Thursday, March 22, 2012

OIL PRICES AND OTHER OBAMA LIES

On Wednesday, Andrea Mitchell, Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent for NBC News and host of MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports, had as a guest Ken Salazar, the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama administration. At the end of the interview, Mitchell made a comment that could lead viewers to believe that at some point MSNBC leaned forward to sign on Salazar as a bias-free point man for rooting out untruths:
Salazar: “The price of oil was set on the global economy. People who have looked at this closely and hard know that is the case. So what the President is doing is being truthful to the people. The political opponents are not. But the President’s point of view is we need to keep on a sustained program that we have been pursuing with an all of the above energy strategy to make sure we get to energy independence and energy security for the United States. And that way the American people won’t have to go through the kind of pain they’re experiencing right now or that they’ve experienced a number of times in the last 20, 30 years,” Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar said on MSNBC today.

Mitchell: “I appreciate that you are correctly fact checking the Republican claims,” MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell said to Salazar after he accused political opponents of not being truthful.
But during the Bush/Cheney Administration we never heard anything near this type of explanation!  All we heard was "Blame Bush,  Blame Bush,  Blame Bush, etc." and Cheney...and all their oil buddies.

So his comment "what the President is doing is being truthful to the people," is as big a lie as most everything that comes out ObaMao's mouth.  ObaMao doesn't know how to be truthful to the people, nor does he want to be!
.

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

WHY CHIMPS THROW POOP.....

… And 17 Other Examples of Government Waste
February 22, 2012

By David Zeiler, Associate Editor, Money Morning

Never mind the $15 trillion national debt; the government blew $592,000 on a study last year to figure out why chimpanzees throw poop.

That's just one example of government waste described in a recent book by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK. His "Wastebook 2011" features 100 examples of needless or ill-advised government spending.

It adds up to $6.9 billion that America can't afford. And while such waste is just a fraction of the federal government's $3.8 trillion budget, a country that needs to borrow 36 cents of every dollar it spends should not be throwing money away on non-essential research.

Like why chimps throw poop.

Here are other things the government wasted tax dollars on last year:

    Exporting Elmo: The U.S. Agency for International Development provided $10 million to a Pakistani arts organization to adapt "Sesame Street" for Pakistani toddlers. The money will also help pay for the creation of 130 episodes of the show.

    Dragon Robots for Preschoolers: The National Science Foundation spent $131,000 on robot dragons designed to mimic human responses to help teach preschoolers language skills. Apparently interaction with real humans was deemed inadequate.

    Virtual Mummies: Thanks to a $25,000 federal grant, visitors to the Milwaukee Public Museum will now be able to experience a "3-D high-definition, full-color true holographic or holographic-like exhibit of a virtual mummy unwrapping."

    Dead Man's Party: Those who complain federal employment benefits are already too generous won't be pleased to learn that many government workers keep receiving payments long after they've died. The Inspector General for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management says "the amount of post-death improper payments is consistently $100-$150 million annually, totaling over $601 million in the last five years."

    Cowboy Poetry: It's hard to recall John Wayne reciting verse in any of the many Westerns he made, but cowboy poetry is a big enough phenomenon to have its own annual celebration. And this year taxpayers helped pay for it courtesy of a $50,000 contribution from the U.S. government.

    Promiscuous Quail: The National Institute of Health gave the University of Kentucky $176,000 to determine if Japanese quail are more likely to have sex when high on cocaine. The study is scheduled to last through 2015.

    Happiness is ... Social Media: Another National Science Foundation grant for $198,000 paid for a University of California-Riverside study of "motivations, expectations and goal pursuit in social media." Among the questions the study seeks to answer: "Do unhappy people spend more time on Twitter or Facebook?"

    Guilty Pleasure: The federal government gave the Hawaii Department of Agriculture $50,000 to help pay for the 2nd Annual Hawaiian Chocolate Festival. The goal is to "highlight the culinary talents and products specifically linked to Hawaii's chocolate industry."

    O Christmas Tree: The U.S. government spent $74,000 last year to help the state of Michigan "increase awareness about the role Michigan plays in the production of trees and poinsettias." Michigan's $40 million Christmas tree industry already ranks third in the nation.

    High on Pizza: A private company was given $484,000 by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to build a Mellow Mushroom pizzeria in Arlington, TX. Mellow Mushroom is a national chain known for its use of hippie and drug themes.

    Tips for India: The National Science Foundation wants to help politicians in India do a better job. So it is awarded a $426,000 grant for research to determine the effectiveness of communications to citizens from officeholders. The U.S. sent $126 million in aid to India last year, even though it is one of the fastest growing economies in the world.

By the way, the researchers studying why chimps throw poop have theorized that it's a form of communication. Maybe they're trying to send a message to Obama.
.

Monday, March 12, 2012

NEAL BOORTZ EXPLAINS BORDER RULES

As you know, Iran recently nabbed three American hikers who (they say) had strayed across their border.  So … let’s review the border crossing rules:

If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard labor.

If you cross the Iranian border illegally your are detained indefinitely.

If you cross the Afghan border illegally you will be shot.

If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.

If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from again.

If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be called a spy and your fate is sealed.

If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into a political prison to rot.

If you cross the U.S. border illegally you get:

    A job.
    A driver’s license
    A Social Security card
    Welfare
    Food Stamps
    Credit Cards
    Subsidized Rent
    Subsidized home loans
    Free education
    Free health care
    Your very own lobbyist
    Billions of dollars worth of public documents printed in your language
    The right to carry your country’s flag while you protest that you don’t get enough respect.

As they say ….. WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT !
.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Alumni from radical 1960s groups are now teaching your children, influencing legislation and trying to re-elect Obama.

From Townhall Magazine's March feature, "Still Radical, Now Influential,"
  by Kathy Jessup:

Buildings were bombed, bras burned and raising two fingers in a “V” became a symbol for peace, not a signal for ordering two. Henry Mancini’s “Moon River” won the Grammy in 1961, but the Fifth Dimension’s win for “Aquarius” in 1969 was symbolic of the decade of tumult that birthed Students for a Democratic Society and its offshoot Weathermen.

But unlike tie-dye shirts and platform shoes, the Marxist or Maoist or socialist SDS politics never went dormant. Former leaders of the original SDS and also its splinter Weatherman group—labeled “a domestic terrorist group” by the FBI—are installed in academia, organized labor, advocacy organizations and in the highest levels of the Obama administration.

In fact, the '60s college-campus political phenomenon seeded today’s new Left. Now the “repackaged” people and policies of the original SDS/Weathermen have been quietly injected into the mainstream by academia, labor unions, advocacy organizations and private enterprise, waiting for a political host. Have they found it under the Obama administration?

President Barack Obama may characterize 1960s Weatherman radical Bill Ayres as just a man he knows from Chicago’s Hyde Park. But what about Rev. Jim Wallis, Obama’s spiritual advisor and a SDS alumni? Surely Obama knew Wade Rathke, head of ACORN where Obama was employed, was an SDSer. How about SDS founder Tom Hayden, once married to Vietnam War opponent Jane Fonda? Obama must have known Hayden had been a big SDS name when Hayden founded Progressives for Obama in 2008. Was Obama unaware of Michael Klonsky’s radical SDS allegiance when Klonsky’s education blog was featured on Obama’s 2008 campaign website? Someone eventually did. Klonsky’s posts were later “scrubbed” from the website, as reported on the blog Gateway Pundit. Or take Marilyn Katz, a SDSer who once touted using “guerrilla nails” to attack police and also helped organize a 2002 anti-war rally where she takes credit for Obama “coming out … as a public speaker,” reports In These Times. Katz, a 30-year friend of Obama strategist David Axelrod, was on Obama’s 2008 national finance committee and was a fundraising “bundler,” according to Obama’s campaign website.

And the moneyman for much of the complicated network is George Soros. There’s no evidence that the wealthy financial speculator was himself an SDS member. But Soros’ espoused Marxist, one-world vision fits the SDS theology that’s aged with the 20-something radicals now portrayed as 60-something mainstream figures.

Students for a Democratic Society was born in Michigan, the offspring of the League for Industrial Democracy, a socialist educational organization. In 1960, a handful of University of Michigan students bonded over views of war, the nuclear threat, racial discrimination and economic inequality; they rejected mainstream opposition to communism. In 1962, the group’s Port Huron Statement advocated national defense based on deterrence and arms control rather than “peace through strength.” It demanded the Democratic Party embrace the issues of “disinherited” groups and universities advance social change by inserting social issues into the curriculum. SDS supported North Vietnam, the Palestinians and Colombians. It opposed “male supremacy,” calling for no legal or financial restrictions on abortion and birth control and demanding “day-care centers, public and free laundries, food centers and other facilities necessary to free women from their status as household drudges.”

“You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows,” lyrics from a song that came to be associated with the Weathermen, signaled that a more radical splinter group was forming out of the SDS with Weather Underground members, Maoists, Marxists, the Worker Student Alliance and some Black Panthers. Mainline SDS faded in the 1970s and the Weathermen went underground as members sought to avoid prosecution for acts of terrorism. But their acceptance of communism or socialism economic redistribution and the use of academia to prime the social, economic and political pumps were nurtured in the intervening decades.

Many names from the golden age of SDS never disappeared. Instead, in the Obama administration, it seems everything old is new again.

For a rundown on some original SDS/Weathermen and their ties to Obama, please read Kathy Jessup's piece in the March isssue of Townhall Magazine.
.

LETTER FROM MY CCC (CONSERVATIVE COUSIN IN CHINA)

Dear Cuz, 

First and foremost, fuck Bill Maher!

Second, media bias exists, we all know it.

Third, conservatism is up against some serious odds.

I was thinking the other day about media bias. What's interesting is if you ask any liberal they will say that the media tilts in favor of conservatives! But anyhow, what's interesting to me is this: so let's count the conservative mainstream outlets: Fox news, Wall Street Journal, Glenn Beck TV? Not many! Most people don't know of any besides those three. Of course we have radio and internet on our side as well, but here comes my point…

So you've got Fox news…but guess what else you have? Fox TV, Fox cinema, etc and so on. In fact the Fox company spends more money on producing liberal-leaning entertainment than it does pushing the conservative agenda. I fear to News Corp the WSJ and Fox news are just niche-fillers, not serious attempts at shaping opinions.

The reality is that 98% of all media is hyper-liberal.

So self-proclaimed conservative reads the WSJ in the morning and watches 2 hours of Fox news at night, big whoop. They spend the rest of their time funding and buying into liberal entertainment. Fox entertainment made Transformers, a fun, but ultimately retarded movie that doesn't exactly try and uphold any traditional conservative thought, in fact, it throws Bill O'reilly into the mix and makes him look bad while promoting the usual sex, violence, and pro-youth mentality of the left.

Most people absorb so little conservative thought throughout the day its laughable.

I'm mad too about all kinds of shit, and I won't quit trying to get the story straight, but it is over unless somehow magically we become a serious Christian nation again or genocide the left. This new generation (mine and the ones getting slapped on the butt as we speak) are so far gone that I'm afraid to say I have almost no faith in us. The counter-culture of the 60's has become so mainstream that people can't even recognize it as such.

A good group of these Occupy assholes are some serious Marxists. Most are mindless drones spouting phrases they overheard, they show up for the crazy tent-life and intoxicated hippy sluts. You can't expect much deep thinking from people when we've been living in an ever increasing ultra-feminized world.

With so many fatherless homes, and a truly female approach to parenting and education, what can you expect?

Our new metro-sexual compassionate progressive relativistic society is absolutely suicidal and we've reached the point where so many of us have seen these Transformer movies that we kind of wish Armageddon would happen on our watch.

Selfish, selfish people we've become…Complete disregard for family, responsibility, etc.

How can these assholes raise a family? Educate their children? We need to basically have a civil war and create two new countries, one conservative-Christian, one liberal schmucks.

The real question is how far do good people let things go? Is there a point when we get off the sidelines? We see things going crazy and out of control, right? If Obama gets 4 more years, if he grooms this Occupy movement up to be his little Red Guard, if they push shitty mandates of health care on us, if they fail to aid our allies, help our enemies, drive our economy into the ground, all the while robbing us blind and berating us all the while, when do good honest folk break?

That's the thing, this bargain can only go on as long as we let it.

They fail to see it is they who are in debt to the earners. The providers should call the shots. They erroneously believe they are sustaining us, while the truth is that without the minds and hardworking incentive-driven regular bible-thumping gun-toting citizens they've got shit.

This is my rant.

If we don't beat Obama…uggh, I'm not sure what will happen, but I don't see it being pretty. There will be like-minded individuals way crazier than us who take up some kind of resistance. The south is a strong ally!

In my mind, we've already sat by and let a scoundrel radical friend of terrorists with dubious credentials disgrace the White House…anything more would be intolerable.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

-----------

My cousin, who shall remain nameless, is a graduate student at a well known Chinese university working on his Masters Degree in Chinese Culture and Language.  He will be well prepared for the Chinese takeover of our economy (and country).
 .

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

BOY, THESE DUDES IN DETROIT MUST REALLY KNOW HOW TO DRESS!

 Part of an $11 million stimulus grant intended to provide business attire to 400 low-income job-seekers instead helped only two people, according to an audit of the city’s Department of Human Services.

    The audit, conducted by the city’s auditor general for the period from July 2009 to September 2011, found the department failed to control the operations and finances of a boutique that was to provide the clothes.  The department did not safeguard grant funds or create an inventory for the clothing, the audit found.

    “The DHS was only able to provide the auditors with two referral forms signed by two clients documenting that they received clothing from the boutique,” the audit said. “Eligible Detroiters are not being served with available clothing being stocked in the boutique.”

    The department did not give a reason for not reaching the goal of providing 400 people with clothes.  That figures!  I think most of the money went into politicians pockets.

Perhaps Detroit’s Department of Human Services is a training ground for Department of Energy clean energy loan officers.  I mean, they must have got their training somewhere, somehow to be so adept at giving away our money.

And assuming the entire $11 million was earmarked for the job seeker “service center,” even if they met their goal of helping clothe 400 people in business attire, that would have still worked out to $27,500 per person. Where did they plan on taking these people to shop? Oscar de la Renta?  This ridiculous wasteful liberal government spending has got to stop!
.

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Hypocritical Cable Programs Eagerly Bash Rush But Embrace Crude Libs

If there ever was clearer evidence of media hypocrisy, I can't find it.  What Rush Limbaugh said was mild compared to what these Democrat cretins are spewing from their mouths.  But where's the protest from the media?  Where's Obama speaking out about the vile language?  Where are his phone calls to the victims of this rhetoric?  Before his Labor Day 2011 speech in Detroit, Obama stood beside Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa and chuckled as Hoffa said:  "President Obama, this is your army, we are ready to march. But everybody here’s got to vote. If we go back, and keep the eye on the prize, let’s take these son of a bitches out.”  

WARNING:  THE LANGUAGE USED IN THIS ARTICLE IS EXPLICIT.

This two-faced hypocrite of a president and his pack of media myrmidons have the gall to go after Limbaugh when the things they say make Rush look like a Sunday School teacher.


Below is the text of a Media Reality Check, researched and written by Rich Noyes, the MRC’s  Research Director. It was posted this afternoon.

 Both MSNBC and CNN have devolved into a feeding frenzy over Rush Limbaugh’s crack last week about a Georgetown law student, with hosts on both networks scolding Limbaugh for his words and fantasizing the conservative radio powerhouse will get knocked off the airwaves.

But an MRC review finds those networks had no negative reaction to far more vulgar and sexist language used by HBO host Bill Maher. Instead, both networks have hosted Maher repeatedly (12 times in the past year) in softball formats where the journalists ritually flatter the vulgarian: “Your show is brilliant,” “I love your show,” “You’re the funniest, smartest guy around.”

If either CNN or MSNBC genuinely cared about the use of insulting language toward women,  they could stop providing the vile Maher with a regular platform to promote his show and his left-wing views.

[Warning: this article includes uncensored vulgarities to accurately represent what Bill Maher has said about conservative women.]

Here’s what CNN’s Piers Morgan said about Rush Limbaugh on Friday: “Limbaugh’s disgusting comments are the work of an archaic old dinosaur living in a warped, ugly swamp, who thinks it’s okay to degrade decent young women for sport and ratings. Well, it isn’t it. Shame on you, Rush Limbaugh.”

The next morning, NBC’s Today show brought on MSNBC host Al Sharpton to lambaste Limbaugh: “You can’t have him as a major spokesman in your movement and then he says something as offensive and misogynist as this.”

Monday, on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, host Ed Schultz — who last year had to apologize after he called conservative radio host Laura Ingraham a “slut” — urged liberals to exploit Limbaugh’s use of the same term (also with an apology) to get his show cancelled. Schultz fantasized: “If there is a time to get him off the air, this is the push. I mean, if women in this country are serious about what they hear on the free airwaves of America, there’s no better time.”

Now, here’s a rundown of some demeaning language used by Bill Maher in just a nine day period last March:

# On March 18, 2011, Maher, on his HBO show Real Time, employed a crude term for a female body part when talking about Sarah Palin: “Sarah Palin finally heard what happened in Japan, and she’s demanding that we invade Tsunami. I mean, she says, ‘These Tsunamians will not get away with this.’ Oh speaking of dumb twats....”

# A week later, on his March 25 show, Maher insulted Palin and Michele Bachman as “bimbos.” Talking about the GOP field, Maher argued: “If Bachmann and Palin get in, that’s two bimbos, and then there’s Mitt Romney, a millionaire, and Newt Gingrich, a professor. We just need a skipper and a buddy – we’ve got Gilligan’s Island.”

# Two days after that, on March 28, Maher employed the C-word in talking about Palin during a show in Dallas. According to a favorable review in the Dallas Voice: “It’s that fearlessness — he acknowledged that some people would probably be uncomfortable with some of his remarks about religion, not to mention calling Sarah Palin a ‘cunt’ (‘there’s just no other word for her’) — that makes Maher the most dangerous person in comedy.”

But none of this prompted any of the scolding that has greeted Limbaugh’s transgression. In fact, in the days and months that followed, CNN and MSNBC cheerfully included Maher a dozen times as a guest in their line-up. Only Chuck Todd, filling for Chris Matthews on Hardball, brought up Maher’s vicious comments just one day after the day after his Dallas event: “Any regrets on what you said?”

Maher, predictably, said he wasn’t sorry: “I’m not trying to hurt somebody’s feelings. But if you want me to say ‘I’m sorry, what I said was wrong,’ no, sorry, I can’t go there.”

These demeaning comments have not caused the news networks to sour on Maher, as he continues to make regular appearances and receive pats on the back from CNN and MSNBC hosts:

# On March 22, 2011 — in the midst of his storm of nasty comments about conservative women, Maher appeared on CNN’s In the Arena. Host Eliot Spitzer did not ask about Maher’s “dumb twat” insult of Palin from four days earlier, or pose any hostile questions to Maher. Spitzer ended by genuflecting: “Your show is brilliant. I love watching it.”

# On March 29, 2011, Maher made his MSNBC Hardball appearance with Chuck Todd, as noted above. While Todd — unlike CNN’s Spitzer — did ask Maher about how he was “getting hammered in the conservative blogosphere, among a lot of conservative hosts” for his nasty comments about Palin and Bachmann, he was in no way judgmental.

Todd ended that interview by publicizing both Maher’s upcoming show on HBO as well as appearances in Indiana and North Carolina. “Bill Maher, always entertaining to have you on.”

# On April 12, 2011, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow hosted Maher, and not once asked about his nasty comments about women. Instead of scolding Maher for his deplorable remarks, Maddow was thrilled to have him: “It is nice to see you....I’m very excited....Thank you so much for being on with us, Bill. It’s really nice to see you. Thank you.”

# On May 3, 2011, Maher popped up on The Joy Behar Show on CNN’s Headline News Network. Behar fawned over her guest: “I love your show. I watch you every week, and I really get irritated when they put you on hiatus.”

# On May 17, 2011, Maher showed up on MSNBC’s Hardball, where Chris Matthews touted him as their “star guest.” Maher trashed Michele Bachmann as a “frothing loon,” jabbing that “Bachmann is the candidate for people who find Palin too intellectual.”

# On June 14, 2011, CNN’s Anderson Cooper interviewed Maher about the GOP debate. Maher unleashed his usual invective, declaring that the Republican candidates “have just horrible, society-killing ideas about America.”

# On July 11, 2011, Maher appeared as a guest on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight, and made the host laugh with a crude reference to Palin and Michele Bachmann. Morgan asked Maher about the GOP nomination: “If you had a choice, gun to your head, which one is it? Palin or Bachmann?”

Maher replied: “I would need a gun to my head. I hope Sarah Palin gets in so that they split the MILF vote.” MILF is an acronym for a “Mother I’d Like to Fuck.” The CNN host ended the interview by telling Maher: “May you remain gloriously uncensored on HBO...Love the show.”

# On August 3, 2011, fill-in host Michael Eric Dyson had “the great Bill Maher” on MSNBC’s The Ed Show. Dyson touted Maher as “my very good friend.”

# On October 11, 2011, Maher returned to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show, which Maddow eagerly promoted. “The one and only Bill Maher is going to be here for an interview tonight,” she promised viewers. Talking about the radical Occupy protesters, Maher used the occasion to suggest violence against Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch: “If a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s window, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people....”

# On January 25, 2012, CNN’s Cooper brought Maher onto his show to talk about Obama’s State of the Union speech and the Republican nomination contest. During that interview, Maher made a derogatory reference to Mormons, predicting Romney would be the nominee and: “I think Obama is going to beat him like a runaway sister wife.” Cooper winced: “Geez, your runaway sister wife? I haven’t heard an LDS punchline in quite a while.”

# On February 27, 2012, Chris Matthews was thrilled to see Maher back on Hardball where he talked about the Republican “crazies” and “idiots.” “Hey, Maher, you’re the best,” Matthews flattered. “You’re the funniest, smartest guy around....Thank you, Bill Maher — you’re an Irish guy, too. Thank you for coming on.”

# That same night, Morgan interviewed Maher again, this time prompted by his $1 million donation to Obama’s SuperPAC. Maher mocked Christianity: “You’re allowed to have your opinion that a Palestinian 2,000 years ago walked on water and did magic tricks and was really —  he’s really still his own father and all that stuff.” As always, Morgan was delighted: “Bill Maher, always a great pleasure.”

Obviously, there’s a certain amount of show business in the media fawning over Bill Maher, but it underscores how utterly unbothered they are by his frequent, nasty comments about conservative women. With that as context, it’s hard not to see those networks’ flamboyant outrage at Rush Limbaugh as nothing more than opportunism by liberals out to destroy the most successful conservative in the media.
.

I HAVE A QUESTION MR, PRESIDENT...

Obama is holding one of his rare press conferences today.  Here’s the question I would REALLY like some brave reporter to ask:
“Mr. President – you made a highly publicized phone call to Georgetown Law Student, Sandra Fluke, after she was called a vile name by a conservative talk show host.  But Bill Maher, who has made a $1 million donation to a Super Pac supporting your reelection, used those same words, and some that might even be worse, like the c**t word, in referring to Sarah Palin.  Will you make a call to Sarah Palin to ask her if she is doing OK after those attacks...and will you be calling Laura Ingraham to see if she's OK after one of your media pimps, Ed Schultz, called her a slut on his MSNBC show?  And if not, why?”
Don’t hold your breath thinking this could happen.
.

Saturday, March 3, 2012

RUSH EXPLAINS, IN HIS OWN WORDS, ABOUT THIS STUDENT'S ADMITTED SEX LIFE AND HOW SHE'S BEING USED BY THE DEMOCRATS

Here's the whole story that the media does not report.  Instead they twist the issue to make it appear that Rush is demonizing and insulting to women.  As usual, they try to destroy critics of liberals by whatever means possible.

But this is not about a slutty law school student who, by her own testimony, says she's having sex about 3 times a day...every day of the year...and wants taxpayers to pay for it.  WTF!  (Her parents must be sooo proud of her.)  It's about a new welfare program that the LibDems want taxpayers to pay for---Contraceptive Devices.  Can you believe it!  Obama must've forgot to put this in his healthcare bill.

HERE IS THE TRANSCRIPT OF RUSH IN HIS OWN WORDS.

Republicans don't hate women, are not at war with women, and never have been.  It's absolutely absurd.  So Congressman Issa wants to have hearings over the unconstitutionality of Obama's mandate that churches and religious schools pass out abortion pills, contraception pills and so forth.

 The Democrats turn this into a hearing about Obamacare and "health care" and an attempt to create a new welfare program, and that is birth control pills for women, and they do it on the basis that the Republicans want to deny contraception to women, which isn't true. It's never been stated. There isn't one Republican that's interested in this. It's all manufactured. 

They tried to get Fluke to testify.  She is not allowed to testify because it was not about women at Georgetown who have so much sex they can't afford birth control!  It was about Obama.  The Democrat women on the committee say, "Well, this is outrageous! This is misogynistic and this is discriminatory right here!  They won't let a woman witness come testify." And it was never about that.  So Pelosi arranges her own press conference for the woman, and the woman makes it clear (her name is Sandra Fluke) that she's having so much sex, she can't pay for it -- and we should.  She's having so much sex, she can't afford it.

She gives the numbers: $3,000 worth of birth control pills worth of sex.  She's paying anywhere from $35,000 to $50,000 a year to go to Georgetown, $20,000 room and board, and can't afford the $1,800 to $3,000 a year for birth control pills and wants us to pay for it.  I said, "What does that make her?"  She wants taxpayers, the Democrats want taxpayers, to pay for it. They want to create a welfare entitlement program where we provide birth control pills, because pregnancy's an illness. Pregnancy is a "women's health issue."  So the woman comes forth with this, frankly hilarious claim that she's having so much sex (and her buddies with her) that she can't afford it.



And not one person says, "Well, did you ever think about maybe backing off the amount of sex that you have?  Do you ever think maybe it's your responsibility for your own birth control, not everybody else's?"  Nobody raises those questions.  Amazingly, when there is the slightest bit of opposition to this new welfare entitlement being created, then all of a sudden we hate women! We want 'em barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, all of these other things.  So that's where we are.  And now, at the end of this week, I am the person that the women of America are to fear the most.  What can I do to the women of America?

Do I have the power to raise their taxes?  I do not.
Do I have the power to regulate their behavior?  I do not.
Do I have the power to make health care decisions for them?  I do not.
Do I have the power to withhold birth control pills from them?  I do not.
Do I have the power to audit their tax returns?  I do not.
Do I have the power to take their little four-year-old kindergarten student's lunch and throw it away and make 'em eat something else?  I do not.
Do I have the power to look into their personal life and leak the information to the media?  I do not.
Is there one bit of freedom that I can deny them?  Can I raise their taxes?

They want to blame me as being the person they should fear, when in fact the people doing all these things I just said I have no power to do, the Democrat Party is doing. That's who everybody's afraid of in this country.  You know that story about the four-year-old girl who had her lunch taken by the federal agent? When those stories happen, have you noticed the people involved don't want their names known?  Who are they afraid of?  They're afraid of Democrat Party.  They're afraid of the Obama administration.  The Obama administration will take away your birth control, and if you let 'em do that, they'll tell you when you can and can't take it. And then they'll tell you when you can and can't have sex, and then they will tell you when you can or cannot have an abortion!

You give them this power, that's what they want.  I can't do any of this.
.

Thursday, March 1, 2012

YOU MAY BE A LIBERAL NUT IF.......


February 29, 2012

From American Thinker

A Guide to the Liberal Mind
By Victor Volsky

As a great fan of Jeff Foxworthy, it occurred to me that it might be a good idea to use his hilarious you-might-be-a-redneck comedy routine in an attempt to characterize the liberal mindset (tweaking Jeff's formula a bit to convert it from the suppositional to the unconditional).  So, with apologies to the wonderful country comedian, here are some of the notable features of the liberal's mental landscape:

    If you believe that freedom of expression is sacrosanct but would like nothing better than to deny it to anyone who doesn't share your views, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the 1st Amendment separates church from state, but not state from church, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the 2nd Amendment was the founding fathers' big mistake and that the 10th Amendment shouldn't be taken seriously, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that endlessly discussing a problem amounts to actually solving it, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the results of progressive programs are irrelevant and that only good intentions count, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Mark Foley, who wrote salacious e-mails to a young but legally adult congressional page, was an evil libertine, while Gerry Studds, who had sex with an underage congressional page, was a knight in shining armor, you are a liberal intellectual.
    If you believe that Obama is an intellectual giant whose IQ is off the charts even though you have no idea what his IQ actually is, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that a decades-old drunk-driving episode in George W. Bush's biography comes under the "people's right to know" doctrine while the entire past of Barack Obama is protected by his right to privacy, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that we can spend and borrow our way out of the recession in keeping with the thoroughly discredited Keynesian model, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that taxpayers don't change their behavior when the government tries to squeeze more tax money out of them, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Americans are undertaxed, while carefully hiding your own money in offshore tax shelters, you are a liberal.
    If you believe, with Nancy Pelosi and Valerie Jarrett, that unemployment benefits are a boon to the economy (but without taking this brilliant insight to its logical conclusion: that the path to unprecedented prosperity lies through 100% unemployment), you are a liberal.
    If you believe that affirmative action improves the lot of poor minorities rather than miring them in perpetual misery and dependence, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty failed because not enough money (a trifling $16 trillion) was spent on it, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that God's middle name is Kennedy, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Jimmy Carter, who has been working indefatigably over the last three decades to subvert his country's foreign policy, is the best ex-president ever, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the Fox News Channel is the modern-day equivalent of Völkischer Beobachter and The New York Times a light unto the world, and whatever the Times publishes is God-given truth while whatever it deems unfit to print doesn't deserve to be known, you are a liberal.
    If you angrily castigate your compatriots for being profligate with their energy consumption while generously allowing yourself to use more than 20 times as much energy as a regular household (see Gore, Al), you are a liberal.
    If you believe that your choice of a car affects the planet's climate while sunspot activity doesn't, you are a liberal.
    If you are notoriously stingy with personal charitable giving but deliriously generous with other people's money while proudly posing as the true benefactor of the poor, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that human nature is infinitely malleable and that nurture easily trumps nature, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that your women's studies degree is superior to a Ph.D. in engineering, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the anarchists, hoodlums, and hobos who make up the Occupy movement are noble idealists who truly represent the 99 percent of America while the Tea Partiers are Nazi troglodytes and of course racists, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that perjury is not a crime if it is about sex, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Bill Clinton defended the Constitution as he repeatedly perjured himself, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Hillary's rather primitive bribery scheme with cattle futures was so complicated as to be beyond human comprehension and thus ought to be shoved into the memory hole, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Chuck Colson, who served seven months behind bars for procuring a single FBI file, got away with murder, but the Clintons, who demanded from the FBI some 900 files, were defenseless lambs relentlessly persecuted by cruel Republicans, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the mountains of corpses and rivers of blood that have been the chief result of all communist "experiments" are merely collateral damage, a possibly regrettable but unavoidable byproduct of the high-minded attempts to build paradise on earth and thus nothing to talk about, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Alger Hiss or Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were innocent victims of McCarthyism, you are a liberal.
    If, to reinforce your salon cred, you bedeck your infant in a T-shirt bearing the likeness of that murderous sadist, Che Guevara, you are a liberal.
    If you believe, against plentiful historical evidence to the contrary, that appeasement works and that America's unilateral disarmament will surely mollify enemies by demonstrating our peaceful intentions and shame them into following our example, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that negotiations are the be-all and end-all of international relations and that as long as our adversaries deign to talk to us, everything is fine and dandy, even if they clearly use the negotiations as a smokescreen to pursue their nefarious schemes unmolested, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that the Palestinians sincerely want an accommodation with Israel and that only the stiff-necked Jews' obduracy stands in the way of Middle East peaceful settlement, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that all cultures are equal but that Western culture is less equal than the others, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that a crucifix immersed in the "artist's" urine or a bucket of paint splashed onto a canvas is genuine art, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that a murderous hoodlum is not really guilty because he grew up in a tough neighborhood and that "judgmentalism" is really the only crime deserving of opprobrium, you are a liberal.
    If you reflexively sympathize with the criminal while scornfully ignoring the crime victim, you are a liberal.
    If you believe that Bill Maher is indeed politically incorrect and Warren Buffet is dying to pay more taxes, you are a liberal.
    If you love the "people" but despise the "populace," you are a liberal.
    If you believe that you and your ilk will be able to fool the American people indefinitely...well, you may have a point there.

 http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/02/a_guide_to_the_liberal_mind.html
.