Better Do A Doubletake

"Waak told the Denver Post that the vandalism, allegedly carried out by a former Democratic canvasser and who left behind an anti-health care reformer poster, was "an effort on the other side to stir up hate." After learning about alleged vandal's political past, Waak told the newspaper that "there is a lot of rhetoric out there from both sides of the spectrum." [link]

Notice how instead of offering an apology for a false allegation the tone changes. What type of reaction would Waak have had had the alleged perpetrator belonged to something other than the Democratic party?

Liberals: Are They Above the Law?

"A cancer-stricken Sen. Edward M. Kennedy has written a poignant letter to Massachusetts leaders asking that they change state law to allow a speedy replacement of him in Congress...The letter acknowledges the state changed its succession law in 2004 to require a special election within five months to fill any vacancy. At the time, legislative Democrats -- with a wide majority in both chambers -- were concerned because then-Republican Gov. Mitt Romney had the power to directly fill any vacancy created as Democratic Sen. John Kerry ran for president." [link]

It would seem that when there might have been a chance someone other than an ultra-lib progressive could have taken a seat long held by Kennedy the Dem's used their might to effectively keep Romney from appointing anyone. Now that a Dem is in the governors seat there is now concern for a speedy replacement? The hypocrisy on the left truly knows no bounds.

Don't misunderstand me, Republicans have done the same types of things before and it is wrong on either side and very hypocritical. Our public servants need to quit focusing so much on power grabbing and more on representing the people they are supposed to be helping.

They Don't Like the Shoe on the Other Foot

"These groups are using scare tactics and spreading smears about the President's plan for reform, trying to incite constituents into lashing out at their representatives and disrupting their events. A couple of months ago, I was interrupted by a group of socialists who shouted me down on a university campus. Two people were arrested. It wasn’t the first time I’ve been shouted down by socialists. So, I find it humorous that socialists are now demanding that public discourse take the form of polite tearoom chatter. You never seemed concerned with these tactics until you seized control of the government. I guess you could call your detractors “community disorganizers.” Welcome to the world of political hard ball." [link]

Just goes to show that they cannot stand the tactics that they have used for so long to be turned against them. They act like they never expected it to happen and gauging so far by the reactions they didn't expect this type of backlash. It only goes to show how truly out of touch they are with the people they are supposed to be representing.

Change will have to come that is obvious. The question is from what corner will change come from. Will the people become lackadaisical again and let pork projects for their area persuade their voting? Or will this finally be the wake up call that enough is enough! The people need to take their country back and not be lured by promises of easy money and jobs that could vanish overnight. This country truly does need an infrastructure overhaul, but not in the form of roads and public works. This country needs solid industry, "affordable health care" (not universal, if you want it fine, if not that's your choice), a stable currency, and less corruption in government. These would cure the ails this country has.

Words Truly Can Haunt You

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face," he said. (Said by Barack Hussein Obama in September of '08) [link] Go to this link and read the story lots of good lies in there from the liar-in-chief.

Evidently honest, hard working Americans are not allowed to "argue with them and get in their face" when it comes to the massive spending that liberal congresscritter's are forcing on this nation. In those instances it is a vast conservative conspiracy which has been plotted by insurers, lobbyists, and Republican Party activists. What are our elected representatives afraid of? Why are so many of them canceling "town hall" meetings? Isn't this the type of activities that liberals love and chomp at the bit in order to attend? Yet when the tables are flipped and the sheople realize the wolf is guarding them and they decide to offer a bit of resistance the wolf will tuck tail and run.

More on Obamacare and Pelosi

"No worries for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco. On Tuesday, she ditched the town-hall concept in favor of a friendlier closed-to-the-public "roundtable" with health care professionals and consumers at San Francisco General Hospital.

At a news conference afterward, Pelosi proclaimed that "health care is a right, not a privilege." [link]

I guess Pelosi decided she didn't really want her actual constituents opinions on nationalized medicine. It is also good to see she does not really understand what a right is either.

New York Patriot Refuses to Surrender His Rifle

"This is the last legal gun that you can have without registration in New York," Littlejohn said. "And yet Mayor Bloomberg is driven crazy by my flintlock gun - the one that won the American Revolution.

A police source says the war could end peacefully if Littlejohn applied for a permit with the NYPD handgun license division.

Littlejohn would rather fight. The Brooklynite says he's willing to sue for his rifle rights." [link]

I can't figure out if it is hilarious that these crackpots in New York are going after this man and his rifle, and that he could end it peacefully by registering with the "NYPD handgun licensing division". Or so outright infuriating that these people are so terrified of individual rights that they act this irrationally.

Out of Touch With Reality

"I thought this was like a frequent-flier program," Sen. Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said of the special benefits. "I thought nothing of it." [link]

Let us just assume for a moment that Congressman Conrad speaks the truth. These words would have been spoken right in the middle of the housing bubble burst. How often does he think people go out an buy new homes. Quite a bit evidently if he makes comments like that above. And he is supposed to represent the people of his state with a warped sense of reality like that?

Now lets assume that he lied. He knew he was getting the good deal because of his clout as a senator and there was a little quid-pro-quo going on. Then he either acted illegally and/or unethically and does not deserve to represent the good people of North Dakota.

Could Someone Explain This?

The House Democrats Health Plan. I can't make heads or tails of it, and I have a college degree.

A Supreme Court Judge Said What?!

"Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of..." [link]

Yes, I had to read that several times to make sure that I was in fact reading it correctly. We just had a sitting supreme court judge say that there was concern about population growth and in particular in certain populations! Wonder what populations she was referring to?

It is exactly this type of lunatic thinking that the 2nd amendment was intended to protect all citizens of the United States against.

Here is a link to the official 1970 census report. You may extrapolate your own data and draw your own conclusions.

Electricity Is Good

We all have to agree that electricity is definitely a good thing, but how exactly do we get it? Well to break it down by the percentages we get electricity from:
48.9% -- Coal
20% -- Natural Gas
19.3% -- Nuclear
1.6% -- Petroleum
This comes out to just a little under 90%. The remaining 10% of energy usage comes from:
7.1% -- Hydroelectric
2.4% -- Other Renewables
0.7% -- Other [source]

Interestingly the Waxman-Markey (Cap-and-Trade) will tax coal, natural gas, and petroleum based electricity generating plants. Which theoretically works out to taxing roughly 70% percent of all Americans to help subsidize the 10% of "clean" renewable energy sources.

However the same people that howl for clean energy also howl in disgust when a dam is built because it damages wildlife and the ecology, furthermore there are probably very few remaining places in the United States where a new dam could be built that would provide a sustainable amount of electrical output. So what we really get is a tax that will subsidize 3.1% of energy production.

Now assuming a nice round number of 300 million Americans 3.1% of those would be 9,300,000. So in reality the remaining 290+ million will be taxed to make those 9.3 million sleep better at night. Doesn't that make you feel all warm and cozy deep down inside.

On a side note here in Kentucky small co-ops provide services for a large portion of the Commonwealths population. Most of these co-ops allow for each household to even sign up for "clean" energy only. Needless to say a line has yet to form.

Obamaspeak

To understand someone who says one thing then turns around and does the exact opposite is quite infuriating to anyone who uses logic, has a brain, or consumes oxygen. However there are some people out there that have actually put together lists of what Obama actually means when he acts in this manner. Far be it from me to even attempt such project. Here is a short list of "Obamaspeak" and how it works...Make sure to go to the link to see the rest.

"1. The Budget. Wanting to cut $17 billion from the budget, as President Obama has promised, is proof of financial responsibility. Borrowing $1.84 trillion this year for new programs is "stimulus." The old phrase "out-of-control spending" is inoperative.

2. Unemployment. The number of jobs theoretically saved, or created, by new government policies - not the actual percentage of Americans out of work, or the total number of jobs lost - is now the far better indicator of unemployment.

3. The Private Sector. Nationalizing much of the auto and financial industries, while regulating executive compensation, is an indication of our new government's repeatedly stated reluctance to interfere in the private sector." [link]

Only If I Say So!

"First President in US History to Have Voted to Filibuster a Supreme Court Nominee Now Hopes for Clean Process!

In January 2006, then-Sen. Obama joined 24 colleagues in a futile effort led by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., to filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of now-Justice Samuel Alito." [link]

So in other words this is only good if it fulfills my own personal agenda! I don't give a ___ what America needs. I am so glad this dried up piece of dog doo is now our president, aren't you?

Goodbye Several Amendments in the Bill of Rights!

"A California federal judge ruled Thursday that mandatory DNA collection for all individuals facing federal felony charges is constitutional, dealing a setback to civil liberties advocates.

U.S. District Court Judge Gregory G. Hollows upheld the DNA Fingerprint Act, a 2006 law which allows federal law enforcement officials to collect DNA from individuals "arrested, facing charges, or convicted" of federal offenses. " [link]

Is it any surprise that this ruling came from a judge in the "land of the left"? I can deal with the part about convicted felons having their DNA on file. What I cannot stomach is just having DNA on file for those only arrested or facing charges.

Has anyone ever heard of due process, innocent until proven guilty, self incrimination? Judges that rule like this...well lets just say more oak trees need to be planted.

Obama Drug Czar to End "War on Drugs"!

Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske..."rejects the formulation of the “War on Drugs” and voices an inclination to treat American drug abuse as a national health challenge: In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation’s drug issues.

“Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them. We’re not at war with people in this country.” [link]

Oh, I see now! We are just going to change what we call it, but continue on with the same strategy that has cost billions of dollars, loss of life, and has led to the drug abuse epidemic growing at an exponential rate.

Remember a few posts back about how the left loves to use wording, verbage, and political correctness to try and win support without actually changing anything of substance?

They Will Never Get It

"...The City of Chicago had suffered nearly twice as many fatalities as all American soldiers in Iraq over the same period...the City tallied over 500 homicides, 80 percent of which were caused by gunshot wounds. In total, the social costs of gun violence in Chicago are estimated at $2.5 billion. Despite the devastating impact on local communities, federal gun control has essentially been taken off the table as a valid issue due to concerns of its unpopularity in elections. To reinstate such an important and consequential dialogue, Democrats must re-frame gun control as a pro-security measure." [link]

I don't happen to see any mention anywhere in the article that gun ownership in Chicago is for all intents and purposes illegal. So wouldn't logic dictate that making something that is already illegal in an area illegal again have no effect, or would the double emphasis on being illegal make all the difference?

Also notice the strategy that has been put forth, that of "re-framing" the issue. I posted yesterday about the mastery of the left in using language as a means of winning support. They change the focus but everything else remains the same. This is a tactic that has worked for them in many areas and one that liberty and freedom minded people need to be more aware of if we wish to stop the encroachment of our liberties.

Money Well Spent, Don't You Think?

I really had to roll my eyes at this one. I honestly cannot think of one single reason, even with my imagination in overdrive for spending U.S. Taxpayer dollars on this.

"The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job...The grant, made last November, refers to prostitutes as "female sex workers"--or FSW--and their handlers as "gatekeepers." [link]

One thing to keep in mind, notice how there is a change in language and noun usage to keep people from summoning mental images. "FSW" and "gatekeeper" what images would come to mind with whore and pimp. Doubt they would have been given $2.6 million if they would have used those terms.

The left excels at this practice. Using "assault weapon" instead of battle rifle or AR-15. "Automatic weapons" instead of the true label of semi-auto. "Extremists" rather than family oriented, deeply religious, or defenders of the Constitution.

They make it a word game and how they can shine whatever type of light on it they want to as long as they light they use benefits them or their agenda. Keep this in mind when you hear them speak and write. Look at how they use words and phrases. Be ever vigilant.