democrats are Playing the Republican Old Guard to Advance their Agenda
So why is the Republican Old Guard on the wrong side of this issue? Because they listen too much to their friends in the Democrat Party. Who are always giving them advice on how to appeal to more voters. To attract more women. Blacks. Hispanics. People who typically vote Democrat. And how can the Republicans get these Democrat-voting people to vote Republican? Easy. Just act more like Democrats. Hence their not criticizing the president. And why they are distancing themselves from the conservative Republican base. The Tea Party. And the Constitutional conservatives. Because that’s what Democrats do. And Democrats are getting more women, blacks and Hispanics to vote for them. Ergo, if the Republicans just act like them they will get more women, blacks and Hispanics to vote for them.
Anyone see the flaw in this plan? If these people typically vote for Democrats why would they vote for Republicans acting like Democrats when they can just as well vote for the people they typically vote for? Democrats? For a Democrat is unlikely to stop behaving like a Democrat. But is a Republican as unlikely to stop acting like a Democrat? When there are Tea Party and Constitutional conservatives out there that may be vying for their seat in the next primary election? If we’ve learned anything from the 2012 Republican primary election it’s this. Republicans try to move farther to the right than their primary opponents. To appeal to the Tea Party and Constitutional conservatives in their base. And the more they act like Democrats while in office the harder that will be to do. Something no doubt Democrat voters keep in mind when they consider these Democrat-light Republican candidates.
Does anyone see another flaw in this plan? Of Democrats helping Republicans to get more women, black and Hispanic voters? Granted the Democrat Party is the party of altruism and welfare. They’re the ones who want to offer a hand-up. To feed the hungry. To house the homeless. To be the father/husband for single mothers. To provide free preschool. Free school lunches. And breakfasts. Free health care. Etc. They just want to give and help as many people as possible. But do they really want to help Republicans? Their political rivals? Those people who vote against handouts (what others call a hand-up), food for the hungry, houses for the homeless, fathering/husbanding single mothers, free preschool, free school lunches, breakfasts, free health care, etc. Of course they don’t. The Democrats are just playing the Republican Old Guard. Getting some of them to vote their way to attract the voters that will never vote for them. To advance their agenda. While using them to marginalize their greatest threat. The Tea Party. And Constitutional conservatives. Anyone who doubts this just needs to ask themselves one question. Why would Democrats want to help Republicans appeal to more voters when they want to beat them in elections? They wouldn’t. Something everyone can see. Except the Republican Old Guard. Who are so blind that they choose the wrong side of the ‘killing Americans on American soil without due process’ issue.
Tags: American citizens, conservative, Constitutional conservative, Democrat, Democrat Party, drone, drone policy, drone strike, due process, filibuster, Jon Stewart, kooks, libertarian, Obama administration, Old Guard, power brokers in Washington, Rand Paul, Rand Paul filibuster, Republican, Republican Old Guard, Republican Party, Senate, Senator Paul, Tea Party, Washington establishment
Week in Review
There are two sides to every issue. Take the Occupy Wall Street movement. Time Magazine has made these protestors their Person of the Year. While Investors.com calls these maggot infested hippy, communist-loving, capitalist-hating pond-scum something else (See “Occupy” A Media Creation Unworthy Of Time’s Person Of The Year posted 12/16/2011 on Investors.com).
Occupy Wall Street — the unkempt campout of the same old rent-a-radicals calling for redistribution of wealth — was largely a media-generated phenomenon whose significance ends there.
Unlike the far larger and more politically potent Tea Party movement, which Time often ignored, Occupy is the thin gruel of radicalism writ large by unwarranted media attention.
It has no demands other than socialist utopia, has elected no one, has failed to draw support from middle Americans and has proven itself mainly a public nuisance. Had the media not showered Occupy with attention, it wouldn’t be news at all.
How do we know? Polls show that the public remains intensely opposed to the Occupy media circus. If that’s not clear enough, the Democratic Party did its utmost to distance itself from Occupy once it learned its support would cost them votes.
That’s why Democratic city machines in the political downstream, after weeks of kowtowing to the protesters, shut down their camps all at once. They know a political liability when they see one…
In its Man-of-the-Year edition,Time calls Occupy a mass movement as significant as those of 1848, while ignoring what the public is noticing — the disease, rape, freeloading, filth, depravity, stench and murder rampant in the camps.
Time tried to tie Occupy’s irrelevant protests in with the flash Arab protests that have fueled Islamofascism as well as the tantrums of economically illiterate youth in Spain, Greece and the U.K.
But far from being spontaneous rage, Occupy’s protests were fully planned over the summer by radical groups like MoveOn.org and Adbusters, a Canadian cabal that thrives on attention.
See? There are two sides to every issue. In the case of Occupy Wall Street there is the truth. As reported by Investors.com and other news organizations. And the propaganda spread by the mainstream media. Spreading the lie that this political movement organized by radical groups was actually spontaneous democracy. All to help an unpopular president win reelection. By spreading the flames of class warfare. So President Obama can run against the greed of Wall Street instead of his record. Because his record is not the kind that lets presidents win reelection.
Tags: class warfare, democracy, Democratic Party, Occupy Wall Street, organized protesters, Person of the Year, protesters, radical groups, reelection, spontaneous democracy, Tea Party, Time
Week in Review
I guess George, John, Paul and Ringo were wrong. Love isn’t all you need. You also need conflict resolution services (see Women Bring Peace to Zuccotti Park by Victoria Pynchon posted 11/26/2011 on Forbes).
Peter, Paul and Mary memorably sang “whenever two or more of you are gathered in His name, there is love.” But whenever two or more of us are gathered to build a bridge, stage a protest, or run a business, there is conflict.
Fortunately for Occupy Wall Street in Zuccotti Park, mediators and other peace workers have been providing conflict resolution services to protestors, including daily nonviolent communication training and mediation for conflicts among the occupiers.
Guess that’s what happens when you use your fellow protestors’ part of the commons as your personal toilet.
One thing for sure is that you never heard stuff like this about the Tea Party. The Tea Party generally cleaned up after themselves. Didn’t urinate or defecate anywhere but in a proper toilet facility. And they didn’t want to beat the crap out of their fellow protesters. Because they all got along. And they got along with the community they were in. For there was, dare I say it? Love.
Everybody now…love, love, love…. All you need is…love, love, love…
Like in the Tea Party. But apparently not in the Occupy Wall Street movement in Zuccotti Park.
Tags: conflict, conflict resolution services, love, Occupy Wall Street, protestors, Tea Party, Zuccotti Park
Week in Review
Sadly, a 23-year woman died from an apparent drug overdose at an Occupy movement in Vancouver (see Death at Occupy Vancouver shouldn’t force end to encampment, protesters say by Sean Sullivan, Katie DeRosa, Jason Markusoff and Sean Myers posted 11/6/2011 on canada.com).
The woman, identified online as 23-year-old Ashlie Gough of Victoria, was found unresponsive in her tent Saturday afternoon from a rumoured drug overdose. Police said the death is not considered suspicious.
After news of the woman’s death broke, Mayor Gregor Robertson said he had asked city manager Penny Ballem to find a way to force the protesters from the makeshift tent city, calling it unsafe…
“This is the second critical incident in the last two days,” Robertson said over catcalls from occupiers, in reference to a man who overdosed on heroin on Thursday…
Protester Niko Guerra said the woman and her friends were peaceful and played music most nights.
“They enjoyed having somewhere to stay, as opposed to living on the street,” he said.
Sad. Only 23 years old.
I guess we can stop calling these the Left’s Tea Party. Because the Tea Party rallies weren’t just a place to score and get high. They had a serious and consistent message. Not just playing music all night and getting high. Which appears to be the case with many of these protesters. Not everyone I’m sure. But enough to make these look more like a tailgate party before a concert than a political movement.
Tags: drug overdose, Occupy Wall Street, Tea Party, Vancouver
Week in Review
Here’s something you just don’t hear about at Tea Party rallies (see NYC residents complain about ‘Occupy’ protesters by KAREN MATTHEWS posted 10/21/2011 on the Associated Press).
At a two-hour meeting Thursday night, some neighbors said protesters urinated in the streets and beat drums in the middle of the night.
“They’re defecating on our doorsteps,” said…a member of the area’s community board, a representative panel that helps funnel local concerns to city officials.
But the board voted unanimously for a resolution that recognized the protesters’ First Amendment rights while calling for a crackdown on noise and public urination and defecation.
Defecating and urinating. How nice. And the drums. Like I said, I don’t recall any of this from the Tea Party rallies. Guess the Occupy Wall Street people are not quite the Tea Party people.
Perhaps these residents, too, are part of the 1%. And their showing their displeasure with their greed as well. While at the same time asking for donations from these very same people. So they can continue their peaceful demonstration. In their neighborhood. What the Occupy Wall Street people use as a public toilet.
Tags: defecating, drums, Occupy Wall Street, public toilet, Tea Party, urinating
« Previous Entries