Fox Basically Has A Liberal Democrat Problem

I was having a late breakfast this morning, and I had the Fox News Show Happening Now on in the background, where a Mr. Joe Cirincione of the State Department was being interviewed by Jenna Lee about the current controversy regarding the nation of Iran. Cirincione has been hyped as some kind of nuclear expert and was giving his opinion about current worries about Iran's nuclear program. I wasn't really paying that much attention, until I heard him mention the name of GOP presidential primary candidate Herman Cain. When I heard what he said, I was so shocked I literally jumped up from my chair and practically ran into the living room. I was so shocked I wasn't exactly sure I had heard what I thought I had, so later I went on the Fox News website and found the Happening Now Blog.

Sure enough, others had heard it, and were commenting on it. One of the commenters was kind enough to supply what seems to have been a direct quote. Or if not, it was close enough to what I remembered I copied it and pasted it below, as follows-

"Iran basically has a Herman Cain problem, they both DID something terribly wrong in the past that is now being disclosed. It is humiliating to try to acknowledged what happened."

Like i said, I couldn't believe my ears, and evidently many others are equally outraged. Some blame Jenna Lee for not calling him, but frankly, what could she say? This interview had nothing whatsoever to do with Mr. Cain, and she clearly was not prepared for such an obvious political hit job.

Fox should issue an apology to Mr. Cain, his family, his campaign, and his supporters, which by the way I am not one, though I would have zero problem voting for him or supporting him should he win the nomination.

Furthermore, this Democratic apparatchik should no longer be invited on Fox to speak on any matter whatsoever. And while they're at it, there are a plethora of other leftists and liberal Democrats who should be given the boot.

One of these days the Koch Brothers or someone similar are going to realize that a cable news channel that in addition to hard news and investigative journalism, is devoted to the discussion of conservative issues with a minimum of liberal bullshit, would bury Fox along with every other "news" show currently running.

Fair and balanced. It was good while it lasted, but its run its course. You can only put up with a minimum of vermin infestation. Before long they get to the point where they start to take over, and then you have a problem. Before long, the integrity of your dwelling becomes so compromised it is no longer fit for human habitation. What happened today is just one sign among many that its time for Fox to call the exterminators.

UPDATE-Fox News has provided a video of the interview, so you can see for yourself. The entire video is 4:33. The offensive remark comes at roughly the 1:23 mark.



UPDATE-Welcome to readers of Doug Ross @ Journal and thanks to Doug for the link, and of course to my buddy Zilla for sending it to him.

Just A Cock On The Beat

Shepherd Smith went ballistic a few days ago when a couple of expert legal guests, in discussing the latest developments regarding the case of missing Kansas City baby Lisa Irwin, stated that sometimes the police are more interested in closing a case than they are in solving it. They also said plainly that sometimes cops will rush to judgment to the closest available suspect in order to do so. If you want to see somebody get their panties in a knot, watch the following video courtesy of Mediaite. Warning-its not pretty, but it is kind of, well, hilarious. He even defends the actions of policemen who in an earlier time arrested him and a friend for open container. Shep obviously loves him some po-po. 



This isn't the first time ol' Shep has exhibited hang-ups regarding the police. Just take a look at this Freudian slip from Shep's closet.



Now that's dedication to our men in blue. I thought it might be interesting to go digging into Shep's past, to see if I could find just what was the genesis of his devotion to our nation's law enforcement. Thankfully, police interrogations are typically videotaped and stored in archives for future reference. With some digging, I think I might have found the video of the interrogation Shep underwent so long ago which he alluded to in the first video. It's a little rough, but hey, who knows? I know he doesn't seem the type who would like things rough, but you never can tell about our Shep.

Report On Occupy DC

Michelle Fields deserves some kind of journalism award for her report on The Daily Caller, along with combat pay. At one point, protesters are blocking traffic, refusing to allow a man with a child to pass. They pushed an old woman to the ground, causing what was hopefully a minor injury. But they get all worked up when somebody stepped on the gas when a couple of the mangy assholes stepped out in front of their automobile, and the police let the driver of the car in question go. I'm not sure I get what the bit was with the woman, man and the two young kids, but it seems like they were acting in an untoward way toward the family and the woman let them all have it and then stormed off.

Throughout all of this, Michelle Fields was harangued by the Occupy protesters, who accused her of making up her reports while some of them chanted "Fuck the Daily Caller".

As hard as it is to believe, it is even worse than the video demonstrates. This all took place when Americans For Prosperity tried to conduct a conference entitled "Defending The American Dream Summit". The Occupy Protesters were trying to storm the meeting, and Fields, who had been assigned by the Daily Caller to cover the protests, was there to film the attempt.

Robert Stacy McCain, who was present at the seminar, interviewed Fields for his blog The Other McCain following the events on the videotape. According to her, they followed her around, purposely blocking her from interviewing any of the participants, and even insulted her clothes. Apparently they didn't like the company Ann Taylor, where they assumed she got her clothes. And according to her, they also screamed out repeatedly "Fuck Michelle Fields" although unfortunately not while she was in the process of recording them.

Yeah, these fucking animals are just like the Tea Party, huh? 

There's been a problem with the Daily Caller embed, so if it doesn't come through here, go to the link and watch it.

National Novel Writing Month

Can you write a novel by the end of the month? If so, you might be interested in National Novel Writing Month You are required to register on the site, where they can track your progress, offer you support, and supply a forum of like minded writers. If you get er done by the end of the month, you'll see it published on-line. I'm seriously thinking of giving it a shot. The catch is, it has to be 50,000 words or more. I'm not sure, but I think that works out to 1700 words a day, which is roughly five pages, I think. That is not as easy as it might sound, by the way. I just found out about this, so I don't know if I can do it without sacrificing time for other matters. Obviously, quality would be one of them.

But I think I do have a partial solution. Tarot cards. Yep, I'll draw a card at the end of every night, sleep on it, and craft the novel based on what card, or cards, I draw. 

It might be interesting, but I just wish I had known about it ahead of time. Unfortunately, I don't think there's any prizes, outside of the title, and of course the bragging rights. But if anything else, this might be a good motivational exercise.

The Artwork Of Marllyn Manson

Pictured-1947 Los Angeles murder victim Elizabeth Short, The Black Dahlia, as pictured by Marilyn Manson the artist. As you might suspect, there's more, much more, at the link.

Death Of A Street Poet

I've been trying to avoid letting my blog be taken over by the Occupy Wall Street movement, but there are some things that bear mention, and a Halloween death is impossible for me to ignore. Gateway Pundit tells the story of the for now unnamed homeless man, known for now only as "Street Poet", who died over Halloween while availing himself of the "hospitality" of the Occupy Oklahoma City protesters. It's pretty sad. The guy was a homeless drug addict who suffered from asthma, and over the previous two days before he was found dead in his tent, he complained of breathing problems. Instead of taking him to a clinic or an emergency room, the protesters housed him, fed him and fattened him for the slaughter. Now they have their symbol, an image of homelessness and despair to contrast against the "corporate greed" of the "1%". Here he is sometime before his death.



Wait and see if the Occupy Movement doesn't blame his death on capitalism and corporate greed. Uh, no, he rushed headlong into his own demise, however out of control he might have been, and he didn't get any help from you, you scumbag hipsters. In fact, capitalism didn't kill him. Wall Street didn't kill him. You sat back and fed him, encouraged him, listened to his sad attempts at rap, yet ignored his obvious need for medical attention. So if anyone is responsible for his demise, besides himself-that would be you. You let him die.

But hey, you good what you wanted. Another symbol, this one in the form of a needles, senseless death to exploit.

Yay. Good job, douchebags.

Hanging Zombie From The Walking Dead

Darryl and Andrea are looking for the missing Sophia when they run across a camp site, and something else.



Darryl relents and puts him out of his misery, with his trusty crossbow. Hell, why take a chance on the rope breaking anyway?

No One Like U

Haxan-A Great Witchcraft Film From The Silent Era

The following movie is actually just one segment from a silent film from 1922. Somebody added the soundtrack, a Satanic prayer. The film, named Haxan (The Witches), by Danish filmmaker Benjamin Christensen, was in fact a documentary based on Christensen's study of Malleus Maleficarum, which in the fifteenth century was a respected study of witches used by witch hunters and inquisitors. Christensen wanted to make a film which he hoped would explain the mythology behind witchcraft, and how the beliefs and legends grew over the centuries.

The following clip from the film is a dramatization of Christensen's vision, not of what he believed actually happened, but of what people genuinely believed, and feared, as he saw it.

Not surprisingly, the film was banned in the US and was heavily censored in much of Europe. Nevertheless, it has become recognized as one of the great cinematic achievements of the early film era.

Clown's Lament

Minotaur Art

This is the best rendering of the Minotaur I've ever seen. I started out looking for an old painting by an artist named George Frederick Watts, painted in the 1880's, when I found this. Unfortunately, I have no idea who did this artwork. All I know is its advertised as a "free wallpaper".

To me, to captures perfectly the inherent nature of the beast. The savagery, the insatiable blood lust, In addition to the sheer sense of debauchery and corruption that led to the creatures birth, hidden life, and ultimate demise.

I see the Minotaur as a symbol of the hidden, unconscious savage nature we constantly try to bury and contain within the hidden recesses of the unconscious mind. When we come face to face with him within our own private labyrinth, we are in effect coming face to face with our own inner beast.

House Of Horrors No Longer In Business

No, the man in the above photo is not going to a Halloween Party, he's actually standing outside the doors of his former abortion clinic in Rockford Illinois, taunting the Christians who used to stand outside his clinic on a regular basis protesting his business. Note I said former, because the business has now been shut down.

This was because of numerous safety and health violations that seemed to be a systemic problem with the clinic. The closing of this clinic, which transpired near the end of September, is important for a variety of reasons.

One, the fact that it was in Illinois, arguably the most liberal of all Midwestern states, dominated by the state Democratic Party and/or the Chicago machine, speaks to the reality of shifting attitudes. After all, when Roe v Wade was first decided in 1973, the science was far from settled as to whether or not an unborn child was truly alive. Now it has been settled, and there is no doubt that an unborn baby is alive, and has feelings and emotions. It's not just a glob of tissue. As such, more and more people are starting to view abortion in general as murder.

It's also important to note that, being in Rockford, the clinic was across the state line from Wisconsin, which has a parental notification law. This clinic provided a way out, a safe haven for teens who wished to acquire an abortion and avoid Wisconsin law. That avenue has now been thankfully closed. Nothing to me is more despicable than passing a law permitting abortions for young teen girls without notifying the child's parents, and for someone to take one across the state line in order to get an abortion should be grounds for a federal indictment, both of the responsible adult as well as the clinic operators.

And worst of all, not only does the left and the Democratic Party support this, they want the taxpayers to subsidize it. And they aren't asking nicely either.

I'm not one of these that favor outlawing abortion at the federal level, either by way of legislation or by constitutional amendment. But its high time Roe v Wade was overturned and the matter left to the purview of the individual states, including the matter of what to do with those adults who take children across state lines, for this or any other purpose, without their parents knowing consent.

Its just too bad there's no comprehensive way of dealing with those cases where an abortion might be justified, especially due to life and health issues, or rape. But it is what it is.

The Origin Of Bicycle Girl From The Walking Dead

To all of you fans of The Walking Dead, I'm sure you will remember the "Bicycle Girl" from last seasons premiere episode. Well, YouTube has a six part "Webisode" series which explains her origin. I decided to post the last part. If you want, you can go to YouTube and view all six webisodes by way of the link to this video.



One things for sure about The Walking Dead. It may damn well be the scariest show that's ever been on television. One thing that's beyond dispute is its damn well the nastiest.

Nowhere To Turn To, Nowhere To Hide

Since Halloween is a day when the dead walk the earth and we strive to pay them due honor and respect (or should) I want to say something about one kid who left this world far too quickly, and while here got little respect in life. His name was Jamey Roddermeyer, from Buffalo New York. He was bullied mercilessly by classmates, because he was supposedly a homosexual. Watch this video he made for the It Gets Better Project shortly before he died.



Notice the level of discomfort he betrays when talking about the level of support he had received from the homosexual community, and from strangers, which he says he knows "sounds creepy" as though he is trying to shrug off the germs. This happens at just after the 1:40 mark of this 2:05 minute video. In another part he inadvertently lowers his voice a slight degree as he glances around nervously, apparently at his bedroom door.

If this kid was a homosexual, then he was sick, in my opinion, in the throes of a delusion. So why in the hell harass him? Would you harass somebody that had cancer?

Of course, I'm wasting my time explaining this to heterosexual bullies, because 1, they don't give a damn, and 2, they don't give a damn. But its incumbent on parents and teachers to understand this phenomenon, and try to get some kind of control over it. After all, not all kids who are bullied are gay (not that it would make it all right if that was the case). Just recently, there was a young kid in Covington Kentucky who, like Jamey, committed suicide because he was constantly bullied. Yet, there was no indication at all that he was gay. He was Sam Denham a nice kid who just wanted to be friends with people and help those who needed help.

A sign of weakness to bullies, and probably to most kids. And there's the rub. Until we understand what causes bullying, it will not get better. This is a primal urge with roots back in prehistory, when the weak were outcast and even destroyed, or made completely subservient to the will of the strong. Bullying is just an outgrowth of that, and it was and is based on an unconscious drive aimed at strengthening the species. This is why a sick animal will be left behind by the herd, even its immediate family. While healthy enough to travel with the herd, they serve the function of being the prey to an attacking predator and thus enabling the others to escape with their hides intact. When they get too weak, or old, to keep up, then they no longer fulfill this function. In fact, they become a hindrance.

So when kids fight, or when they brutalize a smaller, weaker child, they are following the same pattern of asserting their authority, manhood, or worth to the tribe as two buck deers when they lock horns. The bullied kid is worth nothing more, and as a result has no self-worth.

There are ways of dealing with this, by sublimation, and in previous years sports provided a vital outlet. Now, however, in many schools, sports are frowned upon, at least in more "progressive" districts, discouraged by those who don't want to see any child excel or stand out above his or her peers. This mindset, while not prevalent in sports in most schools, yet, still rears its ugly head in other areas of public school, even in the grading system in many cases, while kids are hammered constantly with the demands that they treat all minority groups with a kind of respect that nearly amounts to deference. We are not allowed to express certain aspects of cultural pride in our own European ethnicity, or increasingly even pride as Americans. Yet, such ethnic and cultural and even religious pride is not only encouraged among minority children, it is expected, all but demanded of them.

Is it any wonder then that bullying, aggression, and hostility, having fewer and fewer outlets provided it for positive manifestation, has instead metastasized? And in the meantime, we as a society are encouraged to be supportive of homosexual behavior, which not too long ago was seen by mental health professionals as a sickness and a delusion (rightly in my opinion), to the extent that it almost seems as though homosexual activists are actually trolling public schools for naive, insecure boys and girls to indoctrinate, if you will. As such, homosexuals, in and out of the school yard, seem to be growing into more and more of a protected class status. And the more misguided educators and other adults encourage them to "come out", the more of a target they become.

Ironically, though I concede I might be wrong, I don't think Jamey was a homosexual. He might have been, he might not have been. He might have just been a weak, insecure kid going through puberty and not knowing how to deal with his feelings and the hormones raging through him. On the one hand, not having any "guy friends", only girlfriends, and facing constant bullying and harassment. Maybe he was nothing more than an effeminate boy who made an easy target.

For whatever reason, he reached out, and found aid and support from the homosexual community, and I'm sure he was quite popular. He received tons of support and encouragement from homosexuals and their supporters in the greater community, and seemed to have a supportive family as well.

Yet, he killed himself. How, I am not clear, though he was found in his family's front yard. Assuming he did really kill himself purposely, and not through an accidental overdose in a desperate attempt at self-medication, the question remains, why?

This is why I am personally convinced that he was not really a homosexual, he was just going through a great deal of confusion. Unfortunately he had no one to whom he could turn to, no one he could trust. On the one hand he was bullied by people who hated homosexuals, while on the other he was pressured to be a homosexual by gay activists and their supporters, in school and out. He had no choice in the matter, it seems, but to accept the fact that he was a homosexual. And at his age, that was a choice he not only didn't feel comfortable making, it was one he didn't have to make. Not at the age of fourteen.

Yes, he killed himself, but he had all kinds of help getting to that decision, from both sides of the issue, and no reason to not go through with it, from his perspective. After all, he wasn't just some messed up kid in desperate need of acceptance, love, and help. He was far more important than that. He was a symbol, and he was made to know that he had a responsibility, one that was greater than the feelings and insecurities of a fourteen year old boy.

He owed it to some obscene movement to speak for all of them, and to be out and proud. In the meantime, the bullies on one side of the issue hated him, and many other bullies from the other side of the issue wanted to go down on him. And the responsible adults in his life either didn't know the right way to deal with it, or in the case of the educators in his life, were hamstrung by political correctness if they cared at all.

You all helped kill this kid. Yay, good job douchebags.

The Nobodies

There will be a brief break from the typical fare here, as I get ready to, hopefully, post some Halloween and/or Samhain related material. A few things will be serious, most will just be fun or entertaining, and hopefully all of it will be interesting. One things for sure it will be different. I might post everything on hold and then post it all at once on Halloween. I haven't really decided yet.

In the meantime, enjoy the Manson video.

Susan Bradford And The Shocking Case Of John McCain And Jack Abramoff

Remember Jack Abramoff? Well, turns out he might have been innocent of the charges against him, the victim of a vengeful plot hatched by rival lobbyists and organized crime figures tied to Senator John McCain.

Susan Bradford has written a book about it, called Lynched!: The Shocking Story of How the Political Establishment Manufactured a Scandal to Have Republican Super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff Removed from Power [Paperback]

I recently ran across her blog, Susan Bradford Press, where on the post titled The Shamelessness Of The Washington Post Knows No Bounds she went into some detail mainly about the culpability of the Washington Post in helping to engineer the downfall of Abramoff. But in this post she also explains how the Posts villainy culminated in John McCain using his Senate influence to call a special committee hearing on behalf of his own lobbyist friends and Abramoff rivals, and how this was instrumental in Abramoff's persecution.

I was mainly curious as to whether she considered McCain to be a dupe, or whether he was willingly involved in the effort to intentionally destroy Jack Abramoff. I was pleasantly surprised to receive an answer from Susan the same day I posted the query, and she gave me permission to post it in full. It follows, along with a subsequent response from me, and again from Susan.

SUSAN BRADFORD-Thank you for writing. Is your question: was McCain duped in the Abramoff conspiracy? I know that legislators are tremendously busy and rely heavily upon the advice and judgments of others. Since I never interviewed McCain, I cannot answer with complete certainty.

However, according to Indians close to McCain, the Senator’s wife, Cindy, demanded that he take down Abramoff after losing the South Carolina primary of 2000 since she was under the mistaken belief that the lobbyist spread the rumor that she was a drug abuser.

There are a number of indications that McCain carefully orchestrated the take down of Abramoff. Many participants were offered/cut deals. For example, Louisiana Coushatta Council Member William Worfel, who defended Abramoff, changed his position after McCain invited him to appear in the hearings with the representation of Roy Fletcher, counsel McCain personally recommended to him after promising that he would amend the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, with the advice of Worfel. In addition, the firms involved were aligned with McCain.

McCain was personally close to the accusers. In fact, he even used his office to act on their behalf. The accusations brought forth against Abramoff in his hearings could easily have applied to McCain’s own fund raisers – including the exceptional fees Abramoff was able to command from tribes. Lobbying firms close to McCain micro-managed the hearings, investigation, and media to acquire the results they sought.

McCain, in turn, used the information he had acquired to challenge political opponents, like JD Hayworth — and others, by threatening to either turn the investigation on them or slander them by tarring them with the Abramoff scandal.

In fact, he used the scandal, after removing from power a lobbyist who had thwarted his presidential ambitions in 2000, to position himself for a second presidential run in 2008. McCain was no innocent bystander.

What is unclear is what and how much he knew. My view is that McCain is an incredibly savvy and ruthless political operator who knew exactly what he was doing and was arrogant enough to think he could get away with it.

Rather shocking for many people, wrongful convictions are becoming more common than not.

I am glad you are asking questions and seeking out the truth. Our country needs more people like you!:)

Please keep in touch — and thank you for your post!
Reply
On October 26, 2011 at 8:52 pm ThePaganTemple said:

TPT-You’re welcome. Actually, I was wanting to do a post about this on my blog. Would you mind if I use your reply in my post? I’m assuming its all right with your attorney for you to talk about it. This is really some interesting stuff here, and could be very important. I for one never questioned Abramoff’s guilt. I just assumed everything I had heard was basically the truth. I was never a McCain fan though, so this doesn’t really surprise me, other than it ever seeing the light of day. If the truth was known, this is probably the tip of the iceberg.

On October 26, 2011 at 11:08 pm susanbradfordpress said:

SB-I would be deilghted if you would! What was uncovered is the tip of the iceberg, as you said. My book, Lynched, which is available on my website (www.susanbradford.org) and on Amazon, does provide a full and detailed account of what actually transpired over the investigation, if you are interested. Look forward to reading your post! Thanks again!:)

There the conversation ends, and I think I should point out that the reason I made the statement that I assumed her attorney was all right with her discussing this is because there is currently a lawsuit in the works, in which Susan Bradford is seeking damages from The Huffington Post. The Post, the lawsuit claims, made an agreement with Bradford to publish her story, and then reneged on the agreement. At some later date, however, they published the story and attributed it to a different author.

I just learned all of this today and am still digging. Sometime tomorrow I'll try to update with some links pertaining to the suit.

For now though I'll just end this by saying that if this is true-and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt Ms Bradford or her story-this could be really big, and a lot of people could go down, not the least of whom is Senator John McCain.

Stay tuned.

Ask Not For Whom The Hipster Comes-He Comes For Thee

Sometimes you can only push a hipster so far even if you do so under the cover of authority. He might put up with so much, but once you cross that line then by golly it's on. Witness the following scumbag hipster who in the following video declares war on the Oakland Police Department for their recent actions against #OccupyOakland.

He's a former security guard. He has a pair of handcuffs. He knows how to use them. And he's coming for you, Oakland PD. And when he gets there-

You. Are. Under. Arrest.



H/T The Other McCain

Mitt Romney-Future Ten Commandments Of The Once And Future God

Some might remember a while back when Rick Perry was introduced at the Value Voters Summit by a certain Baptist Minister who proclaimed that Mormonism, the religion of Perry rival Mitt Romney, was a cult. It caused a firestorm of controversy. Many conservative bloggers considered it a distraction which the liberal media would gleefully use to tear apart any conceivable hope of Republican unity. Even many of those who support Rick Perry, such as Emperor Misha, quickly jumped to Romney's defense. Such vile anti-Mormon bigotry has no place in electoral politics according to Misha, owner of The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.

Meanwhile, Lemuel Calhoun of Hillbilly White Trash is more or less in agreement to the extent that a person's religion should not be the determining factor as to his or her worth or ability to be president so long as that person follows and adheres to the constitution. However, Lem points out that it is wrong to demand that any other presidential candidate deny that Mormonism is a cult, and goes on to relate some key beliefs of Mormon doctrine. From Lem's post-

Mormons do not believe that God is eternal. They believe that he was born a mortal human in the distant past on a distant planet (a long long time ago in a galaxy far far away) and that he earned his godhood by perfect obedience to the Mormon religion. They believe that upon his death he was judged worthy and elevated to godhood and that he then called out the name of all his wives who then were elevated to the status of goddesshood. That he then formed his own heaven and earth (our earth) out of already existing materials and began populating his heaven by having sex with his goddess wives, who became pregnant and gave birth to babies who had only spirit bodies. The first of his spirit children was Jesus and the second was Lucifer. They call this life in spirit form before getting a body "the preexistence".

Lem goes on to explain that all Mormons who qualify by adherence to the faith will at some point repeat this same process. Having read this, on reflection it gradually dawned on me exactly what Romney's true goals might be.

Mitt Romney is running for President because he figures it will be good practice for the day he becomes-wait for it-

The god of his own planet!

With this in mind, I've done some digging, and come up with what I believe to be an accurate summary of Mitt's future Ten Commandments. They are as follows.

Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me, For I Am The Lord Thy God And Must Come First!

Thou Shalt Have No Graven Images Unless They Are Edgy Or Unless They Make A Statement!

Thou Shalt Not Take The Name Of The Lord Thy God In Vain Unless Thou Art Really Pissed Off! Or It Makes A Salient Point! Or It Sounds Cool Or Funny!

Remember The Sabbath Day To Keep It Holy Unless Something More Important Comes Up!

Honor Thy Father And Thy Mother So Long As They Do Not Become A Burden Unto Thee!

Thou Shalt Not Kill Unless Thou Hast A Darn Good Reason!

Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery Unless Thou Make Darn Sure No One Knows!

Thou Shalt Not Steal Those Things Thou Needs Not!

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor When Thou Hast Nothing To Hide!

Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife, House, Or Possessions Unless Thy Neighbor Is A Prick!

Now that's what I call a caring, devoted God for the ages, always ready to offer absolution, salvation, and most important of all-wiggle room.

See Dick's Dick. See Jane's Mouth. Suck, Jane, Suck

Robert Stacy McCain nails it in this post about the current state of sexual education and, if recent events in the New York school system are any indication of what's coming nationally, soon your kids will be nailing it as well. And by "it" I'm not talking about the honor role.

And this is not high school students. This is 11-year-olds. This is New York-

New York City 11-year-olds will soon be learning sex education from workbooks that include instruction on “mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral and anal sex, and “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant.”
The shocking revelations were uncovered in “recommended” workbooks reviewed by The New York Post. . . .
One of the preferred resources for students is Columbia University’s website, “Go Ask Alice,” the Post reported. That site includes discussions on topics ranging from “doggie-style,” oral sex with braces, fetishes, and “sadomasochistic sex play.”

As for how this story applies nationally, here's the new rules from the Department of Education-

Starting in the spring, the DOE will require one semester of sex ed in sixth or seventh grades and one in ninth or 10th.
It says schools can pick any curriculum but recommends the widely used HealthSmart and Reducing the Risk programs and trains teachers to use them.

By the time most kids graduate, its up in the air whether they can read or write in comprehensive sentences or perform simple math. But at least they'll know how to perform every sex act known to man.

And besides, how in the hell can a young girl have any real kind of self-esteem if she can't suck a mean dick while she's wearing braces?

Attention Please-That Rotten, Putrid Stench You Smell Is NOT Coming From The Kitchen

Here we have an Occupy Wall Street progressive fuckstick interrupting the meal of patrons of a restaurant owned by Danny Meyer, who sits on the board of Sotheby's. In fact, that's the reason for the disruption, which the thug promises will continue until Meyer, and Sotheby's, stops engaging in "union busting".

Frankly, I'd like to see somebody bust this little cocksuckers head open with a baseball bat.

New York Lawmakers Told "Time To Kill The Wealthy"

According to Politico that is the subject line in an e-mail sent to Republican New York State Senate leaders concerning a New York State surcharge on the wealthy which was passed in 2009 and is due to expire. The e-mail in question demanded the tax be renewed. The tax levies an extra one percent tax on anyone making over 200,000 dollars a year, and a extra 2.12 percent on those making over 500,000 dollars a year. One part of the e-mail states-

“It’s time to tax the millionaires!” reads the email, according to WTEN in Albany. “If you don’t, I’m going to pay a visit with my carbine to one of those tech companies you are so proud of and shoot every spoiled Ivy League [expletive] I can find.”

To be sure the message was clear, the sender got even more specific-

“How hard is it for us to stake out one of the obvious access roads to some tech company, tail an employee home and toss a liquor bottle full of flaming gasoline through their nice picture window into their cute house,” wrote the author of the email.

The message asserted that the "wealthiest 1 percent" were being assisted in the confiscation of the wealth of the bottom ninety-nine percent, as though the wealthiest Americans were thieves who stole their riches from the poor.

This is presumably an outgrowth of the recent Occupy Wall Street Movement, which has been recently promoted and supported by the media, 9/11 Truthers, Stormfront, the SEIU and other unions, and progressive activists, leftist celebrities, Mahmoud Ahmadinajahd and the Iranian regime, Democratic lawmakers, and, oh yeah, Barak Obama.

New York Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo is on record as joining the Republicans in the state legislature in opposing as extension of the surcharge on wealth. No word as yet as to whether he also received a copy of the e-mail in question.

But there can be no doubt that these people are dangerous, and need to be dealt with in a way that is direct and, let's just say, definitive.

Huntsman Brings Out The Big Cannons

Jon Huntsman, the moderate GOP presidential candidate whom Democrats really want Republicans to nominate for 2012, has unveiled his super secret weapon. It seems to have slowly sunk in that he's not going to get the nomination based on his good looks, any more than he will as a former political appointee of Barak Obama, whom he once praised in the most sickeningly saccharine and effusive terms.

His new strategy? Their names are Liddy, Abby, and Mary Ann, and they are his daughters. What time they haven't been posting to their blog on the Huffington Post, they have been making campaign appearances both on the stump and on the cable news networks and talk shows.

And, in order to really get the message out, they have started their own Twitter account, Huntsman Daughters. They've already got their own fan club, but do they have what it takes to get their dad into the Oval Office?

Uhhhm, no, and I don't think they're seriously thinking they can. Since two of the three girls are single, I think they're husband hunting, or maybe just engaged in some other degree of self-promotion. Which is fine. I'm all in, and am now on record as asking the Hunstman Sons-In-Law if I can have sloppy seconds. So far, no answer to that, or to these tweets to the girls I made from my Twitter page. Their tweets follow the RT, my response follows the double slash marks.

@Jon2012girls RT Liddy just woke up to this nice man holding her hand on the plane//Sounds like Liddy woke up just in the nick to time.

@Jon2012girls RT @jon2012boys only wish they were the son-in-laws//Don't be arrogant, I for one would have to get to "know" you first.

@Jon2012girls the only girl married is Abby/Damn that's the one I want too. Figures.

@Jon2012girls RT check out our blog: tinyurl.com/3e77kyr /Really girls-HuffPo? You understand Jon's running for the GOP nomination, right?

@Jon2012girls RT Huntsman speaks in NH-fellow GOP candidates in NV unionleader.com/article/201110… /Clever move-Jon might get to 5% or 6 % in NH now

@Jon2012girls RT "Who's the best candidate to beat Obama?" HINT: He's not on stage in Nevada tonight// Buddy Roehmer?

All in fun of course, but I did feel it my duty to make the girls face the cold, hard facts. I don't know if they've ever read any of my tweets, of course, but if they have, I'm sure they don't take me seriously, any more than I do them or their father, who is probably a good man, but just not the right man for the job. Not this year, and probably not ever, as Jon Huntsman represents a style of Republican politics that is frankly on the endangered species list.

And I stand by that. Jon Huntsman is being used, possibly of his own volition, as a stalking horse to keep Romney from getting the nomination. The reason being that the people backing him on this foolish, ill-advised run have it in their heads that a successful Huntsman candidacy would result in a man who many conservatives would absolutely refuse to support, due to his past statements in support of the belief in Anthropogenic Global Climate Change and gay civil unions, in addition to his moderate approach to compromise with the Democrats,and also due to the fact he has worked for two Democrat Administrations, going so far as to express admiration for both Clinton and, especially, Barak Obama.

Democrats know that Hunstman would be the reincarnation of the Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, John McCain style of campaign that would limit if not outright refuse to engage in "negative campaigning" (which is how Democrats define telling the truth about their policies and candidates)and will treat Obama with deference and respect.

On the other hand, should Huntsman lose, the hope is it would nevertheless result in enough votes drained from Romney as to result in the nomination of someone who is seen as too far right-wing to get the votes of moderate independents and moderate or conservative Democrats who might be dismayed at the results of Obama policies.

From the perspective of the Democrats, the one candidate they fear most is Romney. Or this was the case when Huntsman first started his run. I think now they've started to realize they have no more to fear from Romney than they do Huntsman. For that reason, the Hunstman campaign just cannot and will not gain any traction with GOP voters, for the same reason Romney has never been able to break thirty percent in polling of Republican voters, including likely voters, despite being the only establishment candidate in the race with any support at all.

Most Republicans want to win, but not at the expense of compromising conservative principles. That is the implication of a Romney campaign, and the idea of a Hunstman candidacy is Romney times two.

The girls do make a good case. Just not for their dad. For themselves, as devoted daughters, yes. But if they do ever see my tweets to them, I hope this is the one they take the most seriously, though it might be the hardest one to take.

@Jon2012girls Sorry girls, Jon should concentrate on one day being God of his own planet. He'll damn sure never be President of the US.

If You're A Conservative Republican Woman, Joe Biden Wants You To Get Raped

Hey, that's no lie, he said it and he meant it.

Also, if you're a conservative Republican business owner he wants you to get robbed.

And if you're a conservative Republican parent, he wants your children to be kidnapped and molested.

That way see you'd understand what it was like and you would stop opposing Obama's job plan that includes hiring more police (and other public sector union workers).

Of course Democrats could always drop their strident gun laws which make it difficult and/or prohibitively expensive for law-abiding citizens to own firearms, in which case crime would drop substantially among all categories and there would be no need to hire extra police.

But hey, we all know that's a crazy idea. We will always need as many public sector employees as possible, and since they are putting so many states in the red, the feds have an obligation to step up and foot the bill. Everybody wins, except the Democrats, the public sector unions, and, well, those other crooks and rapists.

Liberal Democrat Senators Mind Your Own Business So You Don't Have To

Hey, who the hell said there's not a lot of difference between Democrats and Communists?

Oh yeah, that would be me.

And they seem bound and determined to prove my point yet again, by calling for Major League Baseball to impose a voluntary ban on smokeless tobacco during the upcoming World Series between St. Louis and Texas.

See, this is how clever these progressives are. Dick Durbin of Illinois (the number two Dem asshat in the Senate), along with Frank "DeCavalcade" Lautenberg of New Jersey, Tom "Ethanol Subsides" Harkin of Iowa, and Richard "Prosecutorial Misconduct" Blumenthal of Connecticut, aren't threatening to pass a law or anything, they want Major League Baseball, and the Player's Association, to ban smokeless tobacco on a voluntary basis-you know, for the good of the chiiiii-dren. This, of course, is their fall back strategy when accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia and general intolerance start to lose their respective edges. They trot out the kids and try to tug at the heartstrings by appealing to our sense of responsibility and what not. It's the old commie diversionary tactic I like to call the commie two-stomp. Step back, obfuscate, reverse course, sidestep, and then go full steam ahead towards the ultimate goal. You know, that one that never changes with these scum, which is full on government control of all aspects of the economy, and society at large. They can't even leave our national pastime in peace.

As witnessed at St Louis Today

Durbin and three other Democratic senators asked the Major League Baseball Players Association to prohibit use all tobacco products on the field, in the dugout and even in locker rooms at Major League Baseball parks.

Who would be affected by seeing the players use tobacco in THE FUCKING LOCKER ROOMS is yet to be explained. Thankfully, they can't pass a law as it stands now because HAW HAW HAW the Commiecrats lost control of the House of Representatives last year.

Oh, but before they lost the House, earlier in April 2010, Democratic Lefty Lunatic Henry Waxman did call for a law banning smokeless tobacco from Major League Baseball. It didn't get anywhere probably because, unfortunately, far too many people were obsessed with such mundane matters as, you know, FINDING A FUCKING JOB!

Now of course the Democrats are reduced to using a great sport as a political whipping post, which makes you wonder in just how bad of disarray, just how desperate, the Democrats are. Unemployment is still at over nine percent and we just had a plot to kill diplomats on American soil sponsored by, allegedly, the Iranian regime, the housing market is still in the crapper, the world is still full of people who want to either rip us off or destroy us, or both, the borders are as porous as ever, and we are on track to break twenty trillion dollars in national debt, and can't do anything to reverse course, while lowlife scumbags are piling into the streets making all kinds of unreasonable demands, and the government is doing everything it can to disrupt job creation by the private sector.

But Dick Durbin still marks time on his calendar for this. And people wonder why I will no longer vote for a Democrat under any scenario. But if you are one of the ones who do wonder why people like me make such a big deal about it, it's really pretty simply. If Democrats can find excuses to extend their dictatorial objectives during the absolute shittiest of times like we have now, just imagine what they will try to get away with when times are good, should We The People become more complacent.

One way they accomplish this is by giving you something you want, or need, and think you just can't live without it and must be supplied or subsidized by the government. In the case of Major League Baseball, they have enjoyed close to a century of exemption from the confines of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which makes Major League Baseball a legally recognized monopoly.

This could easily be revoked at any time by a significant court challenge, or possibly even by a legislative act which would probably be upheld this go-round, which of course gives Congress a great deal of leverage.

The anti-trust exemption could and should be ended, in all honesty. That would put a stop to at least this avenue of interference.

Because frankly, the likes of Dick Durbin should be allowed no closer to Major League Baseball than the cheap seats. Unless of course its by way of a baseball bat up the side of the head, but that's probably asking for too much, unfortunately.

Donald Douglas-Struck By The Poison Of Progressive Ideology

Zilla Of The Resistance is now Zilla For The Defense of a fellow blogger who is being unfairly maligned by his leftist enemies. His name is Donald Douglas and he blogs at the American Power.

According to Douglas-

Some time back, one of my colleagues suggested that no matter what the nature of online disagreements, no matter how intense or vile, taking such disagreements to an opponent's employer is outside the bounds of decency: it is simply un-American. And I would add that when those same workplace complaints involve blatant and patently false allegations amounting to libel, those taking such actions are not only un-American, but genuinely satanic. And I have to apologize to longtime readers who might be getting bored with such blogging, but writing about the progressive left's perpetual campaign of personal destruction, against my economic livelihood, is how I'm able to deal with the issues, keep my sanity, and of course clear my good name. As I noted earlier, there is essentially no lie that's beyond the pale for the radicals. They'll do anything to destroy opponents. And they don't stop. And virtually to the one, the complaints leveled against me have been pure lies. I'm not going to recount them. All of this is of a piece. But since many on the left are coordinating these attacks, the frequency seems to be accelerating. I'll soon know more about the latest round of allegations and lies. In the meantime, here's a roundup of the workplace attacks I've defended against now for almost three years. In each case, there's never been any finding of impropriety or wrongdoing. In fact, the opposite's been true: Accusers have been revealed as the hateful demonic scum that they are. RTWT

The page which contain links to numerous examples of personal and workplace harassment is here-

The problem seems to be three-fold. Professor Douglas is-

*A university professor
*A devout Christian
*A staunch, unabashed conservative who blogs unapologetically for conservative principles and against the politics of the radical left.

As such, he has made many enemies. One of these is E. D. Kain, one of the founders of the blog The League Of Ordinary Gentlemen.

Kain for his part has accused Douglas of defamation and joined the chorus of those who have complained to Douglas's employer. This in particular seems to have something to do with Douglas's criticisms of Kain due to the latter's seeming change of political allegiance over time. I of all people could certainly be sympathetic to Kain, as my views have also evolved, though in the opposite direction. However, when Kain contacted the University, he went way over the line, which he himself admitted in a comment at the post in question.

Only problem is, after posting the apology Kain evidently complained again to Douglas's employer, and demanded that he refrain from any criticism of him on his blog, allegedly going so far as to demand the blog be shut down.

But its not just Kain, there are more engaged in harassment of Douglas, and the charges run the gamut from defamation to accusations of involvement in child pornography.

This is the left, and this is what they do. Freedom of speech, it seems, means freedom to join their cause and act in agreement with their principles, but does not apply to those who hold an opposing viewpoint. But to take it to the extent of harassing employers and fellow employees, or family, unfortunately is not seen as out of bounds to the hard core left.

Full disclaimer. Unlike Douglas, I am not a Neocon, and I would probably find more disagreement with him over pertinent issues than agreements. Truthfully, I don't see Neocons as conservative at all, I see them as pro-national security, anti-communist liberals, which is what they are. As such, they tend to also be Big Government conservatives, and liberal in almost all matters not related to national security, and on many matters that are as far as how they perceive the proper way of going about achieving their policy goals.

But I still respect them and steadfastly defend their right to express their views, on their own blogs and elsewhere. For anyone to attack them to the point of harassment in their personal and professional lives is clearly beyond the pale, and totally unacceptable.

Can there be any question of what life would be like under any kind of leftist regime, especially one with unchecked power.

Canadian Idiot

Blinded By The Light

I have no idea whether or not the following story is true, but if it does turn out to be valid its going to send shock waves through the GOP. Apparently, someone, an unidentified source from inside the camp of GOP Florida Senator Marco Rubio, has informed Robert Stacy McCain of the blog The Other McCain, that someone on Rubio's staff has been trying to influence the GOP Republican presidential primary calendar. The person or people involved, which may or may not include Rubio himself, have been instrumental in moving up the date of the primary, in what would seem to be a transparent attempt to benefit the then current front runner, Mitt Romney. If true, the plan is as clever as it is diabolical, as it presupposed that New Hampshire, which has a state law declaring they must have the first primary in the nation, will be obliged to likewise move up the date of their own primary. New Hampshire also heavily favors Romney at the current time. All of this has caused not just New Hampshire, but other states, specifically Iowa, South Carolina, and Nevada to move their caucus and primaries up as well.

So, whether or not Rubio is involved directly or indirectly, what does he get out of this? Presumably, he would be picked as Mitt Romney's running mate.

As you can imagine, this has, or will cause much anxiety among conservative circles, most of whom see Rubio as a kindred conservative spirit while viewing Mitt Romney as an establishment favorite, and a bit of a squish. While Romney's support has held steadily in the mid-to-upper twenty percent of GOP voters, he never seems to rise above that due to his moderate, RINO reputation based mainly on his identification with big government conservatism at best, and at worst his support for such left-leaning policies as universal health care and a belief in Anthropogenic Global Climate Change, to name just a few things.

If Rubio is perceived as having betrayed the conservative Tea Party movement in order to secure a place on the ticket with the RINO Romney, it could be bad news for the Republican cause.

But should it really be a surprise? Rubio hails from Florida, a battleground state, and though he is seen as a Tea Party conservative, is he really? Conservatives have since his election, and well before, heaped praises on his head, and hailed him as one of the saviors of conservative principles. Yet all the while Rubio seems to have been taken under the wing of the Bush dynasty, particularly ex-Florida governor Jeb Bush, and was invited by Nancy Reagan to speak at the Reagan Library, where at one point he prevented Mrs. Reagan from falling, in an episode that almost seemed staged to me.

At 40, Rubio is a relatively young man, practically a kid in political terms, yet here he is one the one hand the object of near-veneration by the Tea Party, yet feted by and absorbed into the establishment club. Having had a small taste of the potential of the power and influence of Washington politics while rarely questioned or met with a critical eye, should we not have expected this?

This is of course presuming the story is true and that Rubio is himself knowingly involved if it is true. It might well be that the story comes from a plant in the Rubio camp, possibly even a Perry supporter. But the story bears watching, and it will be interesting to see how Rubio responds, if he does.

Whatever the case, conservatives should take from this an object lesson. Being possibly majority Christian, they more than most should be aware of the dangers of the allure of political power and influence. You can dress a man in royal raiment, and tell him in so many words that he's "a god, not a man". Do it long enough and he might even take you seriously on some level. Then by the time that old owl hoots, more often than not the corruption has already done its work, and irreversible damage.

UPDATE-When questioned about McCain's report, Marco Rubio issued a sternly worded denial, ending with "Hahaha". That Marco, such a jovial sort. Even accused McCain-the apparent "they" of the denial-of making the report up "out of thin air". Here's a portion of Rubio's statement, courtesy of The Shark Tank

“Don’t you think if something like that had happened, you would have heard something? 100% fiction, they just made it up out of thin air . . . Ok, BTW, if this were true, it means you got scooped in you own state!!!! Hahaha”

So what exactly is the truth? Who knows? Rubio admits to spearheading the effort to move Florida's primary up in 2007, so I guess that could serve to give him some plausible deniability cover. And then there's this, from The Shark Tank post linked above-

the recent move by the Florida legislature was carried out by a committee spearheaded by House Speaker Dean Cannon and House Majority Leader Carlos Lopez-Cantera- both have endorsed Governor Rick Perry in the Presidential primary.

Convoluting matters further, one of Perry’s top campaign consultants was also Governor Charlie Crist’s consultant during the 2010 Senate race before Crist jumped ship and ran as an Independent, and that Perry’s Florida team was being led by Rich Heffley, Jim Rimes and Randy Enwright. Heffley was responsible for fabricating the infamous “truthaboutRubio” attack website against now Senator Rubio.

So the initial link could be a concerted effort by Perry staffers and former Crist operatives to hurt both Romney and Rubio and in the meantime deflect from the involvement of the Perry campaign apparatus for their role in the primary calendar debacle, something R S McCain has been in the forefront of critical reporting about.

Still all in all, I'm not ready yet to absolve Rubio of complicity. Strange bedfellows and all that.

One thing is for sure. Once the jovial smiles and the joking was over, I bet Rubio started going through his staff with a fine toothed comb. Expect at least one head to roll.

Parents Declare War On Battle Creek Michigan School District

It seems the parents there do have quite a problem with a science book that proclaims Al Gore to be an "eco-hero".

It can't get much worse than that. But there is more-

Thirty-five school districts are using the seventh-grade science kits this year, including Vicksburg, Otsego and Schoolcraft in the Kalamazoo area.

The book holds up Al Gore as an “eco-hero;” promotes organizations such as Greenpeace and Rainforest Alliance; urges children to persuade their parents to “Vote Green” and buy organic; cautions against new-home construction, the plastics industry and conventional agriculture, and notes “many people believe that it is best for the earth for families to have no more than one child.”

I bet most of those kids in that district don't know the first thing about science past the 101 basics, if indeed that much. Granted, this was a seventh grade text, but that's not really the point. In science, and in practically all other courses, everything in the way of practical knowledge must take a backseat to political correctness and indoctrination. This is the primary if not the sole reason why the US is so far behind the developed world, and beyond, in science, math, and practically every other subject.

I bet if you asked these kids why they shouldn't mix sulfuric and hydrochloric acid they'd probably guess "because it's a bad trip?"

Tea Party Versus the Occupy Scumbags

I have been, so far unsuccessfully, trying to find the joyous news of an Occupy Fargo scumbag who lost his worthless life when he fell off a bridge. Until such time that I can regale you with the specifics of this happy report, enjoy the compare and contrast of this video, in which some Tea Party people risked their lives, or at least a case of severe nausea, by walking into the serpents den that is the Occupy DC protest movement.



It's pretty easy to tell the difference between the two groups. One group, the Tea Party, believes in limited government, liberty, free-markets, and bathing. The other group, the Occupy movement, are various degrees of socialists, fascists, and word on the street is there are a fair number of Ron Paul followers as well. Which if true is possibly the one and only thing the two groups have in common.

Well, aside from the fact that, legally, both are predominantly American citizens, and that the Occupy crowd is also made up of, allegedly, human beings.

H/T Say Anything Blog

Mutiny For The Bounty

The Other McCain shares this video that warmed the cockles of my little heart. After all, the unwitting recipient of the crowd's disdain is the same idiot who supported Obamacare on the grounds that the government has the right to force you to pursue your "constitutional right" to the pursuit of happiness. If you don't believe that, I blogged about it here, where you can also see the video where he makes this outrageous claim.

Therefore, when I saw the Occupy Wall Street hipsters put Democratic Congressional thug John Lewis in his place, my initial thoughts were, well they can't be all bad. Watch the fun as Lewis becomes more and more frustrated. You can almost hear him thinking out loud, "don't these people know who the hell I am? I'm Civil Rights "hero" John Lewis. How dare they say I'm no better than they are!"



When I remember how Lewis was one of a group of Black Congressional Caucus members who one time strolled through a Tea Party crowd and later lied, claiming people in the crowd shouted "nigger" and spat on him, I found myself wondering if this crowd would meet the same criticism. But of course that's not going to happen. After all, this protest, and all the other similar ones across the nation, are supported by the powers that be. Not just by the SEIU and other unions, and by activists such as World Can't Wait and Code Pink. They are also supported by Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and other Democrats, who disingenuously compare them to the Tea Party. Yes, the Democratic Party supports this nationwide movement, including the Occupy Philadelphia group that recently marched through the streets of Philadelphia carrying a Soviet flag.

So what do they want, this motley crue of Ron Paul supporters, hipsters, and various stripes of progressives and socialists? Well, besides free stuff, that is. They would seem to want a more fair, equitable distribution of the nation's wealth, jobs, better pay, and of course a higher tax rate on all those that they demand provide them with all of these goodies. And of course they want relief from the burdens of those student loans they've been unfairly saddled with. After all, can they help it that there just isn't that great a demand these days for PoliSci, Sociology, Economics, and Anthropology grads?

But although these things might have provided the original impetus, there is very likely much more to it than that.

Sunday on Face The Nation, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain declared, to a teary-eyed Bob Schieffer, that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is nothing more than a blatant attempt to distract from the failed policies of the Obama Administration by focusing public outrage at the banks, and Wall Street, who by the way overwhelmingly supported the election of Obama in 2008 against John McCain.

All in all, this movement is one that should be welcome, if anything, as a sign of the on-going implosion and disintegration of the left as they stumble through their on-going divorce from reality.

Ed Schultz At Half Wits End

This might be one of the most entertaining videos I've ever posted. It shows two leftist idiots from MSNBC going at each other. Ed Schultz is speaking in support of Obama's jobs plan, and Dylan Rattigan is saying it doesn't go nearly far enough. After so long, a frustrated and visibly angry Schultz calls it off.

When far left commie loon Ed Schultz represents the moderate faction of your party, you know you've got real fucking problems. This might well be a foretaste of a serious problem among the American left. Hey, I know how they might resolve their differences. Bullets.

H/T Bluegrass Pundit

Occupy Portland Finds The Perfect Spokesperson

As we know, the Occupy Wall Street movement has spread across the country, to such diverse places as Washington DC, to Louisville and Lexington Ky, and-Portland Oregon. The following YouTube video is a perfect representation of the kind of folks one might find at such an event. Much thanks to Ace of Spades HQ for digging up this fine specimen of humanity.

Trust-New Single By Bitter Ruin

Just discovered this and thought it was worth sharing.

The Walking Brain Dead

FilmLadd has a brutal evisceration of Bill O'Reilly, who just cant seem to see the trees for the forest. O'Reilly seems to live in a world where everyone basically has the best of intentions. They're just wrong. Thus, in his world view, George Soros is nothing more than a greedy capitalist, a kind of modern day Robber Baron who manipulates social unrest for his own personal power and enrichment. Barak Obama truly loves America and is a patriot. He just has a skewed ideological vision of what is best for the country and for "the folks".

And the Occupy Wall Street Movement, which has just recently expanded to other areas, including Washington D.C.'s K-Street and even to Lexington Kentucky? They're just a bunch of hippies who want free stuff, or equality, or whatever, but nobody should take them seriously, according to O'Reilly. Soon, these same socialist ideologues will follow in the footsteps of their sixties forebears. They themselves will occupy Wall Street in the form of investment bankers and stock-brokers. They will no longer rail against the system. They will be the system.

It is all too clear however that the repercussions today could be much more serious, with longer lasting implications, and one must wonder to what extent Obama is involved with the movement, albeit in the background, though publicly encouraging such random acts of public protest as resulted in one group taking possession of the Brooklyn Bridge, which in turn necessitated the arrest of more than seventy protestors.

Robert Stacy McCain in the meantime points out another group of allies the sixties hippy crowd never had-the unions, particularly the SEIU, along with myriads of others, including teachers.

It's all a bit murky to me. O'Reilly is correct about one thing. Most of this crowd are gravely disappointed in Obama, whom they feel has let them down, whom they believe has sold out to the Wall Street crowd. In fact, this is true in a sense. He sold out to them during his first campaign. Wall Street by and large donated more money to him than to McCain, more possibly than to any other candidate, Democrat or Republican, in history.

Still, there can be no doubt that Obama wants to shore up his leftist base, and so has no compunction about using weasel words to the effect that the Occupy Wall Street Movement speaks for a large and growing disaffection across the country.

One of the protestors is a man I have had a terse acquaintance with for some time. In fact, Troutsky is on my blogroll. (yes, I have some commies on my blogroll). He certainly has no love lost for Obama or the Democrats. Still, note how the old trout guide waxes poetic in this post about how he is working on the sidelines, or as he puts it, on the periphery, and adds this bit of warning to those unions who don't toe the line.

It's great to see SEIU down at Zucotti Square but I hope someone asks them about California health care workers. Because their union is actively scabbing and trying to break a courageous strike. It is time for honest critique of EVERYTHING, just get it out in the open and talk.

It would seem as though healing the sick and saving lives must, alas, take a back seat to the glorious cause of civil unrest and property theft. So what to make of all of this? If you're out and about on your daily routine to and from work, the store, seeing to business matters, etc., what should you do if you run into a horde of these devoted progressives trying to stick it to the man? What can you do? You certainly have to keep a watchful eye and if possible, take judicious notes. Capture the mayhem on video if at all possible.

And by all means, go armed if you can. Just in case the unthinkable happens.

Grover Norquist Exposed On The House Floor

H/T for the below post goes out to Zilla Of The Resistance, whose tireless and unwavering efforts against radical Islam, including her efforts to expose what she calls "Islamoblow" politicians and other enablers or "Islamocoddlers" deserves special commendation. At this point she may be, in her own smaller way, an even more effective voice of opposition than Pamela Gellar, who a good many people tend to shut out without a fair hearing. I urge all readers of this post to visit Zilla's blog and show her your support.

Is Grover Norquist's Americans For Tax Reform being used by Norquist as a money laundering operation? It seems that there is more than ample reason to believe that to be the case, but if so, the veil seems to be finally lifting. Or possibly unraveling. The question remains, who of all of Norquist's unsavory acquaintances, not the least of whom is convicted felon Jack Abramof, has utilized Norquist's organization for illicit means. The answers might surprise you if you are unfamiliar with the man's history, but the answer would seem to be such groups as CAIR, Hamas, Hebbollah, and the Islamic Brotherhood. It would seem that Grover is a major champion and advocate of the religion of peace.

It has gotten to the point where one Congressman, Republican Frank R. Wolf, just today denounced Norquist on the floor of the House. I won't go into detail, as you can read it all here, but the problems with Norquist seem multifaceted.

For one, he has been a strong supporter of any and all Islamic causes here in the US. That in and of itself need not necessarily be cause for alarm, so long as it is transparent, but if he is using the ATR as a means of funneling money back and forth, and to and from Islamic radical organizations, then it becomes grave cause for concern. But more to the point, he has been a strong influence on GOP lawmakers through the aegis of the ATR's "No New Tax Pledge" which he has hitherto run almost like a protection racket.

First, GOP lawmakers and candidates are pressured to take the pledge, and then bludgeoned without mercy if they show signs of wavering from that pledge in the slightest ways. Unfortunately, this goes way beyond raising taxes. Also forbidden is any serious effort at entitlement reform. Perhaps even more disturbing is Norquist's insistence that any attempt to repeal subsidies or even the more odious forms of tax exemptions currently enjoyed by wealthy individuals and large corporations is also tantamount to breaking the pledge.

The end result would seem to be the wielding of a type of influence that might make George Soros green with ency. Yet, according to the Congressman, this kind of influence is stopping any budgetary reform progress dead in its tracks.

The question remains, who benefits the most from Norquist's influence? Have tax loopholes and exemptions made it possible for some corporations to funnel money to Norquist's organization in large sums? And how is this money being used, and for whose benefit? Are some of our major corporations unknowingly funding organizations whose overall objective and purpose is to supplant Western Civilization and to install shariah law?

And of course, although it wouldn't seem to fall under his purview, Norquist has probably twisted arms insofar as legal efforts on behalf of the Islamic groups he supports. For example, he was a vocal proponent of the Ground Zero Mosques, and has been a staunch opponent of the Patriot Act. He has also been at the forefront of demands for the closure of Guantanamo Bay, in demanding civil rights for even the most heinous of foreign-born jihadists, and has even been an advocate of terrorist fundraisers such as Sami Al-Aryan.

It is a disturbing list of allegations, but if true, Republicans need to cut this millstone from around their neck. Prosecution as well should be forthcoming, but there's the rub. How many people in Congress are just in too deep with Norquist to feel comfortable with any further revelations?

Was Rick Perry Wrong And If So, How Exactly?

Rick Perry looks to me like he's on the way out as a presidential contender, and that's probably just as well. The man is a horrid debater. Even in a debate with the Teleprompter Messiah, you need to not come across as tongue-tied for the simple fact it makes you look unsure of your facts, your position, and yourself.

With that out of the way, its really too bad, because I think Perry is getting a bad rap. But its a rap that is resonating in GOP circles nationwide. Here's just one example recently posted in American Spectator from a Republican congressional candidate from North Carolina by the name of Vernon Robinson, remarking at a rally (in front of a Mexican restaurant that is alleged to hire illegal immigrants) regarding Rick Perry's supposed "Amnesty" ideals.

"If Governor Perry's amnesty policy is adopted, it will mark the first time a Texan has surrendered to Mexico in 175 years," continued Robinson. Robinson called for using troops to secure the border, implementing e-Verify, cutting off welfare to illegal immigrants, an end to ballot printed in Spanish and other foreign languages, rescinding birthright citizenship, and restricting the jurisdiction of federal judges who stand in the way.

I'm not sure how much of that Perry would agree or disagree with, but I'll take the governor at his word and assume he sincerely wants to control illegal immigration, meaning like most conservatives he wants to at least slow it to a crawl if not eliminate it all together.

As for me, I find myself agreeing with every single item stated by Robinson. I might be even more hard core than he is. For example, until such time that we can repeal Posse Comitatus and thus put troops on the border (which frankly we should be able to do anyway) we should mandate that our border control agents not only have the right to shoot to kill in self-defense when they are attacked by illegal immigrants at or near the border, but they should be able to shoot them when they are trying to elude capture. If that sounds harsh, bear in mind many of these people are drug smugglers, gang members, and that some even engage in human trafficking. A good rule of thumb is, if you don't want to get shot, don't resist or evade law-enforcement, even if you think you're in the right. Let your attorney sort that out. The Mexican Embassy will appoint you one free of charge and will scream to high heaven in your defense, even if you're a convicted child rapist.

I hope I've made my point. I've been accused of a lot, but being weak on immigration and border security, well that's not one of them. Of course things can change and that might be starting with this post.

My question is, what exactly did Perry say that was so horrible, other than the mangled, garbled, amateurish way he said it?

Let's take it one step at a time. Only instead of looking what he actually said, let's pretend we're Democrats and twist his words around to mean something different than what actually came out of his mouth.

"You Republicans who don't believe in the Texas Dream Act are a bunch of heartless sons-of-bitches"

And of course, as I hope everyone knows, this is not what he said at all. In fact, he wasn't even referring to American citizens, nor specifically Republican voters, in my opinion. What he actually said, to paraphrase him, was "if you don't support giving an education to children who are brought here through no fault of their own, frankly I don't think you have a heart."

This was actually an amateurish and really pretty lame attempt to attack not GOP voters, but GOP politicians and policy-makers who dissent from his views. Where Perry messed up profoundly was in making the mistake of assuming that most Republican voters would agree with him. But he wasn't intentionally attacking them. Perry is not that big a fool. He just hasn't caught on yet that the United States as a country is bigger and more complicated than most things. Including, yes, even Texas.

But conversely, we all screw up when we fail to recognize the unique texture of the Texas landscape. To most of us, illegal immigration is frightening. How many are here, what will be the long-term effects on our culture and society? Will they add an unstoppable horde of supporters to the leftist agenda? It's uncharted territory, to be sure. But Texas to an extent is that territory, and Texans have lived it daily. They have had to deal with the unique problems it poses directly, not as a mere abstract concept.

Seen in this light, I can see Perry's point. Say you have a bunch of kids who have been here since a very young age. Their parents work hard, hidden in the shadows, but in the meantime these kids attend school. Some of them work hard and learn, and make good grades. Some even graduate with honors, as they and for the most part their parents contribute to the culture and society, and don't break the law, other than through the fact that they are here illegally.

Some of these kids have gone on to enter the US military and have fought for their adopted country. Why then should they not be granted a scholarship to attend a Texas University, or allowed to pay in-state tuition, seeing as how Texas is the state in which they have resided, went to school, and worked? Provided they meet the qualifications for attendance, and scholarship, and are willing to work hard, who are we to say them nay? We are always hearing about how we need more doctors, scientists, engineers, mathematicians. Well?

And about this border fence business. Perry is right on that as well. The idea of constructing a fence along the entirety of the Mexican-American border is a non-starter to me. It's grandstanding and demagoguery at best, and anytime I hear someone talk that crap I tend to tune them out. For one thing, are you going to construct a damn fence in the middle of the Rio Grande? Because if you can't solve that challenge then you are faced with the prospect of separating Texas landowners from large portions of their own acreage.

And then, as surely as night follows day, as soon as the fence is built, they will reduce the numbers of border agents, probably by significant amounts. The problem is, you will still need x number of agents or the fence becomes nothing more than a temporary inconvenience. And if you have the number of agents, or national guard troops that you need to make the fence an efficient deterrent, then voila, guess what? Turns out you don't need the damn fence after all, because the same amount of border agents can do the job as good without the fence as with it. Strike that, they can probably do the job even better.

It's like the guy that puts up a high fence around his property. Sure it will keep some people out, all but those that are really determined, and once those determined ones get over, the fence no longer protects you, it protects them. Border agents by and large aren't gifted with x-ray vision. They can't see through the wall any better than the illegals, and if you don't have a hell of a lot of agents, then the illegals will get over. And those that do make it through will be the last ones you would want. And make it through they will, one way or another.

As for the lettuce pickers and the bed-changers, I don't care about them. I want limitations on how many come here, to be sure, and I want those to come here legally, but in the meantime I want to focus our energy and attention on the truly criminal element. If we really, really want to we can get rid of them by shooting them down like the invading army of insurgents that they are in a very real way, if necessary. And make no mistake, that's what they are.

The others we can deal with over time, by initiating a pathway to citizenship for those who have otherwise obeyed the rules and worked whenever possible.

But first we have to secure the borders, in a sensible, realistic way. And a border fence is not going to cut it for the reasons I mentioned. Plus, frankly, I think its intended more as a boondoggle than anything. Just who will build the thing, and how much will it cost. This thing could end up making the Big Dig look like a skateboard park.

So let's all take a deep breath. We have too many important things to worry about. And in fact, this nonsense about a border fence is one of the main things that is holding up progress on actually securing the border. Put the boots on the ground and do everything else sensible that is required to at least slow this problem down to a trickle, and then let's move on from there.

Now You're Talking

Andrew Breitbart engages the left with the discourse they deserve.

Warren Buffett-Snake Oil Salesman And All-Around Fraud

I want to preface this post by stating, I am sick and tired of hearing about how Warren Buffett pays a lesser percentage of tax on dividends than his secretary pays in income tax. That's only to be expected, as capital gains are taxed at fifteen percent. But what is really irritating as how he portrays this as being so unfair to his poor hapless secretary.

This is not a woman who works in some obscure small town doctor or lawyer's office, or some struggling regional business.

This is the secretary of WARREN FUCKING BUFFETT!!! I have no doubt whatsoever that she makes well up into six figures in salary, probably enough to put her well into the upper income bracket. And that's before you start factoring in other compensation, probably a generous end of the year bonus, birthday bonus, shares of stock, etc. This is not a woman who is just making it.

In the meantime Buffett's company, Berkshire Hathaway, has been in negotiations with the feds as to how much back taxes they owe. The hypocrisy knows no bounds, but don't tell MSNBC that. If you tell them Buffett should release his tax returns, they will call you a Buffett Birther.

Now, Buffett is conducting a scam to inflate the price of Hathaway stock, by announcing a buy-out for up to ten percent above the current price, on the grounds the current stock doesn't reflect what he insists is the company's real value. Alice Schroeder, who has had dealings with the so-called Oracle From Omaho, also hints that this might be a ploy to simply drive up the stock, after which Buffett might decide not to re-purchase after all.

Incidentally, Schoeder once wrote a book about Buffett, who told her when there were two conflicting accounts as pertains to any subject, to always use the version least favorable to him. Then he cut off all contact with her for painting him in an unfavorable light.

This is the kind of man we are suppose to listen to when he advises us to raise taxes on the rich, ie anyone, person or business, who makes more than 250,000 dollars a year.

Two possibilities, either one or both of which might explain this phenomenon.

1. The government has something on Buffett

2. Buffett wants certain businesses to lose their stock value so he can snatch them up.

It's one of the two, and probably both. I would almost be willing to bet my life on number two.

In the meantime, if Warren is really that upset that he isn't paying his fair share, here's a couple of things he can do.

1. If you're really in charge of Berkshire Hathaway, stop haggling with the feds. Pay them what they say you owe. Would they lie to you?

2. Here's an even better idea. There are a plethora of charities, some of which do good work, and some of which are struggling, that could always use a shot in the arm, an infusion of quick, ready cash, hell, a respected spokesman (note, better move fast on that one).

Just a few I can think of off the top of my head. Salvation Army, ASPCA, Boys And Girls Club, Make A Wish, Children's Hospital, The Red Cross, The Boy Scouts.

Granted, not all charities are good, some have a mixed record, some are wasteful of their donations. You can ferret those out, I'm sure. Even the worst of them couldn't be any more wasteful than the federal government.

But of course, Warren Buffett couldn't care less about fairness and government efficiency. There's something else up, and you can bet the main beneficiary, in the long run, will always be Warren Buffett.

The Christie Curse

There are at least five good reasons to dislike Chris Christie but he added icing to the cake last night in his address from the Reagan Library when he spoke the ineffable words "compromise". Those words which should never be spoken by any Republican who wishes to be taken seriously by the base, especially when spoken in connection with the terms "Democrats" and "Congress".

It bodes ill for the future of the nation when its leaders can't learn from the mistakes of the past. If you loved John McCain, you should love Chris Christie. On the other hand, maybe not. McCain was probably on balance more conservative. Of all the current aspirants for the Republican nomination, none are as liberal as Chris Christie. That includes Jon Huntsman, who at least opposes gun control.

Yet, the GOP establishment loves this guy. They won't leave him alone. I wouldn't swear to this, but I think they've even threatened him. They are that convinced that he is some sort of savior. But he's their savior, not the savior of the country, or the constitution. They want somebody to watch their own backs and guard their own asses. They want one of their own.

I want to make it clear, I admire Chris Christie, to a point, as governor of New Jersey. But that's where he should stay, where he can do the most good. Continue to put New Jersey on a sane fiscal setting, in a way that will last way past his tenure. Continue to take on the unions, fight for sane fiscal policies. Reform the state pension system and the schools. Do all those things that have made him a household word.

And then he should retire. He should avoid national office at any level. The last thing the nation needs is another national republican who supports gun control, is a believer in anthropogenic climate change, a support in comprehensive immigration reform, and is politically correct when dealing with matters pertaining to the encroaches of Islam in our society.

Whoever wins the nomination will automatically be beset with pleas-make that demands-to put Christie on the ticket. He or she should avoid doing so. Not just avoid, they should flat out refuse.

Its time for the Republican voters to take control of the Republican Party. If we can't do that, or won't do that, then nothing is ever going to change. It will just be one moderate squish after another, and year after year of Democrats demanding twice what they really want and then "compromising" to get everything they really do want. Before long, there won't be anything left worth compromising over.