Monthly Archives: February 2009

The Day Of Reckoning

Those who understand the damage done by the New Deal and the Great Society had better buckle themselves in because the “New Kids on the Block” are going to create a “Progressive Potemkin Village” to beat the band..

Continue reading

Advertisements

Using Lousy Judgement

The Savior has again spoken but as always, his hollow words are still filled with hallucinogenic helium.

Continue reading

A Self Sustaining Entity

The liberals insist in over involving themselves in anything and everything. Acknowledging that the “liberal definitional inversion” is deeply embedded within each their moronic mantras is of paramount importance in order to dissect their demagoguery with surgical precision. For example, the “equality of opportunity” in their dirty hands morphs into the “equality of outcome”. Since the left demands an “equality of outcome” as opposed to an “equality of opportunity”, they have to immerse themselves to an illogical degree in the “day to day operations” of everything that they “selflessly” impose themselves upon. Combining their nonsensical nomenclature with the instinctively intrusive idea of “government”, unfortunately creates the progressive “perfect storm”..

Continue reading

Frank Conversations

Smack dab in the middle of “Black History Month”, after our first “actual” black President (Actually, part black..) (Lilly white, red nose pinko Bill Clinton does not count.) has been elected and after our first minority (black) attorney general (Bush’s Alberto Gonzalez doesn’t count either, not minority enough..) has taken office, attorney general Eric Holder has struck a chord that won’t play well with the tone deaf liberals.

First, lets set the backdrop for attorney general Eric Holder. Holder was immersed in the Marc Rich/Bill Clinton “Pardongate” which involved the whirlwind “pardon party” of 177 convicts that took place as the Clinton administration, also known as the “Clinton Keggers”, busied themselves trashing the White House as they skulked out in 2001. Holder was also involved in the reduction of the sentences of the sixteen members of the Boricua Popular Army, an FBI identified terrorist organization, a move endorsed by Clinton. In 2004, Illinois Governor Rod “Show me the money” Blagojevich, hired Holder’s law firm, Covington & Burling, to “investigate” the Illinois Gaming Board. (My guess is that Blago didn’t think that he was being “compensated” fairly enough..) One of Covington & Burling’s finest examples of “pro bono” work is their representation of seventeen terrorists “detained” at Guantanamo Bay.. Let’s look at the bright side, at least the attorney general appears to know how to do his taxes!

Holder, while speaking at the Justice Department, said, “Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards..” He continued on, “..we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.”

 

First off, let me say that it is hard to take this type of an invitation seriously from a political party headed by a man who for twenty years, sat in the front row of the Trinity United Church of Christ wearing his “WWJD?” (What Would Jeremiah Do?) shirt, raptly listening to the bombastic bile of a clearly unhinged racist “Pastor”.

Michael Meyers, executive director of the New York Civil (snivel) Rights Coalition, identified as a “multi-racial network of organizations that try to promote racial harmony and oppose all forms of bigotry” (except the liberal kind..) said, “I don’t think Barack Obama believes that or would say that..” I agree. No Democrat would EVER consider “having frank conversations” about race and racism because the inherent and reflexive racism of the liberals themselves would have to be “addressed”.. The idea of “frankly” discussing racism with a liberal, whether he or she be an elected official or from any snivel rights group, would be about as well received as the idea of discussing a twelve-step program with Joe Biden or the idea of discussing gastric bypass surgery with Al Gore..

Meyers said that “Holder’s speech signals to him that this attorney general is profoundly left in the dark and in the past about race..” Meyers meant to say, “Any speech about race has to be about the past.. and the stuff about the Democrats and their habitual racism, keep that in the dark..”

In an article entitled, “Attorney General’s Remarks Ignite Debate Over Race Relations”, Barack Obama is mentioned giving “a major speech on race” where he said that “mutual racial resentments remain over the legacy of slavery and affirmative action”.. “Mutual”? The “resentment” rests upon the side of those who must appear appropriately aggrieved in order to expedite their requests for remuneration. There was an old saying that went, “Love means never having to say you’re sorry..” With the “racist resenters” like $harpton and Jack$on, “race” means “always having to say you’re sorry for something that you had nothing whatsoever to do with..”

 

What “mutual” resentment is there about the discriminatory practice of “affirmative action”? (Liberal Definitional Inversion: “affirmative” means discriminatory..) The ” real victims” of affirmative action “resent” the obvious discrimination and the “bogus beneficiaries” of the affirmative action should but don’t resent the condescension of the liberals and their “you are helpless/you can’t make it without us” handout mentality.

“Frank discussions” about “race and affirmative action”? Obama said that he urged the nation to “break a stalemate we’ve been stuck in for years” and he “bemoaned” the “chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races”. Race racketeers like $harpton and Jack$on have too much to lose if the “stalemate” is broken. Blacks who try to break such “stalemates” are usually branded as “Uncle Toms” or “Oreos”.. For example, presenting the proof that the liberals and their “affirmative action”, as well as their putrid public schools, are actually the perpetual purveyors of racist ideology gets you the resounding two hundred decibel reminder that you are in “denial”..

Whenever anyone from the left says they want to have a “frank conversation”, what that means is they expect you to admit to some alleged wrongdoing that they themselves are actually responsible for and they demand that you apologize profusely.

Just recently, the loyal opposition wanted to have “frank discussions” about the nearly one trillion dollar “economic stimulus package” with the Democrats. They were all but locked out during a stimulus bill conference on February 10th, the President responded with, “I won” and the Speaker of the House called the Republicans “acrimonious” and called any disagreement with their bloated bill, “extraneous process arguments”..

Holder called America “a nation of cowards”. I agree. The blacks who have allowed themselves to be victimized by the Democrats, who stand idly by as the disgrace of black on black crime escalates and who accept the ignominious liberal racism without a word of disagreement or outrage would all fit rather nicely into that category.

Holder is right. However, I will say that he is right for all the wrong reasons because he and the members of the collectivist caliphate are not prepared to have “frank conversations” about anything, let alone anything remotely resembling an honest discussion of the relations between the races.

If they claim that they are “prepared” and if they are willing to make the first move in the spirit of “good faith”, then I would suggest that they turn their backs upon the historically racist liberal lice..

Is that “frank” enough for you?

A Very Broad Agenda

At long last, the “Diplomacy from a Distance” style of our Secretary of “Statist” has come to an end. This “green” (in more ways than one..) administration’s concern with the potential “carbon footprint” of a Secretary of State that “actually travels” to conduct diplomacy has led them to believe that a hefty long distance bill is better for the environment than the padding of her frequent flier miles. Then again for some strange reason, her agenda on this romp has little to do with diplomacy and a lot to do with the exaggerated threats to the “environment”..

Rodham, identified as “”President Barack Obama’s chief diplomat” (Name the scarier segment: “chief diplomat Rodham” or “President Obama” Six to five and pick ‘em..) winged her way to Tokyo and then it’s off to China, South Korea and Indonesia. An article (“Clinton warns North Korea during Tokyo visit”) said that this was “her first trip abroad”. Judging by her imaginary “resume” of “thirty five years of experience”, that should actually read, “it’s the broad’s first trip”..

Rodham wasted no time in revealing the inherent gullibility that the progressives are unfortunately known for. In that frigid librarian tone, she “warned North Korea to live up to its commitments to dismantle its nuclear programs”. Here we have a Secretary of State who doesn’t even have the ability to make her husband “live up to his commitments” to her and she is “warning” the North Koreans.

“Warnings” need to have a bit of substance behind them other than the mere amperage of hollow progressive rhetoric. The “substance” behind the Obama administration “warnings” up to this point have been the closing of Guantanamo Bay, the decision to cut defense spending, the dropping of charges against foreign terrorists/murderers and the ordering of all overseas CIA interrogation centers closed. “Dear Leader” must be quivering in his teeny weenie widdle boots..

Rodham dove right into the world of international diplomacy by barking that “the main issues on her agenda included climate change, clean energy and nuclear proliferation..” Later she said, “The administration’s goal is to push climate change and the global financial crisis to or near the top of the agenda..” In China, “Clinton’s agenda will encompass the full sweep of the economic crisis, global warming, clean energy, North Korea and health issues..”

It would appear that the Secretary of State is more concerned with the environment than matters of State. If you look WAY, WAY down the executive ladder within the Department of State, you will find the “Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs”. This typically redundant governmental spot was created by Bill “Mr. Big Government” Clinton to “manage diplomatic efforts on emerging world wide issues such as the environment..”

Since the Secretary of State needs to concern herself with the duties of a much lower level cabinet post’s responsibilities, I will assume that the Obama administration has run into problems trying to locate yet another liberal tax cheat to fill this spot. If they are in a bind, they could call the last Under Secretary, Paula J. Dobiansky, who filled the post admirably during the Bush administration. The only glitch that I would see with this is she actually HAS experience, unlike everyone else in the Obama administration and she seems to understand her obligations on April 15th..

At about 30,000 feet, Rodham said, “the North Koreans have already agreed to dismantling, we expect them to fulfill the obligations that they entered into..” The naivete of the progressives is at once childishly charming as well as definitively dangerous. If they aren’t “talking” about something, they are always ready to “sign” something. Then it is time to dole out the hugs.. Once the flash bulbs pop, the liberal “New age Nevilles” actually believe that their (our) adversaries are going to “fulfill their obligations” because they “said they would”..

Korean kook Kim Jong Il (ill) says he is doing “peaceful scientific research” and “space development”, so there is nothing for anyone to worry about.. The empty and idle threats and the inherent cowardice of the liberal administration towards these kinds of simians will put America right where the left wants us to be, completely vulnerable, totally susceptible.

In order for “negotiations” to be effective, they have to be based upon the premise that retaliation for noncompliance is inevitable, that there might be actual negative consequences for disregarding or violating any agreement that is made. Those who are weak always want to “negotiate first”. The liberals need to understand that the only thing that takes place from a position of weakness is concession. Those who are weak or vulnerable are generally attacked, not bargained with. Those who are weak want to “bargain” before the fight begins.. All of this liberal talk of “talk” emboldens our enemies, it doesn’t paralyze them with fear.

That is the reason that the “U.N. resolution” is irrelevant, there is nothing behind it. The only possible detriment relative to one of these useless reams is the potential for an infection from a paper cut. You have to wonder which is more frightening, the dreaded “U.N. weapons inspector” or a column of powder blue helmets marching towards you..

Here liberal “Peace in our time” inspired “talks” lead to “resolutions” or “treaties” and then eventually, when the liberals emasculate the military to the point where the balance of power shifts, camels are grazing on the White House lawn..

Here we have the United States “chief diplomat” on her first diplomatic mission and she wants to “talk” about the “environment” and “global warming” to countries concerned with and surrounded by the militaristic mind set of North Korea. (and China for that matter..) It is the equivalent of being in Kuwait in July of 1990 and talking about bowling and boysenberries.

Rodham says, “we have a very broad agenda”. I am more concerned with “this broad’s agenda” and the “agenda” of an administration that sends a Secretary of State on a field trip to talk about the weather.. It does seem like a “very broad agenda”, it sounds as though it was prepared by the broads at the Lifetime Channel..

The infantile notion that the enemies to freedom will not do anything “bad” based only on “talks” and “treaties” as opposed to force and can only be found within the communist craniums of the liberal left. The liberals are just dying to believe. Soon, with the Obama imbeciles “talking” to Iran, North Korea and Russia (again..), Americans will be dying BECAUSE the liberals believed..

One Thing Is Missing

Right out of the “some things will never die” category, we find the most recent machinations from Bill Clinton. (There are two things about liberal ex-Presidents, they never shut up and the liberal press always manages to find them when they want to yap. Please note that Republican ex-Presidents can only be found pictured on the milk cartons at your neighborhood store..)

In chatting with radio host Mario Solis Marich, Bill said, “well you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side.. because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows and lets face it, you know, Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining even when he is saying things that I think are ridiculous..” He continued on, “..more balance in the programs or have some opportunity for people to offer countervailing opinions..”

Remember that with “liberal definitional inversion”, words that are used by the left usually have diametrical definitions when they are practically applied. “Fairness” when bandied about by the left, never is “fair”.. “Fairness” is just the liberal’s phonetic fascism, perfumed for full effect and salted to distaste. The “Fairness Doctrine”, like the “economic stimulus package” is nothing more than “Democratic Definitional Diversion/Inversion”.

Since Bill Clinton refuses to be silent like his wife, (AKA: the employed Clinton, starring as the “Invisible Woman” in the Obama progressive pantheon..) we need to properly dissect his discourse..

If the lairs of the left are to be believed, the “Fairness Doctrine” IS “more balance on the other side”. The ridiculous redundancy aside, it is MANDATORY balance as opposed to the “balance” of the free market.

As with all liberals, Bill has no understanding of the free market when he says, “..there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows..” (Ignore the fact that liberals like Mark Green put up “big money” for the failed “Scare America” radio channel.) This “big money” comes from one vital component that the socialist screamers will never have.. an audience. This “big money” comes from advertisers who want to present their products to the biggest market that they can. The reason radio loser/comedian Franken ran for the Senate was so that he could expand the audience of people who recognize him in public into the double digits for the first time.. (Liberal dichotomy factor: Franken wasn’t funny as a comedian, now that he is a “politician”, he is hilarious..)

Bill tried to stumble into something remotely resembling the truth when he said, “..lets face it, you know, Rush Limbaugh is fairly entertaining even when he says things that I think are ridiculous..” He has located the missing element, “entertaining”. The morose morons of the brown shirt brigade are so humorless and uninformative that they can’t even “entertain” each other. The liberal audience is always available, it’s not like they are busy with things like work, so if they could at least present a palatable product for consumption, this “Rush” to censorship wouldn’t be necessary..

I always found Bill Clinton to be most “entertaining” while he was saying things that I KNEW (not “think”) were “ridiculous”.. Isn’t it “ridiculous” when someone who routinely says such “ridiculous” things as “it depends what the definition of ‘is’ is..” has the audacity (of hope) to say that anyone else says “ridiculous” things?

The “Fairness Doctrine” isn’t likely to disappear anytime soon. The liberals have enough collectivists in office to either surreptitiously or overtly slide this stinker onto the front burners. Within the past two years, a number of liberal luminaries have been pounding the progressive drums and sending up the socialist smoke signals in hopes of resurrecting this censorship.

Richard (call me “Dick”) “Turban” Durbin (L-IL.) in June of 2007 said, “It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine”. His opinion on this matter was shared at the time by John Kerry (L-MA) who said that he would unquestionably vote for the Fairness Doctrine before he votes against..

On June 24, 2008, “Nuremberg” Nancy Pelosi (L-CA) told reporters that her fellow Democratic representatives did not want to forbid the reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine because “the interest in my caucus is the reverse..” When asked specifically by reporter John Gizzi, “Do you personally support revival of the Fairness Doctrine?”, the “Princess of the Porcelain Puss” said, “Yes.”

On October 22, 2008, Jeff “Bolshevik” Bingaman (L-NM) said, “all stations should present a balanced perspective and different points of view.” He added, “..discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since.” As someone who looks too much like John Kerry (Think: Easter Island..) and as a carrier of the flaming flambeau of today’s liberal regressive-ism, he firmly places himself within the “since” category.

On February 4,2009, Debbie “Socialist” Stabenow (L-MI) said to liberal Bill Press (who apparently has unfettered access to the airwaves unlike so many of his Marxist contemporaries..) that “..it was time to bring back the Doctrine.” And “..it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves.”

Stabenow’s “expertise” in the area of the Fairness Doctrine comes from being a former social worker before becoming part of the Finance Committee and the Budget Committee. (Note how well she has performed relative to the “budget and financial” mess that the “economic stimulus package” is allegedly “addressing”..) She also is part of the Agricultural Nutritional and Forestry Committee. This irrelevant body of “work” leads me to wonder if there is any “conflict of interest” relative to (I wish I was Eugene) Deb’s diatribes since her significant other is one Thomas Athans. Athans founded and was the CEO of uber-liberal “Democracy Radio” (Remember, definitional inversion.) who later became the Executive Vice President for programming at Scare America.. (Talk about a job where making “busy work” is important..) Sounds to me as if her ox (and bank account) is being “AlGored” by the competition.

On Febrary 11, 2009, Tom Harkin, better known as Howard Dean’s idiotic on stage cheerleader during his “primary primal scream” back in January of 2004, said to Bill Press (STILL an oppressed liberal minority in the media..) “..we gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back into law again.”

Which brings us back to the February 13, 2009 chin wagging of Billy Bob Clinton..

In all of this progressive pother disguised as “fairness” there is one thing missing.. Why aren’t the liberals demanding “fairness” from the ridiculously liberally biased major television networks? (Not to mention the “impartial” print media..) I have yet to hear a demand from Durban for “fairness” from ABC. No puling from Pelosi for “fairness” from CBS. No bawling from Bingaman for “fairness” from NBC. No screeds from Stabenow for “fairness” from CNN. No howls from Harkin for “fairness” from MSNBC..

Until the left, the progressive paragons of the First Amendment and “free speech” until you disagree with them, finally decides to address the one thing missing from their “fictitious façade of fairness”, the rest of us will see their posturing as yet another attempt to disguise the goosestepping that they demand with a perverted progressive pride..

The New Enlightenment

The ink is almost dry upon the parchment, the dastardly deed is just about done. Without the help of “Axis Sally” Snowe, “Tokyo Rose” Collins (affectionately known as “Maine’s Morons”) and Arlen “Judas” Specter, (Keep in mind that Judas was the Apostle in charge of the “money bag” until he betrayed Jesus and then bumped himself off. Foreshadowing, Arlen?..) this “economic stimulus package” would have probably suffered a justifiable third trimester abortion. It will be interesting to take a deeper glance into what “rewards” have been sinisterly interlarded into this bulbous bill which will now be diverted to the great states of Maine and Pennsylvania due their elected “Republican” servants who voluntarily drove the get away car during this heist..

Let’s take a look at one of the prizes that will be bestowed upon the constituents of Nancy Pelosi. A thirty million dollar part of the “economic stimulus package” will be heading to San Francisco in order to “protect the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse.” I will just consider that to be the proof to those of you who weren’t convinced that the liberals in San Francisco are rodents..

Multiple hundreds of billions of dollars, allegedly designated as “economic stimulators” will be assigned to combat sexually transmitted diseases, (most of which will be justifiably heading to the Denver Colorado area in order to combat the “sudden outbreaks” of same in the area due to the August 2008 Democratic Hajj..) smoking prevention, “low income” handouts for Medicaid, home insulation (somewhat redundant, the liberals have been insulating the lowest class for fifty years.) student loans, public school payoffs and too many other “benefits” for societies leeches, siphons and balls and chains.

Hidden in plain sight is $650,000,000.00 for the “digital television converter box” coupons. The liberals have to keep the lowest class both entertained and informed. Access to not only the Democratic “American Idol” but also the idiotic singing one, as well as the dissemination of the socialist talking points via CNN and CBS are of paramount importance. How about $300,000,000.00 for hybrid and electric golf carts for federal workers? I know that these kinds of things are mandatory for the likes of Jerry Nadler and Al Gore, but must we have to pay for them?

“Senate leaders have said that the total stimulus package will sustain some 3.5 million jobs..” I suppose that it is of no consequence that that is the number of jobs necessary to properly disseminate the “benefits” that have to be redistributed (stolen) from the middle class and magnanimously “gifted” to the liberal base who “stimulate the economy” in the same manner that Keith Olbermann stimulates memberships to Mensa International..

Have no fear, the “economic stimulus package will be offering nearly thirteen dollars a week in extra “take home pay” as part of the Obama “Making Work Pay” tax credit for the “middle class”.. This “economic stimulus package” should have to be renamed “Making Workers Pay”. In case you were worried that that hefty thirteen dollars a week might place you into a higher tax bracket, do not worry because next year that amount will be dropping to eight dollars a week..

The liberal “number crunchers” have been applying the “new math” to this bill with all of the necessary non-specifics needed to hood wink the hypnotized. “For every one billion dollars the federal government spends (note: not “invests”) on infrastructure projects translates to 35,000 jobs. ..at $150 billion dollars, do the math and that translates to more than five million jobs, based on the highway administration’s assumptions..” Here the idea of a liberal “Bridge to Nowhere”, based on “assumptions” (where has the liberal obsession with “time tables” and “exit plans” disappeared to?) is now a good thing.

When it comes to the economy and this bill’s effect upon it please consider the following: “..a major expansion of an existing tax break for homebuyers, approved by the Senate last week would likely be jettisoned. There was also pressure to scale back a Senate passed tax break for new car buyers..” Let see, the housing market is in a free fall, the car manufacturers are following suit and tax breaks directed at those who would consume these big ticket items are “jettisoned” in favor of liberal special interest leeches.

If we could have figured out how to give Maine and their two simpleminded Senators to the Canadians, we wouldn’t have this progressive punishment, this altruistic albatross, to contend with. The Canadians are far too intelligent to fall for such a stunt, so what other options would be available? It is time for “The New Enlightenment.”

The Enlightenment came about in order to move away from “The Divine Right of Kings”. A simple (in more ways than one..) majority has apparently elected a “King” who unquestionably believes that he is “Divine” so, so far, so good. The Enlightenment was essentially envisioned to bring about an age of rational discourse, (Name a rational liberal, then attempt to discuss something “rationally”..) personal judgement (Not available under the liberal caliphate, they know what is best for you.) and to bring about the end of the censorship of ideas (The Fairness Doctrine..) and the end of absolute state authority. (The Obama administration and the liberal lemmings in Congress.) It also relied upon the theories of liberty, reason, common sense and the principles of deism. (All of which are the equivalent of garlic, a cross with elbows locked and a wooden stake to the liberals..)

The Enlightenment was the source of critical ideas. For example, freedom, democracy and religious tolerance. (the only religion that the liberals “tolerate” other than liberalism, is Islam.) It also stressed the “scientific method” which “gathered observable, empirical and measurable evidence.. specific reasoning.” (You will note that the liberals have tried to utilize their own version of the “scientific method”, providing us with the predictably humorous results of Darwinism and global warming, to name a few..)

Immanuel Kant called the Enlightenment, “the freedom to use one’s own intelligence.” There is nothing more frightening to today’s leftists than the thought of anyone using their own intelligence.. de Tocqueville said, “In the French Revolution there were two opposite tendencies which must not be confused, one favored freedom , the other favored despotism..” It is not hard to figure out who is who when we apply this to today’s liberals.

Thus it appears that is time to begin the “New Enlightenment”. The elements are all in place as they were hundreds of years ago. In a story titled, “Economic Stimulus Deal, Some Winners, Some Losers”, we find, “..”Obama’s legacy will be defined by this package. If it fails, Obama himself admits there will be a new President four years from now..”

For the sake of what was once our proud country, I hope that the “New Enlightenment” will be the vehicle that brings that bit of clairvoyance to fruition..