Sunday, August 5, 2012

Point of View: Why gun control wouldn't eliminate mass killings ^ | 5 August, 2012 | Cathy Young

In the wake of the horrific mass shooting in an Aurora, Colo., many are urging a new conversation on gun control while others acknowledge with bitter resignation that no meaningful action to restrict guns will be taken because the will for it just isn’t there.

Support for tighter gun laws has dropped sharply over the past 20 years, and gun rights groups have far more political clout than gun control advocates.

Liberal and left-leaning websites are full of comments lamenting America’s barbaric gun culture and Americans’ irrational attachment to firearms.

Yet a closer look at the facts shows that it’s even more irrational to think that gun laws will keep us safe.

Gun control supporters point out that the United States has far higher gun homicide rates than other developed countries as well as far more guns in the hands of the population (89 for every 100 people) and far fewer restrictions.
But that does not necessarily prove a cause-and-effect relationship.
Writing on, Fareed Zakaria cites Switzerland as an exemplary country with low gun homicide rates.
Indeed, the total homicide rate in Switzerland in 2010 was 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants, compared with 4.2 in the United States.
But Switzerland actually has widespread gun ownership (with an estimated 2 million to 3 million guns in a population of fewer than 8 million) and a thriving gun culture rooted in a tradition of a citizen militia.
Meanwhile, in the Philippines, gun laws are considerably more restrictive than in the United States and civilian gun ownership is a paltry five per 100 people yet the homicide rate is more than double ours.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Saturday Night Live Funny Video: Obama and Biden Continue ‘Search for Perfect Campaign Slogan’!

Newsbusters ^ | August 5, 1012 | Brent Baker

“I’m in over my head” and “The economy’s bad, it’s all my fault and I can’t fix it.” Those are two pretty accurate campaign slogans for the Obama-Biden campaign as formuated, via some creative editing done by TBS’s Conan, from Obama’s speeches.

In playing the video at the end of his program on Thursday night, FNC’s Bret Baier explained: “With just a few weeks left until the Democratic convention, one late night show insists President Obama and Vice President Biden are continuing to try out and search for the perfect general election campaign slogan.”

Last Saturday: “New Obama Ad Narrated by Morgan Freeman”
Earlier: “Joe Biden: VP of Comedy Tour”
And: “Auditioning Alternate Campaign Slogans for Obama, Biden and Romney”
Plus: “‘Alternative’ Obama-Biden Campaign Slogans from Joe Biden”

Reince Priebus: Sen. Harry Reid Is a ‘Dirty Liar’!

ABC News ^ | August 5, 2012 | by George Stephanopoulos

Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus called Sen. Harry Reid a “dirty liar” this morning on “This Week” for accusing presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney of not paying taxes for ten years.

“As far as Harry Reid is concerned, listen, I know you might want to go down that road, I’m not going to respond to a dirty liar who hasn’t filed a single page of tax returns himself. Complains about people with money but lives in the Ritz Carlton here down the street,” Priebus said. “So if that’s on the agenda, I’m not going to go there. This is just a made-up issue. And the fact that we’re going to spend any time talking about it is ridiculous.”

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Wait, the U.S. economy actually lost 1.2 million jobs in July?

The Washington Post ^ | August 5, 2012 | by Brad Plumer

The U.S. economy lost 1.2 million jobs between June and July. But that’s not how it got reported. When the Bureau of Labor Statistics released its jobs figures for July, it said the economy gained 163,000 jobs. So what gives?

It all has to do with what’s known as “seasonal adjustments.” The U.S. economy follows certain predictable patterns in hiring and layoffs. School districts always let workers go for the summer and hire in the fall. Retailers always staff up for the Christmas holidays and lay people off afterwards. Students always flood the labor market in June.

So if we want to know how well the economy is doing, we want to know how many jobs were added after taking these predictable fluctuations into account.

This is exactly what BLS does in its monthly jobs reports. As Jacob Goldstein of Planet Money points out, the U.S. economy lost 1.2 million jobs (pdf) between July and June. But, according to the bureau, the economy essentially lost 163,000 fewer jobs than one would’ve expected, given seasonal trends. That’s a sign of a (slowly) recovering labor market. So BLS reported it as a 163,000 gain in jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Axelrod Denies Ever Touting A "Recovery Summer"

RealClearPolitics ^ | August 5, 2012 | RealClearPolitics

Chris Wallace, "FOX News Sunday" host: Didn't this White House badly misjudge this recovery? I remember in 2010, two summers ago, you and Vice President Biden were running around talking about 'Recovery Summer.' That was the summer of 2010 and the fact is the White House said if you got the stimulus, the $800 billion that unemployment would stay under 8%. In fact, with the stimulus, unemployment has stayed over 8% for the last 42 months. That's three and a half years.

David Axelrod: Chris, first of all, I wasn't running around saying anything other than that we were going to have to be persistent. That it took years to get in this mess, it was going to take years to get out --
Wallace: You talking about 'Recovery Summer' in 2010, sir.

Axelrod: Well you should show me the tape of me saying that. I've been very consistent about the fact that we need to be very persistent in our efforts here.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

David "Fluffy": Dems have momentum going into recess (the smell of Lefty fear)

Politico ^ | 8/5/12 | Allen

David Plouffe (fluffy), White House senior adviser, sent a fiery memo to House and Senate Democrats late Friday, urging them to use the August recess to echo President Barack Obama’s message to middle-class families that “he is on their side by fighting for legislation that grows the economy from the middle out, not the top down.”

“The president and Democrats in Congress move into the August recess with clear momentum on the question of who to trust on taxes and, more broadly, whose economic agenda will benefit the middle class,” Plouffe wrote in the memo obtained by POLITICO. “Over the coming weeks, there is an opportunity to build on this momentum and shape the legislative agenda this fall by highlighting the choice Congress faces at this make-or-break moment for the middle class.”

Pointing to the “sequester” reductions to domestic and defense programs which will kick in next year unless the parties agree on a deficit-reduction plan, Plouffe warned: “[M]ore jobs could be lost — from military contractors to teachers — due to automatic spending cuts at the end of this year if Congressional Republicans continue to refuse to ask the wealthy to pay a little more in taxes.”
...Plouffe wrote: “On the issue of taxes, it is clear that Congressional Republicans who opposed the President’s middle class tax cut should be on the defensive in their districts for the next few weeks. They are all that stands between middle class families and lower taxes.”
“The choice is clear. The stakes are high,” Plouffe concluded. “And the message is simple and effective. The President will continue to make sure middle class families know he is on their side by fighting for legislation that grows the economy from the middle out, not the top down. We hope you will echo that..."
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Congress proves Obama himself engineered $535 million taxpayer loss in Solyndra debacle!

Coach is Right ^ | 8/5/2012 | Doug Book

Though grudgingly provided and universally redacted, documents subpoenaed by Congress from the White House and the Office of Management and Budget now reveal that Barack Hussein Obama himself was responsible for manufacturing the loss of $535 million taxpayer dollars in the 2011 Solyndra bankruptcy.

In 2010, solar panel manufacturer Solyndra Inc. received $535 million in loan guarantees for “innovative technology” under the terms of Barack Obama’s federal stimulus plan. The fact that a Price Waterhouse audit filed earlier that year with the SEC showed Solyndra had lost $558 million during its first 5 years in business, boasted negative cash flow, had no profitable years and featured a “seriously flawed” business model didn’t seem to matter to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who delighted Obama’s left-wing, environmentalist supporters by choosing the company as the president’s favorite green energy producer. (1)

But by early 2011, Solyndra was...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

A deal in the desert for Senator Reid? (Is Sen. Reid a Felon?)

LA Times ^ | Jan. 28, 2007 | Chuck Neubauer and Tom Hamburger

BULLHEAD CITY, ARIZ. — It's hard to buy undeveloped land in booming northern Arizona for $166 an acre. But now-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid effectively did just that when a longtime friend decided to sell property owned by the employee pension fund that he controlled.

In 2002, Reid (D-Nev.) paid $10,000 to a pension fund controlled by Clair Haycock, a Las Vegas lubricants distributor and his friend for 50 years. The payment gave the senator full control of a 160-acre parcel in Bullhead City that Reid and the pension fund had jointly owned. Reid's price for the equivalent of 60 acres of undeveloped desert was less than one-tenth of the value the assessor placed on it at the time.

Six months after the deal closed, Reid introduced legislation to address the plight of lubricants dealers who had their supplies disrupted by the decisions of big oil companies. It was an issue the Haycock family had brought to Reid's attention in 1994, according to a source familiar with the events.

If Reid were to sell the property for any of the various estimates of its value, his gain on the $10,000 investment could range from $50,000 to $290,000.

It is a potential violation of congressional ethics standards for a member to accept anything of value -- including a real estate discount -- from a person with interests before Congress.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Democrats Versus Military Voters: Not the First Time

Breitbart ^ | August 5, 2012 | Joel B. Pollak

Last Thursday, Breitbart News' Mike Flynn broke the news that the Obama campaign was suing in the swing state of Ohio to block a law that extends early voting for members of the military for an additional three days. A fierce battle erupted, with Democrats (and a few conservatives) arguing that Obama campaign was simply trying to extend the military's privilege to everyone else. Regardless of the remedy they seek, Flynn points out, they are suing to end an exemption for military voters. It would not be the first time Democrats--who pretend, in their fight against voter ID, to want more ballot access--have tried to stop the military's votes from counting.
In 2008, for example, the State of Virginia (a critical swing state in 2012) had failed to send absentee ballots to members of the military on active duty in time for them to complete the ballots and return them before the election. When the campaign of Republican nominee Sen. John McCain sued to compel the state to count military ballots that had arrived after election day, the State Board of Elections--then run by Democrats, appointed by a Democratic governor--argued, effectively, that it could send absentee ballots to the military a day before the election and still be in compliance with the law. As RedState's Soren Dayton put it:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Olympic Medal Winners Hear from President Obama

Semi-News/Semi-Satire ^ | 4 Aug 2012 | John Semmens

President Obama has been calling Olympic medal winners to congratulate them on their victories. However, some have found the calls “somewhat disconcerting.”

A gold medal-winning athlete who asked that his name be withheld for fear of retribution said he has “mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, it’s flattering to be called by the President. I mean, with all he’s got on his plate, the idea that he’s got time to talk to me is something special.”

“On the other hand, I found his insistence that ‘you didn’t win that’ a bit unnerving,” the athlete admitted. “I know I’ve had a lot of help along the way. I never thought I was in it all by myself. But everyone competing has had help—even the ones that lose. I relish the opportunity I’ve had, but in the end I still had to outrace my competitors. Surely, I merit some credit for rising above that competition.”
Press Secretary Jay Carney defended the President’s message saying “if he had his way everyone would get medals. The victory really belongs to all of humanity. Every champion is the product of every influence that exists or ever existed. His own contribution is vanishingly small in the grand scheme of things. So, basically, the President is right. The ones getting the medals didn’t really win them. Somebody else made that happen.”
In related news, in a campaign speech in Ohio, President Obama hammered Mitt Romney’s tax plan saying that it unfairly “leaves too large a share of the nation’s wealth in the hands of those who created it” and contrasted it with his plan that “carves up the ‘pie’ more fairly because it’s based on need, not greed.”
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...

Ten areas of agreement among conservatives on marriage

National Review ^ | 10-25-05 | dale carpenter

There are ten premises in this debate that most conservatives, opponents and supporters of gay marriage alike, probably share:
(1) Marriage benefits society, and so anything that harms marriage harms all of us, whether married or not.
(2) Marriage directly benefits the individuals married.
(3) It is on average better for children to be raised by two married parents than to be raised by single parents or by unwed cohabiting partners.
(4) Because of the benefits identified in Premises 1-3 above, marriage should be encouraged by public policy and specifically should retain its privileged position in the law.
(5) It is socially preferable for gay persons to be in committed relationships than to be promiscuous.
(6) If any significant change to an important social institution like marriage is undertaken at all it should occur slowly and incrementally, state-by-state, rather than in one fell swoop (as by court-ordered, nationwide gay marriage), so that we can assess the impact of the change and adjust the direction of reform or completely halt the reform...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Here’s the best method for handling a telemarketer!!

Chicken lips are scarce Great gay kiss-off lays a gigantic egg!

New York Post ^ | 8-4-12 | Andrea Peyser

Hot make-out session.

They were to blast anti-gay-marriage comments made by Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy. But gays preferred staying home to watch “The Real Housewives of New Jersey.”

Tumbleweeds could have rolled through the Paramus Park Mall in New Jersey yesterday as a symbol for the lack of stamina in the national kissing campaign.

From Georgia to California, protests drew yawns, not saliva.

Even in Atlanta, the home of Chick-fil-A, only two dozen kissers showed up. And there was a similar lack of necking in Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and San Francisco.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Coming Soon to a Law Book Near You: Arrest and Incarceration for Anti-gay “Hate Speech”

Consequential Commentary ^ | 8-4-2012 | Mary C. Kirchhoff

Picture this: an eleven-year-old child attends a public school. One day at school, her teacher overhears her talking to a friend. The child is telling her friend that her mom believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Because of laws now in place, the teacher must get the principal, and the child is taken to the office.

The mother is tracked down at her job and arrested. The child’s father is away on business and cannot get back immediately; there is no one around to take care of the young girl, so the child is put in temporary custody with a foster parent until suitable arrangements can be made for her care.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Charles Krauthammer: The media missed Romney’s overseas triumph!

The National Post ^ | August 3, 2012 | Dr. Charles Krauthammer

At the outset of his recent foreign trip, Mitt Romney committed a gaffe. In answer to a question about the Olympics, he expressed skepticism about London’s preparations. The response confounded and agitated Romney supporters because it was such an unforced error. The question invited a simple paean to Olympic spirit and British grit, not the critical analysis of a former Olympic organizer.
Soon that initial stumble was transmuted into a metaphor for everything that followed. The mainstream media decided with near unanimity that the rest of the trip amounted to a gaffe-prone disaster.
Really? The Warsaw leg was a triumph. Romney’s speech warmly embraced Poland’s post-communist experiment as a stirring example of a nation committed to limited government at home and a close alliance with America abroad, even unto such godforsaken war zones as Afghanistan and Iraq, at great cost to itself and with little thanks.
Especially little from the Obama administration, which unilaterally canceled a Bush(43)-era missile-defense agreement with Poland to appease Russia. Without any overt criticism of the current president, Romney set out a foreign policy of radically greater appreciation of and fidelity to American allies.
Yet all we hear about Warsaw is the “gaffe”: two phrases uttered by an aide, both best described as microscopically rude. At The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, a pack of reporters hurled questions of such journalistic sophistication as, “What about your gaffes?” To which Rick Gorka suggested that the reporters kiss his posterior, a rather charming invitation that would have made a superb photo op.
The other offense against human decency was Gorka’s correlative directive to “shove it.”
The horror! On the eve of the 2004 Democratic Convention, Teresa Heinz Kerry offered precisely that anatomically risky suggestion to an insistent Pittsburgh journalist....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Sarah Palin: Senate kingmaker!

The Star-Ledger / The Politico ^ | August 4, 2012

CLEVELAND, Mo. -- Sarah Palin, Senate kingmaker, is at it again.

Riding a four-endorsement winning streak in Republican Senate primaries this year, the former Alaska governor swept into a blueberry patch outside Kansas City this weekend looking to apply her Midas touch to the latest fortunate recipient. This time it's Sarah Steelman, a former state treasurer running in a fractured Missouri Tuesday primary to decide who gets to take on vulnerable Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill in November.
With Steelman, Palin is making perhaps her boldest bet yet. Steelman -- who, like Palin, likes to hunt, staunchly opposes abortion rights and touts herself as a maverick -- has been running third against businessman John Brunner, who's poured millions of his personal fortune into the race, and six-term Rep. Todd Akin.
At least that was the case before Palin's arrival and the ensuing glut of media exposure for Steelman.
"They fear her," Palin told a few hundred people gathered at a sprawling farm a few miles from the Kansas border Friday night. "She's the candidate in this race who scares them because she won't go to Washington to just go along, to get along. You have that choice to choose, results over rhetoric. Convictions over consultants and Missouri over Washington."
A win would only enhance Palin's reputation as the most powerful down-ballot force in Republican politics...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama Economic Plan Would Explode Debt to $25.4 Trillion!

Big Government ^ | August 4, 2012 | Wynton Hall

In presidential campaign ads, President Barack Obama claims that his economic plan includes “$4 trillion in deficit reduction.” For a president who has increased the national debt more than all U.S. presidents from George Washington to George H.W. Bush combined, the claim seems incredible. Indeed, it is.

A new analysis of Mr. Obama’s budget reveals the president’s plan would add $10.6 trillion in debt accumulation over the next decade, bringing the U.S. federal debt to a jaw-dropping $25.4 trillion.

Still, the president and his surrogates continue to claim the Obama plan would cut spending. “The President’s proposals… include a balanced deficit reduction plan that would reduce our deficits by $4 trillion over 10 years,” said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney in June.
In addition, the Obama budget contains $1.8 trillion in tax increases over the next decade. Specifically, the top marginal tax rate would jump to 39.6 percent, taxes on dividends would skyrocket to 43.4 percent (from 15 percent), and the death tax would leap to 45 percent.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

We can't possibly be broke ... cause we still got checks in the checkbook!

Government Pays Huge Fees to Green Lawyers to Sue Government!

Maggie's Notebook ^ | 8-4-12 | Maggie@MaggiesNotebook

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) was put in place in 1980, and was designed to help small businesses protect themselves against lawsuits from environmentalists, and a predator EPA. Today, huge Leftist environmental groups are using the EAJA to secure mammoth fees for its attorneys by initiating lawsuits against big and small entities who are targets of government regulations and other green encroachments. It's a slick collusion between government and environmentalists, a sick joke on you and me.

According to this Daily Caller article by Jacob Laskin (please read it all here), the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is not 'accountable' for keeping track of these fees:
Still, we have some clues about the amounts at stake. In an August 2011 study, the GAO reported that between 2003 and 2010, the Treasury Department paid $14.2 million in attorneys’ fees just to those plaintiffs suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). That means that the total for all federal agencies is in the tens of millions of dollars every year.
EAJA thus serves as a hugely expensive vehicle of collusion between the government and environmental groups to advance the environmental movement’s political agenda on the taxpayer’s dime.
Since the general rule is that the loser pays the winner's attorneys fees, and government is "paying," we can assume we are winning - can't we?
Congress passed several pieces of legislation designed to make it easier for small businesses to challenge the government. One was the EAJA, which ordered federal agencies to pay the legal costs of firms that successfully challenged their rulings.
But that's NOT the story. This is the story:
Before long, some of the country’s most powerful environmental law firms were availing themselves of the EAJA to force the government to bend to their political agenda and pay their legal fees — sometimes as much as $750 an hour — in the process. The result was a gross perversion of the political process, paid for by the unknowing American public... The incestuous relationship between the government and environmental groups extends beyond litigation.
In addition to subsidizing their lawsuits, the government is also a leading sponsor of these groups, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
As David Horowitz and I report in our new book, The New Leviathan, between 2008 and 2010, 247 left-wing environmental groups received almost $569 million in federal grants. During the same period, conservative and free market-friendly environmental groups also received government grants, but a comparatively piddling $728,000...
Similarly, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), another major environmental group, has sued the EPA numerous times over the past decade. But that hasn’t interrupted the group’s cash flow: the government has given the EDF $2.76 million in grants during that period.
In a case which the EPA lost against the US Navy, EPA attorneys went back to court to ask for (and received) a higher rate of compensation for the work they did, and more for outside expert attorneys.
In other words, the NRDC contended that the government was not paying its lawyers enough to file suit against it. The NRDC was eventually awarded most of the reimbursement it sought.
Operative: "...not paying its lawyers enough to file suit against it." !!! It takes no imagination to understand what these millions, maybe billions are used to do to against the case for smaller government, lower taxes and a better economy:
Instead, the money has been spent enriching what is anything but an endangered species in America: trial lawyers.
Is there any single, honorable thing our Government is engaged in at this time? Is there anything our Government does not mismanage, either ineptly and/or purposefully/criminally at this time? Page 1 of the article is linked above. Page 2 is here.

86 Percent of ABC, CBS, NBC Evening News Stories on Romney's Overseas Trip Emphasized His 'Missteps' ^ | August 4, 2012 | Elisabeth Meineke

I get that Mitt Romney's overseas trip may or may not have been the most well-executed presidential campaign booster, but it appears the networks are determined to forego any flowery rhetoric they reserved for 2008 Obama and emphasize Romney's failures. According to the Media Research Center,
"Mitt Romney's week-long international trip resulted in unrelentingly negative coverage from the big three broadcast networks, a stark change from the glowing press awarded to then-candidate Barack Obama's world tour in 2008. While Obama was treated like a rock star (from the Associated Press: "It's not only Obama's youth, eloquence and energy that have stolen hearts across the Atlantic...."), Romney endured a focus on gaffes and the trivial.
MRC analysts examined all 21 ABC, CBS and NBC evening news stories about Romney's trip to London, Israel and Poland between July 25 and July 31. Virtually all of these stories (18, or 86%) emphasized Romney's "diplomatic blunders," from his "golden gaffe" at the Olympic games to "missteps" that offended the Palestinians."
Honestly, the best part, though, is when MRC puts this side by side with coverage Obama received on his overseas tour before getting elected president:
In July of 2008, Barack Obama's international tour took him to Israel where, in an attempt to show toughness over Iran, the then-senator incorrectly told reporters that he was a member of the Senate Banking committee. (Obama erroneously referred to "his" committee's calls for divestment from Iran.) There was no outcry and no reporting of "errors" or "gaffes," at least on the three broadcast evening newscasts.

Obama's 2008 foreign tour, unlike Romney's 2012 version, received glowing coverage.

When the Democrat arrived in Berlin to speak, Brian Williams could hardly contain himself. On the July 24, 2008 Nightly News, he trumpeted, "...The man from Chicago, Illinois, the first ever African-American running as presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party, brought throngs of people into the center of Berlin, streaming into this city, surging to get close to him, to hear his message."

On the same program, Andrea Mitchell was beside herself, marveling at the large crowds: "It's hard to figure out what the comparison is. What do you compare this with?"

Then-CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric couched the visit in the most favorable terms, hyping, "Barack Obama extends the hand of friendship to Europe."

Jeremiah Wright Thinks Barack Obama May Still Be A Muslim! ^ | 8-4-2012 | PolitiJim (@politiJim)

I’ve seen it advertised all over but have not yet read “The Amateur” by author Edward Klein yet. However, he gave an interview to CBN on The Brody File show (video at bottom of post) had a stunning recitation of his 3 hour, taped interview with “G-d Damn America,” Jeremiah Wright:
KLEIN to Jeremiah Wright: Are you saying that you converted Barack Obama from Islam to Christianity?
WRIGHT: “That’s hard to say.”
Wright clearly gave the impression that A) Barack Obama was heavily devoted to Islam even when he came to America and that B) even Wright was convinced that he hadn’t converted to Christianity. In other words, Jeremiah Wright Thinks Barack Obama May Still Be A Muslim.
I have always struggled with the notion that Barack Obama was a Muslim, if only because he acts (and has always acted) contrary to core tenants of Islam. And well before it seemed he was interested in politics. He is bisexual, drinks and has taken drugs since college, and not only publically eats pork, he has no qualms about putting pig on the White House menu.
Continued with Video Interview at: Jeremiah Wright Thinks Barack Obama May Still Be A Muslim

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Gaffe: A comment Revealing What You REALLY Think - Not 'Misspeaking'

Maggie's Notebook ^ | 8-3-12 | Maggie@MaggiesNotebook

The use of the word "gaffe" is getting on my last nerve. "Journalists" are paid to say what their words mean, or depending on the philosophic outlook, to lie. Using the word "gaffe" by "journalists" who consider themselves on the other side of center from the speaker, a misspeak is sometimes characterized as a "gaffe," and usually an embarassing gaffe. When the speaker is on the same side of center as the journalist, it is never a gaffe, but simply "misspeaking." When one misspeaks it is obvious, i.e. Obama arrives in Kansas and says it's good to be back in Texas. With so many travel stops, we can overlook it if he has the schedule mixed up, and we can forgive him if he simply turned the words around. When you have a gaffe, you intentionally or unintentionally say what you really think or believe. G.W. Bush had a list of "gaffes" daily, as interpreted by the same media which interprets Obama's gaffes as misspeaking. Now the target is Mitt Romney and particularly his recent trip to London and Israel. He will never be allowed to misspeak (if he ever does), but his media-born gaffes will likely set a record.
Mitt Romney doesn't just 'think' Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, he knows it, historical documents still unchanged, on the Nation of Israel's founding, proves it, and the 1967 Six Day War sealed the deal. No gaffe.

Romney's so-called devastating gaffe:
Romney, speaking to a group of donors, meant to praise Israel’s success. In the process, he demeaned Palestinians — pointing to “a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality” between the Jewish state and the occupied territories. His diagnosis: “Culture makes all the difference." Then, among other factors playing to Israel’s favor, he cited “the hand of providence.”
You have to be an blind or ignorant not to the see the "dramatically stark difference in economic vitality" between Israel and the area Hamas runs, that UNRAW tends to, and the whole world tries to feed, including Israel - something like 10,000 to 14,000 pounds a week. But then, much of the poverty in the area known as Palestine is a sick joke on the rest of humanity. Many, many parts of Palestine are modern and thriving and seldom shown to the West. Those Palestinians are a lot like Democrats. There's not much "charitable" giving in the Arab lands, other than to terrorist groups. The hovels and bombed out buildings we see are the truly poor, put there to be in the public eye when Israel has to defend itself, people to whom Hamas hands out goodies - just enough to keep their devotion, to keep them strapping on the suicide belts, just enough to keep them from rebelling and taking back their cities. It's a "community-organizing-kind-of-thing.
For centuries and centuries, Arabs wandering and dwelling in the area of Palestine produced nothing. The Jews produced everything, long before there was a "Palestine. Not only is there a stark difference in economic vitality, there is a hugely stark difference in psyche between the two peoples. I repeat: no gaffe.
No gaffe, but the response is all too familiar - our current administration is teaching the rest of the world, by example, that claiming "racism" is a winner among the circle of losers (yet another of those community-organizing efforts).
``What is this man [Romney] doing here?'' said Saeb Erekat, a top Palestinian official. ``Yesterday, he destroyed negotiations by saying Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and today he is saying Israeli culture is more advanced than Palestinian culture. Isn't this racism?''
The London "gaffe:" Mitt Romney, former CEO and President of the 2002 US Olympics Organizing Committee quoted concerns, only because he was asked for his opinion, about the 2012 London Olympics. He recounted reports in the London papers or something he had heard somewhere in the media:
"You know it's hard to know just how well it will turn out," Romney said in an interview with NBC News Wednesday evening. "There are a few things that were disconcerting. The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials – that obviously is not something which is encouraging." "Do they come together and celebrate the Olympic moment?" Romney asked. "That's something which we only find out once the Games actually begin."
No doubt the better part of caution was to say something with no substance, but there is nothing gaffe-ish about his comment. Nothing misspoken. Nothing untruthful. Nothing undiplomatic. The truth is, no matter how efficient the management of such an enormous event, no one can foretell, with certainty, success or safety, and someone in their own media was musing about it as well. No gaffe. Examples of gaffes - defined as accidentally or purposefully saying what you really mean. If the reporter and the speaker is left of center, it is classified as "misspeaking." If the reporter is left of center and the speaker right of center, it is classified as a "gaffe"). Here on a conservative blog, I assert that the following are gaffes, revealing a deeply held conviction:
1) [Barack Obama] "We're not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money. —on Wall Street reform, Quincy, Ill., April 29, 2010
2) [Barack Obama] "The Cambridge police acted stupidly." —commenting on a white police officer's arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home in Cambridge, Mass., at a news conference, July 22, 2009
3) [Barack Obama] "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -- defending his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, who argued that Obama's policy hurts small-business owners like himself, Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 12, 2008
4) [Barack Obama] "What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your Christian faith," which Obama quickly clarified (Watch video clip)
5) [Barack Obama] Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation.
6) [Barack Obama] My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect.”
7) [Barack Obama] I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.”
8) [Barack Obama] “I’ve been fighting with Acorn, alongside Acorn, on issues you care about, my entire career.”
9) [Barack Obama] Those opposed to abortion cannot simply invoke God’s will–they have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths.
10) [Barack Obama] “Look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something—there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges.
If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own.”
(Maggie: But of course, the taxpayers work to fund fighting fires. Taxpayers pay the salaries of those building the roads. Taxpayers send their sons and daughters to university to be engineers to build the roads and bridges, and at one time, the parents actually did pay for the education of their children. Those starting their own businesses fund it or take the risk of funding it, the responsibility of making it work (or not), of finding competent personnel and then paying taxes on their success. That good teacher along the way in your success, was paid by taxpayers, who worked to pay his/her salary. Today, 49.5% of all adult American pay no federal income taxes).
11) [Barack Obama] It is a story written into our national mottos. In the United States, our motto is E pluribus unum — out of many, one.
It’s in fact not the US motto, but rather the motto of the great seal of the U.S. By law the motto of the United States of America is, “In God we Trust”. (This one wins dual coverage under Gaffes and Ignorance (or maybe Lies - we can't be sure. (Maggie: Must be horrifying that US Law claims "In God we Trust)
12) [Michelle Obama] For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country
13) (called a gaffe, but just telling the truth) [George W. Bush] "I couldn't imagine somebody like Osama bin Laden understanding the joy of Hanukkah." --at a White House menorah lighting ceremony, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 2001 (Listen to audio clip)
14) [Bill Clinton] "[Congress] will probably have to put everything off [Bush Tax Cuts] until early next year," Clinton said during an interview with CNBC. "That's probably the best thing to do right now."
15) [Nancy Pelosi] We'll have to pass the Bill (ObamaCare) so that you can find out what is in it.
16) [Nancy Pelosi] Unemployment Creates Jobs
17) [Quote from NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden]: he [Obama] wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with predominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.
Examples of Misspeaking:
1) "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
2) [Barack Obama, RedState] “Good to be back in Texas.” (he was in Kansas)
3) [George W. Bush] "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
4) Bush inadvertently mocked Queen Elizabeth II, saying at a welcoming ceremony that she first visited America in 1776.
5) [George W. Bush] "They misunderestimated me." --Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000
Examples of Ignorance and/or Narcissism and/or Lies:
1) "I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." --at a campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon (Watch video clip)
2) [Barack Obama (thanks to Ann Althouse] This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal. June 3, 2008
3) “Poland’s prime minister said Wednesday that remarks by President Barack Obama erroneously identifying a Nazi death camp as Polish had hurt all Poles and he expected more from the US than “regret”. (AFP, May 30, 2012)
4) [Barack Obama, Scared Monkeys] First time I saw 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq. When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there. I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”
...problem. Actually, a rather large problem. … Jared Monti was killed in action in Afghanistan, on June 21, 2006 and he was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously,
5) While speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama mispronounced the word "Corpsman" as "corpse-man." (three times) RealClearPolitics
6) (lie) Speaking about the economy recently on the campaign trail, President Obama stated, “We tried our plan and it worked.” Yet new data released this morning by the Bureau of Labor Statistics confirm that the president is living in an alternate reality if he truly believes that statement. Americans for Tax Reform
7) (lie) [Barack Obama] If you like your [insurance] plan, you can keep your plan. 8) (lie) [Barack Obama] To be fair, The United States has less than 2% of the world's oil reserves.
9) (ignorance or lie) [Barack Obama] It is a story written into our national mottos. In the United States, our motto is E pluribus unum — out of many, one.
It’s in fact not the US motto, but rather the motto of the great seal of the U.S. By law the motto of the United States of America is, “In God we Trust”. (this one wins dual coverage under Gaffes and Ignorance (or maybe Lies - we can't be sure)
10) (This one is definitely in the "lie" category) The Obama administration, in its zeal to blame everything on somebody else, refers to the 2009 budget deficit as the deficit he “inherited.” Approximately $1.3 trillion dollars.
What is never mentioned is that the 2009 budget was a Democrat document (Reid and Pelosi) and that it was never signed by George W. Bush because it was never presented to him for signature. Reid and Pelosi passed continuing resolutions until Bush was out of the White House and then the 2009 budget was signed by none other than Barack H. Obama.
The last budget G.W. Bush signed, the first budget of the Reid/Pelosi control of Congress ran a $641 billion dollar deficit. Prior to Reid/Pelosi, budget deficits were actually going down. The 2007 budget deficit (pre-Pelosi) was $162 billion.
What the Democrats actually “inherited” was a $162 billion deficit, which they then ran up until we arrived at deficits of over a trillion dollars annually. Source: Pat Slattery at Conservatives on Fire
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is “I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th, 2009.
11) [George W Bush] "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." --on "Good Morning America," Sept. 1, 2005, six days after repeated warnings from experts about the scope of damage expected from Hurricane Katrina
(Maggie) Not so ignorant. Bush knew better than anyone the billions of dollars handed to the state of Louisiana, to New Orleans and to the Army Corps of Engineers over decades. What he didn't know (because which of three three would spill it to the world?) is how abused and mismanaged those billions were.
12) (lie related to Gaffe No. 15 above) [Bill Clinton Next Day] I'm very sorry

WashPost's Miller: Media Should Ignore 'Astroturf' Black Pastors Opposing Obama

NewsBusters ^

On the Saturday Washington Post “On Faith” page, columnist and Newsweek religion editor Lisa Miller insisted it was not a news story that black ministers came to the National Press Club and insisted Obama’s support for gay marriage “might cost him the election.”
It’s not a story, Miller insisted, because Rev William Owens is “enough to make a cynic blush...He’s a figurehead in what political operatives call an ‘Astroturf’ campaign...and his threat is not a threat.” Miller complained about the news sites that somehow found this “nearly empty” press conference newsworthy:
CNN, Fox News, NBC, the New York Post, the Daily Caller and the Christian Post, among others, followed the story. Headlines underscored the potential threat: “Obama’s support for gay marriage ‘might cost him the election,’” wrote
Andrew Mach at reported the same thing Miller found so off-putting and artificial: Rev. Owens is associated with the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes gay marriage lobbyists across the country. Miller felt pressed to admit there was a “glimmer of honesty” in this publicity against Obama: "In every craven political maneuver, there is a glimmer of honesty, however, and this case is no exception. The African American community has been slower than the American majority to accept same-sex marriage."
But Miller said Owens was also “Astroturf” because most black Americans will stick with Obama seemingly no matter how much of Christianity he opposes in the public square. She quoted David Bositis of the liberal Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies: “I would place the odds of African Americans defecting the president as about the same as the odds of an asteroid hitting the Earth and wiping out all human life.”

Obama Care

08/04/2012 | Tim Lilje

Well It had to happen. A friend of mine called me up and wanted to ask me a few healthcare questions. For background sake he is a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat whose daddy was a Democrat and his entire family only voted Democrat. I am an RN who works at a local MD owned Ambulatory Surgical Unit.

He started out asking me what types of blood tests he should get on Monday when he goes to his Primary Care Physician for his annual physical. I told him that the doctor will perform a routine battery of tests that screen for any problems. He asked me if he should have any other tests (for Cancer ect) besides the MD recommended ones. I said no because it did not make any economic sense to test for everything, just wait til the results of the screening tests came back and if there are any abnormal values, the doctor will order more specific tests for that particular result.

He stated he did not want to do this because the doctors office said he would have to pay for the other tests and that under Obama Care any routine tests should be covered. I told him that yes, certain preventative tests are done for free. I also told him that if his results came pack abnormal and required any further testing he would most likely have to pay for them if it is not covered by his insurance.

He started to become perturbed. He told me that his wife went to get a pap smear and had to pay for it and that this should be free but it wasn't. He then asked me what all this Obama Care stuff was about if you have to pay for it. I asked him if he had health Insurance. He said yes and I responded that since he has insurance he was going to have to pay his Co-Pay if any abnormal results showed up. I explained to him that this is the way that the law was written and that frankly he made too much money for the law to cover it. I said that if he was on medicaid or State indigent care the entire visit would be covered, and that somebody has to pay for them.

I had a dead silence on the other side of the phone and I could see his head exploding. I'll see him tomorrow and ask him how it is turning out.

Could Obama’s efforts to strike down military voting extension cost him election?

Hot Air ^ | August 4, 2012 | Howard Portnoy

It is no secret that Barack Obama never served in the military. In fact, he doesn’t seem to be that big a fan of our men and women in uniform (at least the ones who aren’t gay). And unless pictures lie, the feeling is mutual.
One retired Army officer so dislikes Obama’s policies toward the military that he has publicly stated his view that the president is “undeserving of the title Commander-in-Chief.” That would be Congressman Allen West, who wrote on his Facebook page:
I am appalled at the Obama administration’s actions to bring a lawsuit against the State of Ohio for the early voting privileges it extends to our Men and Women serving in uniform. To have the Commander in Chief make our US Servicemen and Women the target of a political attack to benefit his reelection actions is reprehensible. The voting privilege extended to these Warriors who represent the best among us should not be a part of the collective vision of this inept President who is more concerned about his reelection than sequestration. As a Combat Veteran, for this President to unleash his campaign cronies against our Military is unconscionable… how dare this President compare the service, sacrifice, and commitment of those who Guard our liberties not as special and seek to compare them to everyone else.
The lawsuit West alludes to was filed jointly in mid-July by the Obama for America campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and the Ohio Democratic Party. Its purpose was to strike down part of an Ohio law that grants members of the military an extra three days to cast their votes.
The Daily Caller’s Holly Bensur cites a report by the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program specifying the primary “reason for military voter disenfranchisement” and that is “inadequate time to successfully vote.” The report was sent to the president and Congress, but Democrats nevertheless wrote in a complaint filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio that the law is “arbitrary” and possesses “no discernible rational basis.”
The president and his minions have a point. Why should individuals who put their lives in harm’s way to defend the nation deserve special treatment? If they can’t get to a polling place in a timely fashion like the rest of us, that’s their problem.
Naturally, the question of why Obama is taking such an unfeeling position arises. He will claim it’s in the interests of fairness. Cynics will argue that it is a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise members of a voting bloc in a critical swing state whose ballots are likely to favor Obama’s opponent.
But if his motivation is the latter, then consider two facts: (1) Ohio, according to the 2010 census, has only 8,261 active military personnel. (2) In 2008, Obama carried 44% of the military vote nationally. Even if every service member in Ohio is registered to vote (which is unlikely) and even if the vote is distributed in proportions identical to 2008, his actions will block a little over 4,600 votes.
It could be a meaningful difference in a state he needs in his column to win a second term. But it could also create epic backlash if the 1,088,465 service members nationwide vote in solidarity with their Buckeye State brethren, not to mention the countless millions of civilians who are staunch supporters of our fighting men and women.
One things that’s for sure is that the story, with its negative optics for the president, isn’t going away. The Marine Corps Times reports that a consortium of 15 military groups, including AMVETS, the National Guard Association of the United States, the Association of the U.S. Army, have asked the judge in the case to dismiss the suit. Regardless of the outcome, Obama stands to lose the vote—and respect—of many.

QUEER Rights

by WriteOn

There is no QUEER birthright without a gay gene. The "born that way" argument lives and dies on a QUEER gene!

Show me the gene or shut up QUEERS!

The Thug In The White House!

by Armaggedon

Obama is a focus of the unholy trinity, hate, lies and death. 

The mass media spreads Obama's disease by creating an image of the beast which is infectous for those who do not have a firm foundation in the divine trinity of love, truth and life. Obama hopes to get re-elected by infecting as many as he can with his hate, lies and death.

Obama also hopes to ridicule all those who honor love, truth and life. 

If Obama can prevent people from voting for Romney he will have four more years to curse and destroy America. Obama is full of hate and spreads that spirit. Obama is a fountain of lies and pours out that corruption. Obama spreads sin through his religeous cult of political correctness.

Obama's denial of divine principle sets up a harvest of destruction and death. Obama does not know that he cannot fight God and win. How many people will Obama lead to the gates of denying God on earth? The mass media creates, defends and spreads the Obama image of the beast and many are being infected. This is separating the sheep from the goats. The Obama cult will pass away.

Let us choose Love, Truth and Life.

56 reasons Obama is a lying, lawbreaking, warmongering, corrupt cronyist, who loves corporate corruption! ^ | August 4, 2012 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

Full title: Here are 56 reasons why Barack Obama is a lying, lawbreaking, warmongering, corrupt cronyist, who loves corporate lobbyists and Wall St., and who has no respect for the Constitution, limited government, rule of law, individual freedom, civil liberties, the taxpayers, or sick people who have prescriptions for medical marijuana!

1) Carried out military interventionism
In June 2011, U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) said that Obama had violated the Constitution when he launched military operations in Libya without Congressional approval.
2) Gave a no-bid contract to Halliburton
In May 2010, it was reported that the Obama administration had selected KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton, for a no-bid contract worth as much as $568 million through 2011 for military support services in Iraq, just hours after the Justice Department had said it would pursue a lawsuit accusing the Houston-based company of taking kickbacks from two subcontractors on Iraq-related work.
3) Has an administration full of lobbyists
While running for President, Obama had promised that, unlike Bush, he would not have any lobbyists working in his administration. However, by February 2010, he had more than 40 lobbyists working in his administration.
4) Has close ties to Wall St.
Although Obama claims to support the Occupy Wall St. movement, the truth is that he has raised more money from Wall St. than any other candidate during the last 20 years. In early 2012, Obama held a fundraiser where Wall St. investment bankers and hedge fund managers each paid $35,800 to attend. In October 2011, Obama hired Broderick Johnson, a longtime Wall Street lobbyist, to be his new senior campaign adviser. Johnson had worked as a lobbyist for JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Fannie Mae, Comcast, Microsoft, and the oil industry.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama angers military groups with lawsuit against Ohio early voting law

Washington Examiner ^ | August 4, 2012 | Joel Gehrke

Fifteen Ohio military groups have gone to court to oppose an “offensive” lawsuit filed by President Obama’s campaign that challenges a law allowing military members to vote on days when the rest of the state cannot.

“The Obama campaign’s and Democratic National Committee’s argument that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to afford special consideration, flexibility, and accommodations to military voters to make it easier for them to vote in person is not only offensive, but flatly wrong as a matter of law,” the military groups — which include the Marine Corps League, the Association of the U.S. Army, and the Association of the U.S. Navy — argued in their filing.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also attacked Obama over the issue. “President Obama’s lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period is an outrage,” Romney said in a statement today.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Paradigm shift: Sarah Palin takes Texas!

The Hill ^ | August 1, 2012 | Bernie Quigley

Establishment Republicans rally today to debunk Sarah Palin much as Letterman, Couric, Tina Fey and the vast info/entertainment culture did at the beginning. It is a measure of her success and the fear Grizzly Mama strikes in the heart of the timid. The Ted Cruz victory in the Texas Senate race brings substantive political change and Sarah Palin is behind the paradigm shift. It is, as The Washington Post called it, “a victory for the Tea Party.” Today, “the establishment” pushes further away from the main pulse of America and Sarah Palin holds the pulse.
The paradigm shift can best be seen in Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s last primary race for governor. The entire Eastern Conservative Establishment including George H.W. Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Karen Hughes — as proxy for W. — lined up behind Kay Bailey Hutchison, who had challenged Perry for the governorship. Perry had in his corner Sarah Palin. Perry was then to be seen as the front man on the rising Tea Party. Yesterday, Gov. Perry brought his support to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. Palin backed Cruz. So Perry, in Texas, has been marginalized as a Tea Party figure and wrapped in with “the establishment,” a phrase now used in mainstream publications like the Post.
The Cruz victory brings the Tea Party to a higher level of maturity and engagement. And it pushes “the establishment” in Texas and the heartland closer to the margins.

Oakland, the Last Refuge of Radical America

New York Times ^ | August 1, 2012 | JONATHAN MAHLER

The Anti-Capitalist Brigade started gathering early on May Day at Oakland’s Snow Park. There was free coffee, oatmeal, doughnuts, fliers with the day’s agenda and plenty of pot. A “street medic” — “I just finished a wilderness first-aid course,” he told me when I asked about his training — tended to his first case of the day, a man in his 20s whose leg had been beaten to a purple hue with a metal rod in an overnight fight in the park. Nearby, an organizer reminded protesters to take down the toll-free number for the National Lawyers Guild: “This is important. Do not put it in your cellphones, because if you get arrested, the cops will take those away. Write it on your bodies. In indelible ink. There are Sharpies on the table.”
No central action was planned. A coalition of labor unions had asked Occupy Oakland, with its proven ability to turn out large numbers of militant activists, to blockade the Golden Gate Bridge, but then withdrew the request at the last minute. Instead, thousands of Occupy protesters met at various “strike stations” and fanned out into the streets with shields and gas masks (or the homemade alternative: bandannas soaked in vinegar), transforming downtown Oakland into a roving carnival of keyed-up militants of every shape and size: graduate students, tenured professors, professional revolutionaries, members of the Black Bloc, dressed like ninjas, their faces obscured.
Joints were passed, but this was not a mellow crowd. A barefoot man known as Running Wolf grabbed an American flag from outside a popular cop bar and dragged it behind him. Packs of protesters charged into businesses, overturning tables, shattering windows and smashing A.T.M.’s. An activist spray-painted vulgarities on the window of a Bank of America branch. The Menace was loose again, as Hunter
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Silent Majority Goes to Chick-fil-A on 8-1-12!

The Weekly Standard ^ | August 2, 2012 | Mark Hemingway

The Chick-fil-A controversy has no doubt been polarizing in some corners of the country, but the undeniable success of yesterday's nationwide rally to support the fast food chain means we're likely to remember August 1, 2012 as Silent Majority Day.
While the fast food corporation has stayed mostly mum since the fallout from the remarks in support of traditional marriage by Chick-fil-A president and COO Dan Cathy, the company broke its silence about the events yesterday. "We are very grateful and humbled by the incredible turnout of loyal Chick-fil-A customers on August 1 at Chick-fil-A restaurants around the country," said Steve Robinson, executive vice president of marketing in a statement. "While we don’t release exact sales numbers, we can confirm reports that it was a record-setting day."
Across the web, patrons tweeted and blogged pictures of the long lines at registers and drive-thrus across the country. Other anecdotal evidence piled-up: "Chick-fil-a owner friend said they got message from corporate to expect 15-20% more in sales yesterday. Got over 200% more in sales." Indeed, there were reports that a number of franchises ran out of chicken.
However, details on all that happened remain sketchy because as, previously reported, the major media are trying to make sure that the Silent Majority is silenced. But more than that, the media weren't even trying to hide their antipathy. Mark Krzos, a reporter for a Gannett newspaper in Florida, actually wrote on his Facebook page, "I have never felt so alien in my own country as I did today while covering the restaurant’s supporters. The level of hatred, unfounded fear and misinformed people was astoundingly sad. I can’t even print some of the things people said. ... Such a brave stand … eating a goddamn sandwich."
Of course, you don't have to oppose same-sex marriage to feel that politicians threatening business owners because of their private religious beliefs is the far more dangerous attitude. And that's regardless of the fact Cathy's beliefs on marriage are held by a majority of Americans, and the president himself publicly agreed with Cathy until a few months ago.
In fact, a number of gay Americans noted their support of Chick-fil-A yesterday. Along these lines, it seems it's been definitively proven that Chick-fil-A does not shoot lasers at their gay customers. Regardless of your stance on same-sex marriage, it's encouraging that most Americans prefer their chicken sandwiches with waffle fries instead of a side of cultural fascism. Some tried to disrupt Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day by going there and asking for free water to take money from the corporation, only to be stymied by the restaurant's notoriously cheerful employees. (In fact, the guy that filmed this video eventually removed it from his own YouTube channel, presumably after he realized it made him look like a jerk.)
Contrary to Gannett reporters with unresolved issues, I'm happy to report that the scene at my local Chick-fil-A in Northern Virginia was festive. In the line out the door I saw businessmen sliding BlackBerrys out of belt holsters and taking pictures of the line for posterity. There were cops and servicemen, enough different races for a Benetton ad, and, oh, lots and lots of families. In other words, it looked a lot like America.
However, by the time I ate my spicy chicken sandwich and left, three protesters had arrived and were handing out flyers and otherwise exercising their rights. Still, the protesters looked more confused than anything, and even the few Chick-fil-A supporters that engaged them were more polite than outwardly defiant. Same-sex marriage may remain polarizing, but if yesterday is any indication, enjoying milkshakes and tasty, affordable chicken sandwiches is something that most Americans can agree on.

'Why Not ObamaCare?'

American Thinker ^ | August 4, 2012 | Joe Herring

Millions of people like ObamaCare. The idea of universal coverage appeals to many Americans, as does the ability to cover adult children on a parent's policy. Addressing the subject of pre-existing conditions and portability of health insurance are also...
In the Netherlands (under a similar system), as many as 40% of all deaths annually occur as a result of either assisted suicide or some form of euthanasia. Active euthanasia was legalized there in 2006, and the Dutch have proudly advertised that the rate of euthanasia has barely increased in the years since. However, the touted statistics have been gamed to exclude the use of "passive" euthanasia, also known as "Continuous Deep Sedation" (CDS), which has skyrocketed, accounting for as many as 49,500 deaths annually.
Dutch doctors are also placing patients into CDS under a protocol known as "intensified alleviation of symptoms," ostensibly to relieve their pain. The patient is then kept in this diminished state until his organs fail and death occurs, hastened by the effects of the sedation itself. Moreover, according to a report in the British medical journal The Lancet, 42% of the time, this scenario plays out without permission or notification of families or even the patient. These deaths are also not counted as either active or passive euthanasia, serving to further shroud the growing prevalence of state-sponsored killing...
The most compelling argument against ObamaCare has nothing to do with care or cost. It concerns power, and whether we, as citizens, choose to retain that power for ourselves or vest it in bureaucrats with whom we have no meaningful influence. ObamaCare is unconstitutional, although not for the reasons argued before the Supreme Court. Rather, ultimately, the ACA by necessity will abrogate the most fundamental right our maker reserved to us: our right to remain alive.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Piss On HIM!

Score Cards

Obama’s incredible small business gaffe just won’t go away!

The New York Amsterdam News ^ | August 5, 2012 | Richard Carter

“Do you think not getting caught in a lie is the same as telling the truth?…”—Robert Redford, “Three Days of the Condor” (1975)

In the long, undistinguished annals of big-time gaffes in American politics, Barack Hussein Obama’s recent shot at small businesspeople ranks near the top. Indeed, this astonishing verbal blunder has taken on a life of its own.

As a result, three weeks after the president’s ill-advised comments during a July 13 campaign speech in Roanoke, Va., much of America is still talking about his unseemly words. And they are still hard to believe.

To wit:

“If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that—somebody else made that happen.” Ugh!
What’s the best way to describe what Obama said? Here’s what some pundits are calling it: “botch,” “blunder,” “bungle,” “delusional,” “faux pas,” “fumble,” “gaffe,” “goof,” “loopy,” “misstep,” “stumble” and, quite simply, that he put his foot in his mouth big-time.
In effect, Obama dissed America’s business community in general, and small businesspeople in particular. It’s unconscionable that a president of the United States would do this. His words were stunning and simply unbelievable. And they continue to resonate.
What could Obama have been thinking? Some have speculated that it was due to “going off teleprompter”—that is, speaking off the cuff without reading from the multiple teleprompters that always surround him. Doing so is not his strong suit. Others say this president is simply anti-free market business.
If the former was the case—perhaps surprisingly to his worshippers—Obama is in for a tough time in the upcoming presidential debates against presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney. American political debates are a contact sport and spontaneous.
If it was the latter, Obama truly is out of his depth as president. Doesn’t he understand that the nation’s economy was built by the blood, sweat and tears of hard-working businesspeople—small as well as large? His fixation with the federal government as a panacea is, quite frankly, an embarrassment and reeks of socialism.
Here’s how Romney responded to Obama’s blunder: “To say something like that is not just foolishness, it’s insulting to every entrepreneur, every innovator in America. I don’t think the president, by his comments, understands what makes America a unique nation. If you attack success, you’ll see what we’ve seen over the past few years—less success. I find it extraordinary that a philosophy of that nature would be spoken by a president of the United States.”
In the same vein, Romney took Obama to task for failing to meet with his Council on Jobs and Competitiveness for the last six months. And the explanation by the president’s press secretary, Jay Carney? “He’s got a lot on his plate.” Huh? Can you believe it?
Predictably, Obama’s loopy small business gaffe, which has strongly galvanized Republicans, is reflected in many pointed letters to the editor in big-city newspapers. The writers leave no doubt as to their negative feelings. Following are some excerpts:
“Would the late, great Sylvia Woods, the ‘Queen of Soul Food,’ have agreed with President Obama that someone else made her tremendous success happen?”
“Of all of Obama’s rhetoric in the White House, his attack on the very notion of creativity has been the most destructive, by far. If he had said this in 2008, he would have been unelectable.”
“Beyond the small business community, which suffered a direct insult, Obama has just told each and every American that they cannot expect to succeed without him. I think that comes as a shock to even his most fervent followers.”
“According to Obama’s philosophy, no one builds anything. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Thomas Edison, John D. Rockefeller and the rest of the great entrepreneurs in history are merely leeching off the efforts of others.”
“By letting his view slip out, Obama displays a lack of faith in our economic system, diligence and people.”
These sentiments express very clearly why Obama’s classic gaffe could be what millions of Americans will remember in the voting booth on Nov. 6. Prior to the election, his inexplicable diss of small businesspeople may also become a focal point of the three presidential debates in October.
A concrete result of Obama’s small business comments is reflected in a new Gallup poll released July 26. In it, his approval rating among business owners dropped from 59 percent to 35 percent. Meanwhile, the latest Rasmussen tracking poll has Romney leading Obama overall by six points—49 percent to 43 percent.
Finally, Obama’s intemperate remarks of July 13 were exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time. America is a working-class nation whose citizens don’t like anyone telling them they didn’t make it on their own. That’s because most small businesspeople did.
Bottom line: It’s clear the land is rife with political unrest among independents—such as this writer—and Republicans. If you’re a Democrat, you’d better hope Obama gets his act together or, indeed, he’ll be a one-term president. And that’s the name of that tune.

The Speed of Progressivism

Sultan Knish ^ | Aug 5, 2012 | Daniel Greenfield

The transformation of Chick Fil A from a fast food place that most liberals had never even heard of into the "Enemy of the People" is a reminder of the speed at which progressivism travels forward and backward in time. A few months ago the CEO of Chick Fil A would have done nothing worse than echo a consensus so mainstream that it was adopted as a campaign position by the leftiest Democrat to sit in the White House. A few months later that same position is so outrageous that it leads to mass boycotts, threats of violence and mayors of dysfunctional urban centers threatening to drive the reactionary chicken franchise out of their cities.
One of the wonderful things about progressivism is that it defies the laws of physics and history. When the Democratic Party, a once notable national party that has been turned into a red shill for the sort of people who used to hang out in cafes and plot to blow things up in between free verse recitals, adopts a progressive position, that position instantly travels backward in time to alter history and create an entirely new past.
For example when the Democratic Party decided that its future lay not with racist white gerrymandered districts but racist black gerrymandered districts, its adoption of civil rights, formerly a Republican position that good Democrats had fought tooth and nail, actually traveled back in time transforming our nation's history.
When the Democrats belatedly decided that black people were human beings, or at least a better bet for votes than Southern white men who were in danger of deciding that they didn't have much in common with a party of corrupt Northern elites being painted by a corrupt Northern media as saints, the energy from this decision transformed Lincoln into a Democrat, segregation into an idea that Ike and Dick came up with in between dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and the Trail of Tears, and turned the Community Organizers who had been busy torching black orphanages and Republican newspapers in New York City and Boston as part of an organized wartime campaign to defeat the Union, into a lost page of history.
Governor George Wallace, three-time Democratic candidate for the Presidency of the United States, said, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." The real quote though it turns out is, "Progressivism now, progressivism tomorrow, progressivism forever." History works and is revised so that the past agrees with the present.
The Democratic Party has always been at war with racism, in favor of gay marriage, illegal aliens and killing everyone over 50 to save on health care costs. The latter position hasn't been articulated yet, but when it is, it will travel backward through time and since what will take place in the future has already occurred, it has already traveled backward in time to alter our history so that we now know that the Democratic Party has always supported killing people over 50 to save on health care costs.
This however is only a projection. History is notoriously unstable. What was the progressive pose yesterday may be an unacceptably reactionary position tomorrow. The French Revolution and the Communist Revolution and the Cultural Revolution spent a lot of time purging comrades who had failed to recognize that the new progressive position had been adopted tomorrow and had become reality yesterday and was subject to a loyalty oath today. Like Chick A Fil many of them ended up being enemies of the people where they were subjected to worse things than the mayors of bankrupt cities declaring that anti-gay chicken was an unacceptable addition to the parts of their fair cities that aren't on fire.
The Democrats borrowed their interest in black civil rights from the left, which was only working with urban minorities because it was hoping to include them in its revolutionary coalition of coal miners and lettuce pickers who would help overthrow the reactionary capitalist American Dream and replace it with a bunch of people shouting slogans and shooting each other. These days the NAACP does not look like a good bet for overthrowing America and the favorite progressive minority du jour actually keeps black slaves and hangs homosexuals.
Muslims have currently trumped blacks and gays, not to mention every other group, on the crush list of the left. And the Muslim world is one of the few places that still has slaves and kills black people in large numbers, whether it's in the Sudan or the newly liberated Muslim utopia of Libya. The day may come when the Democratic Party and its leftist hag riders decide that slavery was progressive after all and that all men should have the right to own slaves. And then this new policy position will immediately travel backward in time and loyal comrades will turn to the little red books of DailyKos, Think Progress, the Center for American Progress and ProgressProgressProgress to learn the new official position they are obligated to learn and abide by.
That notion may seem ridiculous, but so would the idea that the party of bra burning would become the party of the hijab. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, said Ralph Waldo Emerson. To be a true progressive, you cannot afford to be small-minded. Every idea, value and belief is waiting to be demolished and replace by a newer more progressive idea. And if that newer more progressive idea actually seems backward, that's okay, because progressive ideas are like buses, if you wait around long enough they'll come right back to where they were.
Progressivism is chaos. It is a force that is constantly destroying old things to make way for new things and with so much destruction, it can't be expected to tell the new old things and the old new things apart. Progressivism is a contrary talker, a teenager who knows everything, it doesn't know a whole lot, but it knows that everything you know is wrong. And then off it goes in its retro clothes to shock all the adults with gay marriage, euthanasia clinics and then maybe slavery.
Progressivism violates the laws of physics because it has no past, only an eternal future. It imagines that it is always moving forward in time, when it's actually moving backward. Its past is its future and it can't tell the two apart because it has eradicated any understanding of history that isn't based on its own idiotic ideological posturings. To the left history cannot exist apart from its politically correct understanding of history.
History is bunk, said Henry Ford, a man who didn't know who Benedict Arnold was, but did know that the Jews start all the wars because some European Socialists who were active in the Anti-War movement (Circa 1914) told him so. History is bunk to progressives too who are always throwing it out, tossing it away and writing long books on how all of history was a massive conspiracy to dominate the underclass or at least prevent the progressives from organizing and then dominating the underclass.
Henry Ford's old bunk history about a Jewish War Conspiracy was picked up in 2003 by the left, polished up and shipped out again. The Guardian was reborn as the Dearborn Independent and the rewritten versions of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion starring Wolfowitz, Perle and Feith. Who knows how long it will be before the Democratic Party goes back to its roots and begins explaining why slavery should be legalized to allow an inferior race to experience the civilizing influence of Islam?
Under the multicultural umbrella, Muslims terrorize Sikhs and Africans in London, and gays in New York, which like Boston and Chicago is too good for a Chick-A-Fil, but not too good for a Ground Zero Mosque or a sitdown with Calypso Louie Farrakhan and his Fruits of Islam. The burka has gone from a symbol of oppression to a symbol of liberation. Leftist activists smash Jewish stores and when the time comes will throw acid in the face of female teachers in solidarity with their Taliban brothers.
Sane people ask where the principles of the left have gone, but when has the left ever had principles? Its only principle is progressivism, its faith is in smashing things to build a better world that will also have to be smashed because it isn't good enough. Its violent activists create anarchy and then tyranny and repeat the same cycle leading to greater barbarism each time until they have finally managed to destroy civilization and made the world safe for feudalism.
Progressivism is a destructive force of chaos opposed to the stable order of conservatism. Its rhetoric is empty, its fury is mere posturing and its philosophies are justification and celebration of its violent impulses. Like all chaos it defines itself in opposition to the order that it would destroy. Its only identity derives from the face of the man it is punching in the face or lynching on a street corner.
Right now Chick Fil A is the enemy for opposing gay marriage. Tomorrow, when Republicans adopt gay marriage as their platform, it will be the enemy for supporting gay marriage. Churches will be picketed for wanting to force gay men and women into the stifling conformity of a heterosexual institution. And the people, and by that I mean the people who always talk about who should be first up against the wall, will have a new enemy.

Bring On The Chocolate: Study Finds Chocolate Can Protect From Skin Cancer!

947TheWave ^ | July 29, 2012 | Brie?

A new article in Allure magazine is so sweet it will make you shed tears of joy! Chocolate can protect you from skin cancer!

It turns out chocolate doesn’t just provide comfort on a rough day — a new study reports that chocolate helps protect against UV rays. Better yet, this isn’t a matter of slathering chocolate fondue all over your body.

The Journal of Nutrition reports that the superfood contains antioxidants epicatechin and catechin that shield skin from the sun- only when you eat it. Women who consumed 326 milligrams of high-flavanol cocoa per day for 12 weeks had decreased sensitivity to UV light versus the participants who ingested just 27 milligrams per day.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Surprise: Obama Campaign Explicitly Approved Reid's Anti-Romney Lies! ^ | August 4, 2012 | Guy Benson

Earlier this morning, Karl Rove appeared on Fox & Friends to discuss Harry Reid's reckless accusations against Mitt Romney. In case you're just joining this controversy, the Senate Majority Leader has spent the last few days peddling a scurrilous and evidence-free claim that Romney is a serial tax evader. Rove wondered aloud why our fraudulent post-partisan prince of a president hasn't denounced Reid:
Karl Rove Calls Out Harry Reid's 'Slimeball Nature'; Says the Senate Majority Leader Should Be 'Embarrassed and Ashamed'

There's a pretty straightforward answer to this question. Obama isn't lifting a finger to put an end to this slanderous side-show because his campaign specifically gave Reid the green light to launch these baseless attacks. Politico reports:

The ruthless Senate majority leader sees political gold in his attack on Romney — and he’s got the blessing from President Barack Obama’s campaign for the attack, even if he lacks evidence on Romney’s failure to pay taxes. Reid has calculated that the frenzy created by his charge has accomplished exactly what he sought to do: Turn the focus back onto the GOP nominee’s unreleased tax returns, according to several people close to the leader and the campaign. For Reid, he’s got virtually nothing to lose: His approval ratings back home are still upside-down, and he may not even run for reelection when he’s up for a sixth term in 2016. On top of that, his aides say, Reid genuinely believes his source...

As far as Reid and Obama are concerned, the more we're discussing this foundationless rumor, the less we're discussing the president's egregious record of economic failure. Three quick points:
(1) Even if Reid has special "source" inside Bain, which I sincerely doubt, said informant would have no access to Romney's personal tax returns.
(2) A former McCain aide who vetted Romney as a potential Vice Presidential pick in 2008 has reviewed many years of the current presumptive nominee's tax returns. He says everything was totally in order, and if anything, Mitt overpaid.
(3) Here's a quote from a "top Reid confidant," explaining Democrats' thinking on this smear campaign:

“What Republicans don’t get is the more they fire back at Reid, the more he will fight, and in the end, what will the topic be? Romney and his taxes.

How does one effectively combat an opponent with no shame, no decency, and not even a tenuous commitment to the truth? One option is to take the high road, fight the smears, and continue to push your message. For the record, this is the road I would personally recommend. ("Oh, that's interesting Harry -- get back to me when you have some evidence. Incidentally, have you seen the latest jobs report?") Another option is to get down into the Democrats' mud and fight dirty. As amusing as the Reid/pedophilia "accusation" saga is -- and we still haven't seen firm proof that the Senate Majority Leader doesn't fondle little boys -- it won't break through and capture the narrative spotlight. If Republicans are interested in getting nasty and force-feeding Democrats some of their own repulsive medicine, they would need to make it about Obama. Here's what they could do (not an endorsement, just an illustration): Get a senior and high-profile Republican member of Congress to give an on-the-record "scoop" to a site like, say, Let's use Sen. John McCain as an example; as a former presidential nominee and a media fixture, he'd do the trick. McCain could say that he's heard from "a source" inside the Justice Department that President Obama exerted executive privilege in the Fast & Furious scandal because he didn't want the public to discover that he himself ordered the operation. McCain might add that he isn't totally sure if the leak is true, but he still believes it to be accurate -- and that it is up to Obama to release every single document pertaining to Fast & Furious to prove that he didn't directly order it. After all, the president has been extremely secretive about the program, even as hundreds of its murdered victims' families demand justice. Romney wouldn't have to comment on the allegation, aside from affirming that Americans "deserve answers" about the lethal gun-running operation. (The public agrees). McCain could keep making the allegation day after day, with Democrats rushing to condemn him. The truth wouldn't matter, though; the more they'd fire back at McCain, the more he'd fight, and in the end, what would the topic be? Barack Obama's bloody scandal that killed hundreds of innocent people, including a US border agent. See how this works?
The above scenario is a nearly perfect parallel to what Democrats are doing now, except Obama's scandal actually exists, and real blood has been spilled. The only stretch/fabrication would be Obama's direct involvement in it, rather than just his Attorney General. There are, of course, a few problems with this scenario: First, the media simply would not abide such tactics from Republicans (even as the cover Reid's lying buffoonery as a partisan squabble), and second, John McCain is an honorable man. Democrats are working with two insurmountable advantages here -- a press that covers for them, and a surplus of dishonorable actors.