October 31, 2008

Tito The Builder Again

Good stuff. His description of socialism is excellent.

Tito the Builder

"Tito came onto the national stage last week when he showed up at a Virginia rally for McCain and started launching on the news media, demanding to know if he was going to be investigated too and that he had brought his papers." I just saw this guy on Hannity and Colmes, and he really finally got to talk - he was phenomenal. I love listening to him; and his perspective on foreign countries like Venezuela, Obama's desire to connect with Chavez, and how we ought to look at the lack of liberty they have there and wonder what will happen to our own under a man like this, was terrific. His comment to the press on how he's from Colombia and he knows how the press works when they're NOT honest, hide things and refuse to inform the people (countries where, unlike this one, there is no freedom of the press - and here we are WITH freedom of the press and they refuse to do their jobs) is really inspiring. He also made a hilarious comment when they complimented his glasses - after explaining that he actually has a problem with his eyes, he then said that they were really there to intimidate Colmes. I'd be lying if I said part of it wasn't hearing someone with such a rich and pleasant accent praising this country and its values. Before you complain, I feel the same about most accents, and about almost anyone who comes to this land of opportunity and loves what the US has to offer. In addition to my Palin crush, which has ended up strengthening as I've kept seeing further evidence that she is a lot smarter than I imagined at first (I realize a lot of people who had crushes on her have cooled a bit, but the people who are meeting her sure haven't - just ask Tina Fey) I have to say I have a crush on Tito too now. Go Tito :) Daily Humor, albeit kind of black - it's funny because it's so stupid: Global Electoral Vote - as determined by online voters who happen to read the Economist (which is unfortunately a terrible misnomer). Because I'm sure that impoverished people in India not only have internet access, but read the economist and are closely following the US election. Predictably stupid results. The explanation is here, and it's unfortunately even dumber and (in a blacker way) funnier than the map itself. Because it's really not dumb AT ALL to give all 195 countries of the world a say in our country's elections. Also - yes, it is possible to lose the popular vote and win the election (though it's not a given that that's ever happened) - there's a REASON FOR THAT. The REASON for that is because the founders not only were four-square AGAINST Democracy (which they called Mobocracy) but they also wanted to avoid the tyranny of the cities against the extremely important but less populous heartland - the real producers, the farmers and so forth. It was not MEANT to be a mere popular vote. I've never seen the reason for the electoral college so graphically represented as I did here - in the county-by-county map of the Bush election. Urbanites with no stake in the land do not get to tell the rest of the peons how it's going to be without an equalizing force - and that's the electoral college.

October 29, 2008

"I Chose My Friends Carefully"

"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist Professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets."

There is probably some context in which this statement can be taken another way. I can't imagine what, but it's theoretically possible. There is another thing I wasn't very aware of; I tend to, as I've said before, immerse myself in deliberately far-leftist blogs and sites to see what they're on about, so it seems I may have lost sight of how desperately far left the mainstream media has gone itself.

This one on the redistribution audio is a particularly eggregious example.

"On closer inspection, the "bombshell audio" turns out to be a rather wonkish, somewhat impenetrable, discussion of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren. Obama, then a University of Chicago law professor and Illinois state senator, argued that the courts have traditionally been reluctant to get involved in income distribution questions. He suggested that the civil rights movement had made a mistake in expecting too much from the courts -- and that such issues were better decided by the legislative branch of government."

Didn't pay much attention, did you? If you had, you wouldn't have confused the legislative branch with the administrative branch. Ass. If he thought it was a legislative issue he would have been happier as a senator than running for the branch that he thinks can and should be engaging in the redistribution.

"In other words, Obama says pretty much the opposite of what the McCain camp says he said."

Actually, they were spot on. See, I actually listened to and read it, and unlike you who think it was wonkish and who couldn't "penetrate" (i.e. understand) it, I understood what he said. It wasn't that hard - he was being more honest at the time. Remember, he chose his friends well - the Marxist professors and the radical associations, the Alinski-style politics - and some of us know what Alinski taught. Obama learned it well. If you understood it, you are lying about it now, but perhaps you didn't. Also, can we dismiss this nonsense that McCain dug up this audio and publicized it? It was all over the net before McCain or his "camp" said a thing about it - we all heard it for ourselves and heard it loud and clear. No one needed McCain to interpret it for us, you get it? WE CAN HEAR IT FOR OURSELVES. A private citizen dug that up - something you, the press should have been doing all along, but didn't - and it made its way to McCain. He'd be an utter fool not to say anything about it; and believe me, he's being a lot nicer about it than he should be, or than any of us are. So can we get real here?

I am not even going into Khalidi at present - the L.A. Times reported that they have the tape, and they refuse to release it. Obama then gets away with outright denials of any relationship with the guy, despite describing a very close relationship openly in the past. I realize the media has been left-leaning for a long time - since at least the late 60s early 70s and likely before that - but decided that if talk radio and the internet were going to exist, they might as well dive in headfirst and not just bathe in the muck but generate more of it. It's not only jolting, it's disheartening. I have often seen the far left profess to "love" this country, but that love to me seems to be of the same type the little boy had for The Giving Tree. MANDATORY READING on this topic - and naturally I've been beaten to it, it's already been done, and it's already been done BETTER than I could. Thanks, Andy lol. Unbelievably smug quote today: "We might just turn to you, and in a voice that sounds just like a “real” American voice, destroy your fragile faith by saying, “Have you ever considered that if god is all powerful and all good, then there shouldn’t be evil in the world?" My non-God, NO - no no no, for all that is holy, NO - we have NEVER thought of that, because as you smart people know, we don't THINK at all - and now that you have mentioned it, my faith is destroyed. You pompous asshole. Daily Humor: Obinfomercial Outtakes Trick Or Treat Obama Parody

October 28, 2008

The Plumber and Israel

"I do know that. … I'll actually go ahead and agree with you on that one."—Joe "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, during his first stint as a campaign surrogate at a McCain rally, signaling his agreement with an audience member who said: "It's my belief that a vote for Obama is a vote for the death to Israel." "Though "Joe the Plumber" has become a centerpiece of McCain's campaign in the closing days of the presidential race, McCain aides told FOX News the Republican nominee does not share Wurzelbacher's opinion on Obama's view toward Israel." Really? Because I just heard a McCain ad this very day saying pretty much EXACTLY that - and except for the fact that Israel is VERY capable of self-defense (and are close enough to their own roots not to be lazy and stupid like we have grown, so they're more willing to do it), it would be true. Review. Sum up. The ad. So if it's true, and McCain knows it, why throw Joe the Plumber under the bus? I realize the press is trying to eat the man alive and destroy his livelihood, and the LA Times reporter certainly doesn't want that to happen to him, but what's McCain got to lose? Why deny the obvious? Has Obama pretended to be a friend to Israel or something? I don't know, these things just stump me at times. How much people are willing to swallow.

October 27, 2008

Private Coinage? And The Moral Duty to Disobey the Law

Private Coinage?? Must We Obey...? While we're at it, how about The Decline and Fall of Gorbachev and the Soviet State to round out our economic and political education. "A young man from a peasant family I knew had heard that market activity was legal, and decided to raise a pig to sell in the market. For six months, this hopeful entrepreneur devoted his time and money to caring for it and feeding it, hoping he would earn twice his money back by selling it. Never was a man so happy as when he took the pig to market one morning. That night I found him drunk and depressed. He was not a drinker, so I asked him what happened. When he arrived at the market, a health inspector immediately chopped off a third of the pig. The inspector said he was looking for worms. Then the police came and picked the best part of it, and left without even saying thank you. He had to pay bribes to the officials in charge of the market to get a space to sell what was left. And he had to sell the meat at state prices. By the end of the day, he earned barely enough to buy one bottle of vodka, which he had just finished drinking. This was Gorbachev's new market in a nutshell." This one is fascinating from start to finish.

Not Socialist? Pass Me That Crack Pipe, Please

I wanna get high too.

Biden finally got questioned hard and had to flat-out lie about his own words (as I quoted below) and about his and Obama's intentions...unless perhaps he really doesn't understand himself what he's into. I'm going to embed that video because it's pretty good, at least for showing the obvious lies, but first I am curious. Now Obama has been pretty open from the beginning of his political career that he was a radical deconstructionist, Alinski-ite, Chicago socialist, friend to other radicals like himself and pontificating on his radicalism. It's the thing open socialist bloggers like most about him; that he is indeed a full-out socialist, a lot farther to the left than Hillary is willing to openly be. Than almost any of them are willing to be, really. I didn't realize the extent to which he and his team, once you finally call it what it is, were trying to deny these things. Why deny it? It's why people like you. At least, the hard left, and who the hell else would vote for this guy? How is it that people are missing this fact so badly, that they get excited when this old audio surfaces showing exactly what Obama believes...and surprise, it's literally scrapping the Constitution and redistributing via force/law. I mean...he's BEEN GOING AROUND PROMISING TO DO JUST THAT so why the hell would this audio be some kind of smoking gun? Because he openly says he wants to trash the constitution and as president he'll have to make a false promise to execute and defend it? Does he think anyone cares? His supporters will not be impressed; they believe the constitution is passe, bullshit, and even if it wasn't that Bush had made it into toilet paper long ago (yes, they think it started with him lol - not the Great Society or even Lincoln, but I digress; that's just the current media brainwashing of everything being Bush's fault.)

So I'm going to embed this audio and parse it a little, but for crying out loud, how can this possibly be a coup or a surprise when this is what he's been promising to do and who he has been all along? Enjoy:

OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that, uh, I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and -- and as long as I could pay for it I'd be okay. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. As radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted -- and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you. But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted, and one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And, uh, in some ways we still suffer from that.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what the constitution is, Mr. Constitutional "Scholar." It is first a list of what the scope and sphere of the government is, and then the bill of rights is a SPECIFIC and EXPLICIT list of what the government MUST NEVER DO TO US. The government is not a body that is intended to DO THINGS TO US - it is supposed to stay out of the way so we can reserve the full liberty and the full rights that human beings are endowed with by nature and nature's God. That's what it is. Or did you miss the Ninth Amendment completely? The constitution does indeed spell out what they may do in order to engender liberty - the distribution of powers, checks and balances, promoting free trade between the various sovereign states by minting money and looking after interstate travel. It was not put in place to do other things TO us - the fact that you look at it as such is frightening to anyone with belief in their own rights and sovereignty as individuals. The fact that you want to so irresponsibly sweep aside checks and balances in order to promote a radical, from-the-roots restructuring of what society IS and throw out our liberty in the process, was an obvious fact - I'm not sure why you're trying to hide it now, but it won't work. And now you're trying to deny it not by denying it, but by saying "Well, we're not going to have TIME to make all these lurches to the left that John McCain is saying we're going to do." You WON'T HAVE TIME? Are you kidding me? THAT'S your excuse for openly wanting to throw out the constitutional protections we've had for 200 years - don't worry, we WANT to but we won't really have TIME for all that anyway, so no need to fuss and fret; we just want to take care of you." Thanks, but NO THANKS, sir.

Of course Biden is still just denying it outright, which is kind of funny, but my god, how is it anyone wants these radical deconstructionists in the positions of power that are sworn to uphold those very constructions??? Because it feels good? Because you can assuage your liberal guilt, or think you're doing people of color some imaginary good by putting the constitution in the shredder and spreading the wealth?

Then he goes onstage with his God-reverb microphone/sound system and promises, in his deal-sealer, that MCCAIN calls this redistribution "socialism" and they call it "opportunity", and that that's HOW WE'VE ALWAYS GROWN THE ECONOMY - FROM THE BOTTOM UP? Not by fiat, sir. Never. Ever. It does indeed originally grow from the ground up - by people who start out with nothing and MAKE something of value for themselves and their communities, and it progresses from there so long as government stays out of the way. But no sir, it does NOT and NEVER HAS grown from government taking that money at the point of a gun, through theft, and distribution to those who currently have less. It never, never has grown that way in the slightest. All that has ever done is cause ruin for everyone. And I think you know that, Mr. Alinski-disciple. (I would like to note, read Alinski sometime if you wonder what that means - read about how community organizers must never have a static notion of "truth" - that truth is relative, and it changes all the time, and the idea is to destroy what has been built and remake society a la Stalin and every other radical from Che to Mussolini to Adolph.) And by the way, McCain doesn't have to call it anything - THAT'S WHAT IT IS. Socialism HAS A DEFINITION, SIR - and everything you are fighting for and promising FITS THE DEFINITION OF SOCIALISM. I realize a lot of people now believe that's a good thing, but with all due respect, they're morons. They have never lived through really hard times and they don't have a clue the kind of ruin you are promising for us all, or what liberty they will forfeit to get there. It's infuriating.

Well, might as well see Biden lying through his teeth (or just being incredibly stupid - neither is any good) and a very surprising interview...in fact, it sure took him by surprise; Dems are not used to being asked tough questions by the media, and he finally says he can't believe the questions...but they're all legitimate. That's why he has to lie (or be incredibly stupid - still don't know which for sure.)

October 25, 2008

Dumb Quote of the Year

"And here's the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough - I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you, not financially to help him, we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they're made if they work, then they weren't viewed as a crisis. If they don't work, it's viewed as you didn't make the right decision, a little bit like how we hesitated so long dealing with Bosnia and dealing with Kosovo, and consequently 200,000 people lost their lives that maybe didn't have to lose lives. It's how we made a mistake in Iraq. We made a mistake in Somalia. So there's gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia's newly-emboldened position because they're floating in a sea of oil." Holy. shit. This guy is practically brain-dead. By the way, on the topic of Palin's wardrobe (which by all accounts candidates never have to pay for because the designers like the publicity, but they DID pay for it) which is NOT HER PROPERTY and will either be returned or given to charity, who paid for Biden's failed hair transplant? Oh yeah, us. Not even campaign contributors. Who pays for Pelosi's pearls? It's a wonder, isn't it?

October 23, 2008

Lorne Michaels Says

That Sarah Palin is a "very powerful, very disciplined, incredibly gracious woman." Now I saw the news skit, the "Palin Rap" featured on one of the far left feminist sites - shakes or pandagon, with some very angsty commentary, all worried that maybe Palin didn't "get" that it was humor, or that she might not understand the irony. You'd think she was downright differently-abled, to hear them wonder if she knows how much they hate her or if it all went right over her head. Newsflash - nothing went over her head. She is able to laugh at herself. All this should have been obvious when she pulled off the bit about Stephen Baldwin being her favorite of the brothers. Jeesh. But to the one of you who posted it, who ACTUALLY believed that Tina Fey "snubbed" Palin directly - that made you sound incredibly stupid, even more stupid than all the nail-biting over whether she was smart enough to feel insulted. Because, duh, that was how it was written, how it was *supposed* to be - they were supposed to pass each other without speaking. Though I did think the bitchface Palin put on as they passed was kind of priceless. Oh yeah, she knows who the assholes are, make no mistake. Also, they DID indeed spend some time together off-screen and there were no screaming matches or bloody noses. Make of that what you will. Baldwin had a few things to say as well - "When you come on a show like that, you are prepared in advance to get worked over. Palin knew that. Palin came on to be a good sport. And she was. She was polite, gracious. (More so than some of the famous actors who come through there, believe me.)" Maybe I'll forgive you for not moving to France now, Alec.

Guilty as Hell, Free as a Bird, What a Great Country

It's just a little genocide. Who cares? All in the name of human rights, world peace, love and a shared community. Heh.

He's now (and has been) a "respectable" (strange choice of word, but OK) education person, spreading Marxism, anarchism, and anti-Americanism to children. Which is a perfect Alinski move - that's what you do; you don't destroy the institutions with bombs, you infiltrate them, become part of them, lead them, and render them meaningless. Really the only thing that irks me about this is that the left is CONSTANTLY portraying themselves as the downtrodden underdog outsiders, the "counter-culture" railing against the entrenched patriarchal white masculine establishment that oppresses them, and the reality is that you're no counterculture anymore. You ARE the establishment. You ARE the dominant paradigm. If you want to subvert the dominant paradigm, you've got your work cut out for you because the dominant paradigm IS your brand of subversion - you're going to have to eliminate yourselves to subvert the dominant paradigm now. I even heard a feminist saying feminism doesn't have access to the mainstream yet - girl, you and your ilk OWN the mainstream and the institutions, along with your buddies like Ayers and all the leftover 60s radicals you want to emulate.

Actually at the end of that video there is a link to a buttload of excellent videos. Go watch them.

________________________________________________________________________ In the meantime, I'm going to tell you a funny story - and it's true. It's true on a pretty big scale, I might add. Big enough that you just might not need to worry so much about the voter fraud by which Obama plans to steal this election just like Kennedy did in 1960.

It concerns polls. Now I do spend some time on the largest conservative message forum on the internet, and this is pretty universal there. Today, my husband encountered it en masse in real life. He was working with thousands of men, most of them contractors from out of state. He was shocked because the parking lot was full of McCain/Palin stickers, and you just don't see that in New Jersey. Of course he quickly realized they were mostly out of state contractors.

So they're working, and he's talking to some veterans and some other men about this election, only this time he isn't getting furious, because they're sane. One veteran from Florida says he had already put in his McCain/Palin vote in Florida. "But I told them I voted Obama."

You mean, they asked you on the way out who you voted for and you said Obama?

"Yes, I always do that. Everybody I know does that. Always have. And lemme tell you something, I have a lot of friends, a lot of veterans, and THEY have a lot of friends, and everyone we know of does it too."

Everyone at the internet community not only does that, but some have managed to continue to be the people who get polled - you don't often get called if you're a registered Republican, but if you're a registered Dem you have a good chance of being polled. In order to ensure that the polls keep coming their way, they not only register as Dem, they always answer the polls as if they're supporting the Dem candidate with their vote. In the straw polls, in the exit polls - everywhere but in the voting booth.

So all I'm saying is, conservatives have been doing this a long time, and a LOT of them do it. Don't let these polls to get you too worried. Of course the voter fraud could still take it, but remember, it has to be pretty close to be able to cheat successfully, and it just might not even be that close. Get out there if you're voting and don't let the fact that they've been trying to CALL the election for the past 2 months stop you, discourage you, from getting in your own ballot.

Let not your heart be troubled :)

October 22, 2008

Too Brilliant

On a more sober note I remember during 2000 the Gore fans screaming bloody hell that the next election had to be NO MORE PAPER BALLOTS - the ONLY chance for a fair election would be ELECTRONIC VOTING...naturally the very next election, with electronic voting, the Republicans were tampering with the machines and stealing votes from whoever the hell was running at the time. Now people are claiming that the machine is simply "turning" their vote from Obama to McCain, magically. And they're demanding...paper ballots. Dimples, chads, butterflies and all that. I called that one 8 years ago. I called it before it ever happened. I called it over and over. Good lord, how short are the attention spans of the mediasprites in the United States. A contario sensu below - WHAT AN IDIOT!

October 19, 2008

First Humor Post!

Yes, go ahead, laugh - it's funny!

Saturday Night Live

Don't know if you're an SNL fan; I've been watching since 1975 (except a couple years I call "the dark years" with Piscopo when frankly I was too busy on the weekends to bother. Dark because with a few exceptions it wasn't very funny then, either. But I watched Giuliani put on a dress and a little lipstick (no, not the full drag he's done otherwise, but a hilarious sketch as Cheri O'Teri's mother, where they call the neighborhood Hooligans spoon-cooking, motherless whatsits.) His dry delivery was brilliant. I watched Hillary Clinton during the primaries, and even she managed to be funny (hey, good writers and a willingness to laugh at yourself is what makes SNL good). So last night Palin went on, and managed to get two COMPLETELY classic lines "Live from NY it's Saturday Night!" and "Good night, and have a pleasant tomorrow" (oh, Jane Curtin, we miss you and Laraine and Gilda.) Courtesy of Hulu, here are the two pretty damn funny pieces. Too bad stoopBama didn't go on when HE was scheduled; it would have gone a long way for a lot of people, including me. It makes you a little less robotic and a tad more human. Oh well. Some people are Too Serious to be made fun of. Or maybe, "Too Important To be Captured." (Flintstones reference, if you're not old enough.)

That Kooky Fringe

I saw an Obama supporter trying to make a subtle (well, not really - just unspoken) implication that Todd Palin was un-American and possibly dangerous, due to his involvement with the "fringe secessionist" party, the AIP. It seemed to be a counter to the very obviously disturbing relationships that have existed for many years between Obama and the dangerous and frightening characters that he has insisted on being close to (Wright, Ayers, Pflager or what-the-hell-ever, Khalidi, ACORN and so on ad nauseum.) Of course the "journalist" who mentioned it is far from unbiased (for example, when you refer to a quick stop at WalMart for diapers as "stumping" we all know what you're doing, as well as implying they're abusive for bringing their daughter to rallies - neglecting her schooling and exposing her to ZOMG scary dangerous racists) but still, my goodness, is it possible that the party in question is some lunatic fringe, the type who might bomb the Pentagon, bomb police stations, preach sermons so full of rage that they sound demonically-possessed (God DAMN America!) and be a security threat to the rest of us? I had thought sure it was just liberty-loving people who just wanted to be left the hell alone, and maybe to get the vote that was promised to them in 1958. Yeah, what a lot of baloney. Carl Sagan would be stymied. For your edification, here is the Alaskan Independence Party's Platform - Oooooooooooohhhhhhhh - scaaaary! Creeeeeepy! Fringe!!!! If it's fringe, that's only because the majority of US Citizens today has been utterly brainwashed by ever-increasing encroachment upon their lives by all levels of government - whether "giving" or "taking." Interesting, they have also supported a Constitution Party candidate for US President. Very interesting because except for a very limited number of issues, I think the Constitution Party is *excellent.* I'd vote that way, if ever the two-party hold could be broken. I guess you could call the Constitution party "fringe" too, but only if you want to include every founding father in our entire history under the category "fringe." Apparently some very sound ideas will be labeled kooky fringe ideas...well, if you happen to have a socialist/Alinski disciple for a candidate who has associated with the extreme and openly anti-American fringe, and you have to save face by pointing the finger back. "You're a towel." "No, YOU'RE a towel!" It's all they've got left. No you're a towel
Ok, well that and spin. See above and see "Michelle Malkin says it’s not because of his race, it’s just because of all the black-ass liberalism they share." Wow that's terrible. She said that? Oh, wait, she totally didn't. "It’s a mistake, though, to attribute Powell’s endorsement primarily to some kind of race loyalty. It’s Obama’s social liberalism, not his skin color, that attracts Powell most." Insert the Paul Shanklin parody, "Spinnin' spinnin', spinnin' the lies away!" Heh

October 18, 2008

Dual Purpose

There are two purposes to real tax cuts (not mealy-mouthed half-assed tax cuts that don't do much). First purpose is that high taxes are immoral. It is immoral to steal, as in take by force, more and more of a person's money that they have earned. "Progressive" tax codes are more immoral than most; but either way, theft is immoral. Second, meaningful tax cuts benefit everyone because they employ more and more people, give them a better standard of living, and give everyone more profits. They EVEN give the government more money to spend more liberally on programs for the poor and destitute. Not that giving the government more is a good thing, because it isn't, but that's what happens. The lousy, shitty, couple days worth of pay that Joe Blow or Joe the Plumber or Mickey Mouse gets per year from a direct result of a tax cut was never the primary reason, nor does it meaningfully help anyone like Joe Blow. But we knew that, right? More on this later.

October 17, 2008

Huh?

Are you kidding me? This guy is cited all the time (he looks exactly like the swishy health-food-political-know-it-all-disrespects-women-and-his-mother jerk-off I work with, except one smiles and one doesn't. Guess which.) Dude, you're not even trying. That was the piss-poorest critique/analysis of an economic issue, ever. I know you can do better, because to my surprise one of those "wonk" leftist sites actually made me think for a quarter of a second the other day by reporting what you just said and then having the decency to at least take it a tiny bit further. God.

Also, citing Krugman isn't going to impress people - he's very good at creating a stir, but that doesn't make him right. He also touts the positive economic powers of war, citing WWII and the Iraq war as positive economic boosts for our economy. He might have won a prize for his Keynesian (ugh) economics but he wasn't going to win the peace prize, now was he? Of course the Nobel committee only mentions his trade writing and not his cycle writing; no surprise there. Plus, I think even a Keynesian would know what's wrong with that silly calculator style of "X dollars per year for Joe the plumber is better than Y dollars per year for Joe the plumber." I tend to suspect that the people writing such pap are smarter than that, and know they are just spinning it in the most infantile manner possible, but then maybe they aren't. Is that really possible?

Recycling Old False Stories

Obama just accused McCain of planning to "pay for" his economic plan (it doesn't work that way, but we'll get to that) by making deep cuts in Medicare. What do they do, recycle these old news stories and just change the names? Search-and-replace? They said the same thing about Bush. SNL even poked fun at the false accusation with their commercial about Old People being afraid of Robots. It was hilarious; but it wasn't so hilarious that the Democrats were lying in order to breed fear in the elderly and were succeeding. I knew many people who were afraid, including my in-laws. They did not understand that a reduction in the proposed increase is NOT A CUT, much less a deep one. They didn't understand that most of the time if you make meaningful, deep tax cuts among the high brackets during depressed times that the government generally ends up quickly taking in a lot MORE money and doesn't end up having to cut a thing, but can spend even more liberally on programs. I said "Don't worry, they're not going to reduce it, they're going to increase it," and they were afraid that that meant their payments would increase as opposed to the very real fact that Medicare spending would continue to go UP just as it always has (it did.) That no one intended to cut it, even if the tax cuts for some reason did not result in increased revenue for the government (which it did.) The scare story was a lie then, it's a lie now. Obama knows this very well, just as well as Hillary and the senators who said it then knew it. They KNOW that people who are tapped in will not fall for it, but will roll their eyes yet again and say, "Not THAT old chestnut?" But it's back to the tired old tactic of outright lying in order to scare the elderly? How disgusting a practice is that? And not even a creative new type of lie, but the same lie that has been used and re-used until to anyone who understands it's just a joke (but is not a joke for the elderly people who are frightened into believing it)? Can't they come up with anything new? It's ridiculous. I also find it very annoying that I know that he knows this, and he spits in our face by saying, "Yes, you know it and I know it - but the people who are going to get scared; they don't know it. It will still work. So fuck you." Fuck you too. Update: "It's Already Stolen" - same story, almost word for word, that started going around 38 years ago, 8 years ago, 4 years ago - when the voter registration fraud was exposed (and when it finally got too big to sweep under the carpet) - "You stole it" "No YOU did! Haha!" "You're a towel." "No, you're a towel!" I'm so sorry you've been disenfranchised, Mr. Six-Feet-Under and Mr. M. Mouse. Here's your ballot back; we already knew who you were going to vote for (always the Dem)

October 16, 2008

Four Letter Word

He was tired.

October 15, 2008

Darn, Beaten by Two Years

Reading yet another insufferable and incoherent rant aimed at "trickle-down" - I was pulling my freaking hair out wanting to STOMP the bastards who invented the phrase. Then it occurred to me I better find out who invented it first. And it figures that it was the usual suspects, taking aim at what they simply don't understand or bother to learn about. Of course in the process of finding that out I find that others have of course already written about it so do I bother? Might as well link and talk about it more later.

Ayers: Will Not Be in Cabinet

I know it's not just me; the whole election has taken on an air of severe absurdity and I'm thinking it's just time to not listen anymore and wait until the actual outcome. How absurd (really there is no other word for it) is it to have to reassure people that you won't have a bomber in your cabinet? That you will not take for your advisor a man who stomps (literally) on the flag and wishes he'd bombed more Capitol buildings? How can you have to disavow that in any way? And it's pretty funny as well that after this ad comes out "Come on, he was 8 years old, he said it was a bad thing, let's get over it now?" McCain's ad pointing out the connection is declared (by HuffPo of all places) illegal - according to McCain/Feingold LOL! HOIST BY HIS OWN PETARD! I'm sorry, but I was against McCain in the 2000 primaries and all he kept doing was pushing that campaign finance reform shit - pushing and pushing, and all it did was make him look like a hothead, after which it seemed like they put it through for him more as a legacy than out of any real need or desire for this unconstitutional "reform" law. Now here he is and his own ads are coming out against his own law? Pardon the expression, but you just can't make this stuff up. You can't write it. It writes itself. If it were made up, it would be too far-fetched. As Stephen King says in Lisey's story, "Reality is Ralph." If you're a fan, you already know. If you're not, I'll explain it later. Also, CBS is teaming up with someone to bring you the debates live online - and they promise you this as a come-on: "Be sure to tune into this CBS News link not only to watch the 90-minute debate live, beginning at 9 p.m. EDT, but also for follow-up live network coverage and then an exclusive Web-only show featuring Katie Couric and the CBS News political team." Oh yeah, I'll be sure not to miss THAT. "On the Webcast, slated to begin at 11 p.m. EDT, Couric will talk with special guests and undecided voters" Again with talking to idiots? I'm sorry, is anyone "undecided"? How stupid do you have to be, I ask again, to stand for NOTHING, to have NO philosophical or moral underpinnings, and to NOT be able to make a simple decision? Why do YOU, being that stupid, get the limelight for 30 days every 4 freaking years? It happens every damn time. If you can't make a decision, get the hell out of the way and let the grownups handle it, ok? Jeez Louise.

My New Tagline

This is like the greatest and funniest line I've ever read in the mainstream media - I want it for my own motto. "Bush's diplomats acknowledge the challenge of verifying any claims from what one official calls "the most secret and opaque regime in the entire world." Hehe - PurelyPolitics - the most secret and opaque regime in the entire world. Muahahaha! Sorry, but reading that kind of thing as "serious business" and "news" (CNN lol) really gives me a boost. You have to laugh at stuff like that. Well, I do - it's funny. Then you get this stuff. Morons without any ideological underpinnings who blow like the wind willy-nilly any which way the media spins it that election cycle. This year it's Obama. 8 years ago it was Bush. 16 years ago, Billary. I wouldn't brag about it if I were them - and I'd like to know WHY it's something to be proud of that you don't have any actual standards or beliefs, and why you get to be the subject of focus groups for being that stupid. Does that make sense to you? Because it doesn't to me. Ask a stupid person a stupid question and get a stupid answer. Garbage-in/garbage-out. Another one off the duh truck.

On Not Being Alone

It may seem like I'm probably one of these people devouring hour after hour of Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, but not especially. It's not exactly hard to have an original thought when this stuff is so damned obvious. But I sometimes think it really is an original thought when it's just plain common sense - the reality is I bury myself in the leftist media and can't believe how they don't see the obvious. So when I see or hear someone saying exactly what's in my mind, it's always a little surprising - even when, as I say, it's so damned obvious that a child would have seen it. With that in mind, I heard a woman say this today on the radio and it's pretty much exactly what I said yesterday - and how is it that everyone is not saying exactly this? How could you possibly say anything BUT this? "I mean I think if McCain just came out and said, "Listen, do you think if I started off my political career in an unrepentant abortion bomber's living room, would the press give me a free pass?" You know, he's gonna think that Obama would go, "Oh, I was only eight." Gee. Was that so hard? And to be really honest, you'd have to be brain dead to not see all of this, and I don't believe that McCain is that. damn. stupid. He has to know how much the media hates him. While it's disappointing to not see him say the obvious, I think there's also a kind of courage there that I didn't want to see before. The courage to really bend over and take it up the ass because you love the country that much and don't want to see it in the hands of people who want to destroy it. If he can keep taking it and never say anything, I'm going to like him a little more than I did. Because I've been pretty hard on him myself. Maybe I was wrong. Either that or he really is braindead. I can't be sure. And really I can't even blame the left for sort of rolling in Obama's dirt and being stoked about it - they've got themselves a guy who can openly steal votes and associate with known terrorists and completely get away with all of it - I kind of think I'd be excited too, and even revel in that a bit just like they're doing. And in fact they had not one but two such people - these things go in cycles, and 8 years is really all you get. The only time you get 12 is when you have someone truly revolutionary like Reagan, who took a dead economy and turned it around 180 degrees within months.

October 14, 2008

Those Angry Mobs

Yeah I've seen the videos - I've posted some here. Lots of lies going around about them - hell, right in the video, the leftist couldn't get it straight that the person had said "He associates with terrorists" rather than "He is a terrorist" and many times over, he directly lied about what the people had JUST SAID. We heard a man's impassioned plea to McCain that "We are angry!" and McCain trying to calm them by lying and saying that Obama would be a fine president, blah blah. I wonder why these people are angry? Could it be because from the media, and from pretty much all leftist corners, all they get is THIS shit? I'm not even a Republican and I'm pissed. There isn't a hint of the desire for fairness in the leftist blogosphere or even in the mainstream media. They aren't even pretending to be objective - even the ones who claim they are. If McCain had a close and long-standing political association with someone who had bombed an abortion clinic (hey, that was a LONG TIME AGO!) you really think people would be taking up for him this freaking hard, and pooh-poohing the whole thing? If instead of ACORN voter registration fraud and "votes for smokes" you had RECORN (I made that up) doing massive voter registration drives and committing fraud while doing it, do you seriously think the left would be trying to act like it was nothing, like it was OK, and "Hey, after all, voter REGISTRATION fraud does NOT cause VOTE fraud, duh." Are you freaking kidding me? (No, seriously, I just read that one today.) You look at that video from Sept. 21 and you tell me. Tell me if you're self-deluded or if you actually have your eyes open here. This is so far beyond ludicrous that I'm ashamed to be of the same damned species. Where the hell has logic GONE? Intelligence? Basic decency? It's so far beyond the pale it's almost impossible to live with.

Wealth Spread 500!

"I can't believe it's not earned" lol. Thanks to the People's Cube. Looks like a Rico suit has been filed in Ohio.

October 12, 2008

Memo To John McCain

This is posted by permission from The Jawa Report. Memo to John McCain: The Moment We Cease to Be 'Scared' of Obama as President of the United States... ...is the moment many of us cease to be particularly interested in getting you elected in his place. Despite your advice that we shouldn't be scared of Obama as President, I remain very, very troubled by the idea of a President Barack Obama, as do millions of other Americans. If you have any interest in actually becoming President rather than just going through the motions of a campaign, you'd better do whatever you can to keep it that way. For the most part, you have a chance in this race at all for one reason: you are not Barack Obama. Very few people love you--or even like you. For a great many of us, our support for your candidacy has little, if anything, to do with any wonderful things we expect you to do if you're elected President In fact, if you're elected, we'll no doubt have to spend a whole bunch of our time over the next four years trying to prevent you from doing much. Our support of your candidacy arises, rather, out of the really shitty things we reasonably expect Barack Obama and his socialist allies to do to our country if he's elected. The moment Barack Obama becomes an acceptable option in this election, you're pretty much finished. If you have any hopes of winning, you'd do well to keep that in mind and act accordingly. By Ragnar Danneskjold, Typical Bitter Gun-Clinger at October 11, 2008 11:35 PM I couldn't have said it better myself. The only thing I'd add is that I actually do really like Palin. And once she learns more about economics, she ought to be king of the world. Ok I'm overstating. But I really do like her a lot, and think her potential is quite amazing.

It's a Bungle Out There

I found something at Pandagon; now in a place that *excels* at going over the top, around the bend, and beyond the pale, it's not easy to find something that stands out. This did, for its stunning mixture of arrogance, stupidity and ignorance.
"The resurgence of ugly right wing populism reminds me of one of the more amusing ironies that makes liberals feel superior, which is the disconnect between Springsteen (humongous liberal) and the right wing leaning of so many working and middle class white people who relate to his music. It’s a microcosm of this major frustration---they can get so close, identifying the forces that make their lives harder, and yet can’t make that final leap into realizing what has to be done to make it better, instead pouring out their bitterness into a vote for Republicans."
That's so rife I don't know where to start. Holy shit. Right wing populism never went anywhere. So cut it out with the assertions. Also, it's only ironic to you because you misunderstand it. In reality there's nothing ironic going on. But of course we know you're a *little bit superior*; you wear your feeling of young urban superiority like those quietly desperate people you loathe wear workboots. All the time and twice on Sunday. On to your non-irony. Springsteen is not one of the people he sings about. He might have been, once.

Grasping Straws

Philly sports fans? The same crowd who boos Santa Claus and pelts him with snowballs? This is supposed to bother anyone? Please. Not that the reporting has been close to straight - HuffPo claims "deafening" boos while others merely "resounding" boos and yet others "a mixed reception". One report specifically admits that it's so hard to tell that they *messed with the audio so you could more clearly hear the booing.* Watching the video of Palin, Willow and Piper going out onto the ice, I'd go with mixed reception. In a Philly sports crowd, that's practically an ovation. But I guess it feels good to some people, those who are maybe getting a little desperate now that the whole Rico thing is heating up and there are federal investigations in the double digits regarding Democrat vote fraud and ACORN. And the fact that it's coming out more and more that Obama has associated with ALL MANNER of terrorists and dangerous characters to get where he is - oddly, some people find mentioning this "insulting" and "meanspirited." I find it "good to know." Or if you're into brevity, "true." I think little Piper is a doll, though - it will be nice to have her in the public eye a little bit, to keep seeing pictures of her when her mommy is Vice President (or if we have to wait until 2012, President) - even though there will always be lowlifes to say terrible things about her. There was a time when the people of this country had the class not to speak ill of presidential children, but that time passed with Amy Carter, so I can't complain extra now. The link deserves its own post - but I'm not doing it. It is NOT from a conservative point of view - lots of Hillary supporters involved. And it's really long, very involved - but keep your eyes open. This RICO/ACORN/Democrat vote fraud thing is going to bust WIDE OPEN - there are going to be indictments. The left isn't going to be able to hide from this for long. So if booing a few little girls makes them feel better now, I won't even complain. Enjoy it while it lasts I guess. UPDATE: Looks like Obama campaign has been DIRECTLY implicated in the fraud now - not just ACORN anymore! Let the indictments roll!

October 10, 2008

Moonbats are Funny

Especially when they bark and it just comes out like a little whine.

So a Barking Moonbat goes to a McCain/Palin rally and proceeds to harass people while calling them a "mob." Most act pretty disinterested, though a few get annoyed at his constant insistence on putting words in their mouths which they did not say. His questions are really inane - ok, stupid. A few seem to be having some fun tossing off flip answers to his dumb questions. Being the racist that he is, he can't fathom why the black man he speaks to is voting for McCain/Palin and not Obama - he asks how he can justify this. That make sense to you? Me either. Being the pussy that he is, he made a little fudgie in his undies when the man rumbled in a very deep voice that he wanted to be left alone by this gadfly. It looked like the question had RIGHTLY offended him and he wasn't there to be putting up with racist nonsense from some snot-nosed little moonbat. The "mob" aspect seems to be entirely missing, but one woman does hold up a pretty funny Obama puppet, and when asked why, she says it's a free country and she's gonna mock him with it. To the Moonbat's undying horror, a kid says "You need gloves to touch him!" Clearly racial hatred from a future KKK member. Or, you know, a joke.

This is being lauded everywhere on the moonbatosphere as evidence that the Palin/McCain crowds are turning ugly, scary, and violent - but what it really looks like is said Moonbat with guano-for-brains wanted to taunt a mob into saying dumb things, failed miserably, looked like a huge pest and pain in the ass (or really, sort of like that gnat that just WON'T stop flying in front of your face while you're trying to type on the computer) and then posted the video with false commentary trying to start a meme. The meme worked and has been picked up all over the media, even some allegedly reputable ones. Except how anyone looks at it and sees what he wants them to see is very much undetermined. Collective delusion maybe. Take a look for yourself.

He seems disturbed by the charge of Obama being a Communist/Marxist (even though this is hardly considered a slur by moonbats, and Obama IS in fact a Communist/Marxist.) But what really bugged him was the guy didn't know how Obama had become a communist/Marxist. He mentions the father, but I doubt that - more like the grandparents and then the Kellman/Alinski connection. Alinski also had close ties with Hillary Clinton, which was one reason Barack was probably the only other Dem who could have beat her; those Alinski disciples are tough. Read about Hillary's Black Panther days sometime.

"Among the primary goals of Alinsky was radical socialism and redistribution of wealth. Alinsky taught his proteges to "HIDE" their true goals by any means necessary. Lying was fine. The objective of Alinsky and Kellman was to turn people against the white establishment."

Just today I heard the clips of Farrakhan (Calypso Louie) CALLING OBAMA THE MESSIAH. And what about this Ayers guy eh? Or that lunatic "Wright"? (The one that mysteriously disappeared from Obama's website as soon as people heard the God Damn America tirade? The one of the two of them standing together beaming?) Yes, it's safe to say Obama is presenting a false image of himself - some toned-down guy who just happens to have all these violent and terroristic type people AROUND him - they just live in the hood, he doesn't KNOW know them. You know? And Marxist, oh please. And dare you, DARE you question his patriotism? When you know that Michele has never once felt pride in her country until Barack got the nod? (I'm assuming that was the night pride bloomed for that one, too.) It's only something to be proud of when the free market can be destroyed and the Alinski-ites in charge I guess. Accomplished through whatever means necessary.

________________________________________________________________________

Another moonbat tells us Bill Ayers is the new Vince Foster. "And by that, I mean that the repetition of the name will get to the point where it’s drained of all meaning, but is just a bell whistle to extract a Pavlovian hate response towards Obama from right wingers. That sort of toxic wingnuttery is exactly the sort of thing that tends to turn off middle of the road people, and so I find myself a bit baffled as to why McCain/Palin are ramping it up."

Speak for yourself, Moony. I know exactly why I react to the name Vince Foster the way I do, and it's nothing to do with wingnuttery. It's to do with a man who had the ability, possibly, to stop the mass murder at Waco by the government and did not do it. Who then felt so guilty he took his own life. On which night Hillary Clinton, good good friend to the Fosters, ordered the office immediately ransacked and all Waco files removed. The man charged with the task, when asked why, said he was told that the First Lady (Hillary Clinton) needed them. That she needed to check them first. The files were apparently shredded because they never resurfaced again. Meaning that there was something in there so damning to Hillary or Bill Clinton regarding the Waco massacre/mass murder, that it had to be destroyed immediately.

So yes, there is a REASON people react to the name Vince Foster, even if you don't know what it is because you haven't bothered to learn. Also, this bears no resemblance to what is going on with Ayers, so your comparison is beyond murky and down into impassable muck.

There is also a reason people are reacting to Ayers and his association with Obama - who has a VERY POOR TRACK RECORD of trying to HIDE former associations when they become dangerous to his campaign. His pastor of 20 years that officiated his wedding, baptized his daughters, inspired and preached to him every Sunday - that radical hatemonger? - was deleted from Obama's website the instant people caught sight of the tape. ACORN? The organization he bragged for years about working with and for, building up the South Side of Chicago like a good community organizer? He's now lying on his website and saying he had nothing to do with ACORN. But we're supposed to believe him that Ayers is just some guy in the neighborhood (who happened to what, buy his house on the same day) and he doesn't really know him at all - yeah, pardon me while I don't freaking believe you on that. YOU certainly don't know; and it is possible we will not know for years when all the REAL investigations come out, just like we didn't know why Vince Foster killed himself for years when the REAL investigations took place. But it'll come out someday. You'll be onto slamming the latest "wingnuts" and touting socialism and continuing to blame free markets for your failings, but we'll remember. You were wrong then, and you're wrong now. And you will keep being wrong. It seems the most dangerous position to be in is "radical friend or grandmother of Obama who will help his ambitions and then be thrown under the bus when you are no longer politically expedient for him to acknowledge you." Next most dangerous position will be serviceman in harm's way when Obama wields the ax of defense cuts and brings about the new Cambodia, followed shortly by loyal US citizen who holds views deemed "incorrect" by the "Truth Squads." Or, if he loses, unfortunate bystander during the coming riots - at least that's what Carville says.

Palin Exposed - The Dirty Truth

Risky for moose. Risky for us.

Assorted Nuts

"ACORN Has Been Implicated In Similar Schemes In 14 Other States - Including Ohio, Where A Worker Traded Crack Cocaine For Fraudulent Registrations." (Editorial, "Another ACORN Scandal," New York Post, 7/13/08) The price sure has gone up for fake votes. It used to be a pack of smokes, now you have to make with the rock! They were talking with some volunteers who were driving people to the early voting (vote early and often!) and asked one who she was voting for - Obama, naturally. They asked if she tried to get the people she was driving to vote for him too, and she said of course she did. They asked "You mean you tell them who to vote for?" And she said "Yes, for Obama, it's time for a change." Then, apparently to let her realize what she had just admitted to, they spelled it out for her, "So are you telling me that instead of trying to just get people to vote, you're actively trying to get votes for Obama?" and she sort of screeched and said "No, I'm just trying to get them to vote - now I have to GO girl" and she fled. It was pretty funny actually. Then a couple of college girls were looking around their campus for the community activists working for the "Get out the Vote" type orgs and thinking they were going to be canvassing the students around the campus and trying to get them out. Except what they actually found was that the activists were rounding up homeless people and getting them to register with temporary addresses. But there's no chance anyone would give them cigarettes or crack to vote for a specific candidate, I'm sure. You can see the video on Greta van Susteren's site - the one called Palestra I think. Like I say the interview was pretty funny. It's kind of a shame - back in the early 90s I remember laughing at the ACORNS - dressed up in silly costumes to protest some stupid thing or other; bussed in and paid to do so (I don't think I realized they were paid by us, at that point), with their antics and their angry signs. Now here they come after the white house, with greedily open hands (there's bailout money comin'!), still being paid by us to perpetrate massive voter fraud and gain the white house. What the hell? I want the good old days back when I can just laugh at them. Well hell, maybe I just will anyway. Sure maybe I'll end up being waterboarded for it, but I can laugh in the meantime. If we really have sunk so low that such a thing can happen, I'm gonna have to laugh plenty anyway. How long does it take to utterly destroy the greatest Republic on the face of the Earth? We'll know if the answer is "221 Years" in another few weeks. Don't get me wrong - the opponent is a sign of doom too - two socialists is the choice we get - but between winning in Iraq and the energy plan, and the possibility of a future Palin presidency, there could be a temporary resurgence that might buy us enough time for truly rebuilding the country according to that thing, that...you know, that thing that matters - THE CONSTITUTION, that's what. Dream big, Dreamboat Annie :)

October 9, 2008

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Stealing Elections but Were Afraid to Ask

It's happened a lot at local levels; seldom at the highest. Kennedy pulled it off (and his inexperience cost us a lot). Gore came close. Now an ACORN member himself is giving it a run - and making it seem pretty possible. At least we know what a community organizer does now. If Barack Obama wins this election, there will be absolutely no doubt whatsoever that one of the things that will help push him over the top is massive Democrat vote fraud. It'll make the Democrats that stole the 1960 JFK/Nixon election for Kennedy look like pikers. One example of this massive vote fraud is in the amazing fact that there are now more registered voters in Indianapolis than are actually eligible to vote. News at 11? How about no news at all. For the second time in as many months a left-wing community group largely funded with U.S. tax dollars has submitted fake voter registration cards, this week in a key battleground state. The Chicago-based Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), where Barack Obama worked as a “community organizer,” has long been investigated for falsifying information to register new voters during nationwide drives and authorities are especially vigilant in a presidential election year. This week officials in New Mexico’s most populous county (Bernalillo) notified federal authorities that more than 1,000 fraudulent voter registration cards were submitted to the clerk’s office. ACORN, which pays workers for each registration, is the prime suspect since it has handled thousands of new voter registrations in New Mexico since January. And if you try to weed out fake registrations by barring early voting? The NAACP will declare it a form of racism. Yeah, I don't know either. Everything is racist. LaSota said Monday representatives of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, a grassroots activist group conducting registration drives, dropped off 2,000 new voter applications in Lake County. "About 1,100 are no good," she said. LaSota said the flawed forms are incomplete or contain unreadable handwriting -- similar to hundreds of other forms that ACORN produced prior to this week. She said some ACORN vote canvassers apparently pulled names and addresses from telephone books and forged signatures. A spokesman for ACORN couldn't be reached Monday for comment. Lake County Republican Chairman John Curley said Monday the ACORN registration drive is the main reason he opposes the opening of early voting centers in Gary, Hammond and East Chicago. An attorney for the Indiana State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, filed papers in federal court alleging Curley's opposition to early voting was an unconstitutional to discriminate against black and Hispanic voters of the county. Uh-huh. Don't impede our fraud, that's racist, ma'am! The Bernalillo County clerk has notified prosecutors that some 1,100 possibly fraudulent voter registration cards have been turned in to her office. Some cards in New Mexico's most populous county have the same name as a voter who's already registered, but carry a different birth date or Social Security number; some list someone else's Social Security number; some have addresses that don't exist, Clerk Maggie Toulouse Oliver said Wednesday. In one case, a series of about nine cards appears to have been taken directly from the phone book, she said. In 2004, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, ACORN, came under scrutiny for paying workers to sign up voters and offering bonuses for turning in more than 24 registrations a day. Before the 2004 presidential race, then-Bernalillo County Clerk Mary Herrera — now secretary of state — said her office found 3,000 registration cards with problems that invalidated them. Those included faulty addresses, no addresses, bad signatures or no Social Security numbers. The Postal Service returned 400 cards as undeliverable. And how much of the bailout money will ACORN be receiving? I guess we'll find out. This has been a message from free-America. Where the clock is ticking. Update: "That one" is now trying to minimize his previous association with ACORN - despite bragging about working hand in hand with them for how long as a major accomplishment. How many more skeletons in the closet does he have to now run from? "No, I didn't REALLY know Ayers, not as such, KNOW, you know," and "Well I'm not going to disown a man (Rev. Wright) who baptized my daughters and officiated my wedding...er, oops, I didn't really know the man, REALLY, not as such, KNOW, you know," the list just keeps growing. I didn't really KNOW ACORN, not, as such, KNOW, you know... I guess if you know the meaning of know. Or who pays your checks. Or who really wrote your first memoir. Who the hell vetted this guy? Palin was vetted more thoroughly before and after, and there's pretty much nothing. That one doesn't get vetted at all, turns out to be standing atop that mythological beast "an orgy of evidence" and manages to skate through all of it. And they wonder why McCain/Palin crowds are angry at the media? They're SICK of it, that's why. They're sick of being lied to and fed a line. They're tired of the press mocking everything they care about and slandering people they admire and lauding villains. I've seen it all through the left talking points today - "Palin Crowds SCAAAAAARY" - well, then, dammit, be scared, as though there is such a thing as mediacide. More like a shift to alternate media because too many people are sick of what spin artists and liars you are. Like I say, this talking point hasn't just been in the mainstream outlets; it's slithered its way through all the leftie blogs through KOS and the usual suspects, and become a meme. Them scary Palin crowds - oooooohhh. With three heads and 6 tits, all filled with acid ready to scorch you if you commit the cardinal sin of not being lily white. What a bunch of rubbish.

Shenanigans!

Indiana has 105% of its potential voters registered. Free smokes for all who vote Dem! Of course it's hard to cheat when it isn't close. But it's close. And cheatin's easy! Come on in!

October 8, 2008

Back to Sugar Candy Mountain

So what if the crow says it doesn't exist; I say it does. And it's time to stop being so gloomy and look forward to it. Squealer is doing what he does (better than ever I'd say) and the sheep are doing what they do - we can't feign surprise here. Some of the chickens will squawk when more and more of their eggs are removed before being allowed to hatch - we promised them it wouldn't be so - but they're just chickens. No one of note. More and more states are reporting rampant voter fraud - complaining of homeless and derelicts selling their votes to ACORN for a pack of smokes or some dinner - get real, you think that's new? It's SOP. And you know what? It didn't start this century. Or last. Before I head off to sugar candy mountain for a bite and a short respite, I'm gonna share some secrets with you about what's happened in elections gone by. You decide if they aren't as bad as electing a man who's cozy with an unrepentant domestic terrorist and who hates this country to the core of his being. 'Cause I'm not so sure. 5 Elections that Sucked More Than This One When you have a smile on your face, come back too. We're gonna ride the rest of this one out laughing :)

Nevermind

Fulfill your black and hideous dreams of an Obama presidency - oh how ugly they may be. I remember gas lines and I remember the hostages and I remember the MORON who would be president. Let him be one again. Except this time with ACORN connections. Four years of that will cure the dumbest of you of your dreams, mark my words. You will grow up and if not you will realize that the rest of us have. We will survive. And then we shall see a new day dawn, because there is no choice. Economic devastation will drive you to it. McCain is a weakling (no offense to his survival of torture but he is now). At the end of that time I pray we will see a President Palin or perhaps someone we haven't thought of. For now enjoy your folly.

October 7, 2008

Quick Before it's Gone~

The SNL sketch on the bailout (which was fairly funny and largely true - including the KILLING George Soros and pals made out with - billions) has been pulled a couple times already...and NOW they're RE-WRITING it! This is unreal. For the moment the skit is still available at Moonbattery, but I'd suggest watching it now before it's too late. It's the October 7th entry. Also, guest on Fox News Liz Trotta takes one hell of a slam at a 6 month old baby, thus:
“One other note…the image of dragging that handicapped infant around and having IT on stage has caused consternation in some quarters as to how tasteful this is”
Yeah I can see your concern, assmunch. Calling a baby "it" is a lot more tasteful than bringing him onstage. She can't win if she's with her nursing baby and she can't win if she's not with her nursing baby. Or should I say, if she's with "it" or without "it." Disgusting. It sorta kills me that anyone could say anything bad about that poor little fuzzy-headed man in his little suit who never did anyone wrong. :(

That Moose Don't Hunt

Some bloggers can keep rattling their teaspoons and mediamatters can keep barking at the moon all they like, but the "rape kit" story is one dog that isn't gonna bark. Now there is some very good information in here, including the fact that this was pretty much a widespread phenomenon throughout the time-frame within the US - rape "kits" being very expensive new-type technology, right down to the failure to find any former victims who would say they had been billed and on up to the minutes from the meeting wherein legislation was agreed upon to forever ban the possibility that a rape victim might see a medical bill. So I really suggest reading through the piece and the comments. There is one excellent question raised - if it were so, what are we supposed to be taking from that? And why would we take that message in light of the obvious willingness of Palin to show compassion as regards the law to people with whom she doesn't agree? It's in there if you read it. But the continuation is where it really comes together and we see that there's just nothing left to bark or to clank your spoon about. It just didn't happen. There were no bills. There was a fund in place which would have covered such bills even if the victim was uninsured, or the tiny town's police chief couldn't find the money in the budget. It never needed to happen and it never did happen. So you can bitch and piss and moan about tiny town budgets (I'm surprised no one's screaming more that Wasilla didn't even have freaking POLICEMEN until 1993, but I guess no police is better than police that ask for budget help to investigate crimes) but you're not going to be able to make Palin a heartless rape-monger who bathes in the victims' blood to keep young. It just isn't going to stick.

Is the Media Still *Blatantly* Campaigning for Obama?

Yes. Just in case you were wondering. Oh yeah, tax "cut" plan. Or whatever.

October 6, 2008

The Ugly Truth

This one you'll have to see for yourself. Commander in chief? PLO ties? ACORN? I think not.

October 4, 2008

Hang on Until Tomorrow!

Heh**. Anyway, today I had a tooth pulled and I'm totally frigged up with excruciating pain (waiting for the percocets to kick in already - if not, MORE) but tomorrow promises some very interesting post material. First, I'm going to see An American Carol by the same Zucker who made Airplane! so THAT ought to be hilarious and fun and also quite interesting. Nice counterpoint to the pompous piece of shit Maher released the same day (Religulous). Second, Sean Hannity has finally completed the journalistic investigation that the MSM REFUSED to do on Obama, and will be dishing up ALL the information on the treasonous, highly dangerous, ACORN-fraud/crime, *terrorist-supporting*, activity (you have heard of Ayers, right?) Obama's been involved in since he could first say "God Damn America." Since the papers are more interested in Bristol Palin's pregnancy or whether the mayor of Wasilla ever had a hypothetical discussion with her librarian, it's about time someone did some real investigation on Obama. What we already know is enough to frighten any rational person (or at the least prove him utterly unfit for any high office in this country) this should really take care of even the dumbest ones. It won't, but it should. So I'll have two fun things to write about tomorrow, hopefully, and maybe my lower jaw won't be exploding out of my freaking head. A demain mes amis et amies! **In case you want to argue, it was funny, but yes I know that is hardly all there is to it. From the Big Bang (the expansion was of both matter and time) onward. So let's not debate a humorous slogan, eh?

Back Atcha Couric

Palin answers the questions she supposedly "flubbed" with Couric, and explains why she was just a tad annoyed with the nasty bitch in the first place. Oops - she really DOES know plenty of SCOTUS decisions she disagrees with, and is quite well read also. She graciously apologizes for being a little flip; no word on whether Couric will apologize for being a raging bitch bottomfeeder whose numbers are in the toilet and doesn't know the meaning of the word journalism. Or whether she'll ever notice that FDR wasn't president in 1929 and that he did not, in fact, go on television that year. Back atcha, Katie!

October 3, 2008

How Soon They Forget

Or maybe they're just pathological liars. And the mother of all gaffes Biden made last night is here. Actually I think this one is a straight-up lie; though it's really several lies in one. For one thing, he is on record supporting the Palestinian elections. The rest seems to be no more than gossamer - spun sugar. Or, you know, lies. But big ones. I was listening to Curtis Sliwa last night - that guy is really cool - and he was playing bits of Sandra Bernhardt's vicious, slimy rant against Palin, mentioning how she thought Palin should be gang-raped by black men if she ever went to Manhattan. Turns out Bernhardt had been scheduled to appear for a fundraiser for a women's crisis center in NY, and she was disinvited - as Sliwa put it, they told her they didn't need her fundraising help for women's serious business. It sounded so cool with his super-thick New York accent. Thought you would be welcome all over town with that bullshit, did you, Sandra? I know you've never been the brightest bulb in the tanning bed, but how could you be THAT stupid?

14 Lies and 96 Tears

It was nice to see Palin on top of her game again actually. But poor Biden - I might have bought the tears if he hadn't been so busy lying. Well, actually I think they are lies in the same sense that FDR going on TV in 1929 was a lie - he just doesn't know any better and says whatever sounds good at the moment and that people might believe. But here's a full list regardless. I'm disappointed no one brought up how he voted AGAINST the Alaskan Pipeline in the early 70s - holy crap, that was like being a Nazi sympathizer or something. Only FIVE legislators voted against it, and they were utter laughingstocks and embarrassments. Biden was one of them.

No Redefinition of Marriage

I'm sorry, did Biden just say that NEITHER HE NOR OBAMA SUPPORT REDEFINING MARRIAGE TO INCLUDE SAME-SEX COUPLES? Uh, yes, he did. What?

October 2, 2008

The Pied Piper

So let’s review: both Barack and his wife were admitted to prestigious colleges as “legacy” students; Barack’s work as a community organizer consisted of two modest projects, only one of which was ever completed; Barack became a state senator by slipping his first mentor, Alice Palmer, the stiletto and then getting all of his remaining political opponents scrubbed from the ballot. Barack won both his primary and general elections for the U.S. Senate because of last-minute revelations from his opponents’ divorce files, which spared Obama from the necessity of debating any tough issues. As soon as he arrived in Washington he began his quest for the Oval Office. He has spent most of 2007 and 2008 campaigning for the presidency. He has said, “I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all, of them.”
Barack Obama has always run unopposed. Whether slipping his mentor the stiletto in the back alley or having his operatives manufacture slimy scandals, he has gotten nowhere on effort and hard work; but through Chicago street thug politics that have allowed him to run without an opponent. The press, willing and eager operatives themselves, are doing their best to see that he runs unopposed this time. They might get away with it. Like the children of Hamelin, there is every possibility that enough of the public will fall for it. Looking around online it seems untold numbers of people already have - even allegedly "intelligent" people. They've never sat in gas lines while the president told them to just put on a sweater. (Or inflate their tires.) They don't know what it was like having US civilians hostage in Iran and a president so stupid he thought being "nice" and covering his eyes and ears would make it all go away. They laugh at Palin's alleged bad answers during the Katie Couric barbecue session (they weren't), never noticing that most of the answers were excellent and that KC BBQ didn't bother to press Joe Biden even when he lied, or made unforgivably stupid statements like claiming FDR went on television in 1929. Actually, she's stupid enough that she probably didn't know what was wrong with that sentence either. Hell, she was too stupid (or deliberately didn't bother) to ask him what in hell the VAWA had to do with interstate commerce. Like all of you, I hope it doesn't happen. I don't want to find out that so many people are that gullible and/or stupid. I don't want a president who got in by rubbing out the opposition by hook and crook instead of by being better or simply more welcome. It would have been nice to have a fair race, but we aren't getting one. We aren't even getting close. A fair race would have run four-square in the direction of McCain/Palin, and after 8 years of a president the left believes didn't even win the election, and much rage, bitterness and derangement, that must not be allowed. A Chicago-style, Alinski disciple, street thug politician with the full cooperation of the media was necessary to accomplish such a coup, I suppose. They are going to have it - and if they don't, there will be riots that will make Florence and Normandy look like a church bake sale. Truth Squads. Interviews with communist torturers. No legitimate press or journalists. The politics of personal destruction. If we're lucky I suppose we'll only get four years (and as we know from the Carter debacle, that's PLENTY of time for the short-attention-span skulls-full-of-mush on the left to get mighty sick of the results of their own politics) and then a shot at another Reagan. But we'll have to see how powerful the fascist thug squads become during that time. Obama & Co. are a lot more fascist and dishonest than Carter, so it could get really really interesting. Of course I'll be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes, so when the blog goes silent, just remember the Muslin Truth Squads got me. :D