This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Liberals suck

  • Nanny Bloomberg refuses NG help because of their guns

    Lorraine and Country Singer send us a link to our buddy, Gateway Pundit, who links to Fox Nation which reports that Nanny Bloomberg rejected help in the recovery of Hurricane Sandy from the National Guard because the only people he wants on the streets of New York with guns is the New York Police Department;

    Mayor Bloomberg has snubbed Borough President Markowitz’s impassioned plea to bring the National Guard to Hurricane Sandy-scarred Brooklyn — arguing that approving the Beep’s request would be a waste of federal manpower and turn the borough into a police state.

    “We don’t need it,” Mayor Bloomberg said on Wednesday during a press update on the city’s ongoing Hurricane Sandy cleanup. “The NYPD is the only people we want on the street with guns.”

    Yeah, because if New Yorkers are going to get shot, I guess he wants them shot by local boys.

  • How to dismantle the military

    Our buddy, Rick Maze, at the Military Times, writes about how the liberal think tank, The Center For American Progress thinks they can dismantle our national security apparatus by slicing to pieces the things that make military service attractive to prospective recruits. Attractive enough to make a career out of service. The smelly hippies who hate the military suggest that the military cap pay raises, reduce the healthcare benefit that retirees have already paid for with their service, and reduce the retirement compensation to 40% of their pay instead of 50% and make retirees wait until they’re 60 years old to get it;

    Similarly, the report endorses many of the Defense Department’s proposals for cutting health care costs by raising fees, mostly on retirees and their families. But the report goes a step further: “To truly restore the Tricare program to stable financial footing, the Defense Department should enact measures to reduce the overutilization of medical services and limit double coverage of working-age military retirees,” the report says.

    One idea would be to modify Tricare for Life benefits for Medicare-eligible retirees so that the program would not cover the first $500 of costs per year and would cover only 50 percent of the next $5,000.

    Another idea would be to mandate that working-age retirees could only have Tricare benefits if they or their spouses do not have access to employer-provided health benefits. The report suggests this would be an income-based restriction but does not say what the cutoff should be.

    Yeah, I dare them to suggest the same things for Social Security. Tell those people on SSI for life that they can’t get it until they’re 60 and that their out-of-pocket healthcare costs are zooming up. Tell Social Security recipients that you’re going to slash their benefit. I’m not saying that Social Security recipients are itinerant lay abouts, what I’m saying is that stupid hippies would never slash their own social programs the way they attack the military’s benefit programs.

    I want to compliment Rick Maze for finally noticing a liberal group and calling it such in his article. I think this is a first for him.

  • Facebook censors Special Operations Speaks

    Sunday, we posted a video from Special Operations Speaks which criticized the Obama Administration for abandoning four Americans in the Benghazi consulate when they called for some support during the siege that cost them their lives. SOS also put the video on their Facebook page. It seems that the folks at Facebook didn’t like the video for some reason and removed it. When SOS put the video back, Facebook suspended their account for a day with some nebulous excuse about their terms of service.

    From SOS’ press release on the subject;

    “It looks like Obama’s liberal followers in Facebook HQ are terrified of how damaging the Benghazi scandal is for the President. We understand that Facebook can run their site however they’d like, but when they’re trying to quietly squelch opposition to what is a clear leadership failure that resulted in the tragic deaths of some of our nation’s heroes, they deserve the to be called out on it,” said Larry Bailey, CAPT (SEAL), USN (Ret).

    “We are paying advertisers on Facebook. It is outrageous that Mark Zuckerburg, founder of Facebook, who worked to elect Obama in 2008, would sell out patriots who made the ultimate sacrifice – all to serve the political ambitions of the man who let them die.”

    I’m still waiting for Facebook to justify this, of course, they don’t have to because it’s their business. But they cuddle with Chinese dictators and squelch free speech here in the States. That doesn’t sound like a good business plan to me.

  • More Stupidity from Chrissy-Poo

    Chrissy-Poo strikes again!  This time, he’s playing the race card:

    “I think they hate Obama. They want him out of the White House more than they want to destroy Al Qaeda. Their No. 1 enemy in the world right now, on the right, is their hatred, hatred for Obama. And we can go into that about the white working class in the South and looking at these numbers we’re getting the last couple days about racial hatred in many cases … this isn’t about being a better president, they want to get rid of this president,’ he (Matthews)  said.”

    Yep.  According to Matthews, people who don’t support Obama are against him because they’re racists.

    But Matthews doesn’t stop there.  According to Chrissy-Poo, people who don’t support Obama hate him so badly that they’d rather see Obama lose the election than see al Qaeda destroyed.

    That opposition can’t possibly be because they think the current POTUS is incompetent, inept, and unable to lead.  Or the fact that they disagree with his policies, finding those polices misguided, counterproductive, and destructive.

    No, anyone who doesn’t support Obama must be a racist.  There’s no other reason not to support Obama.  No less an authority than Chris “Tingly-Leg” Matthews says so!

    Teh stoopid is strong in Chris.  But we already knew that.  This is just more proof.

  • Guess Who Didn’t Pay Attention in Junior High Civics

    It looks like everyone’s favorite MSNBC liberal, Chris “Tingly-Leg” Matthews, is pissed.  It seems as if he doesn’t think the current POTUS is getting proper respect.

    And maybe he’s right.  After all, the Constitution does say that you can’t challenge the President – right?

    Matthews:  “I don’t think he understands the Constitution of the United States…He’s the President of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance . . . .’”

    Um, no.  That’s not what the Constitution says at all.  I’m thinking you’re the one who doesn’t understand the Constitution.

    He’s the US President, Chrissy-Poo.  He’s not royalty ruling by Divine Right or some absolute dictator whose whose words are beyond question or challenge.

    The Constitution gives the POTUS no special pass on following the law, or on being challenged.  If someone thinks  he is wrong, the POTUS can indeed be challenged – publicly, and directly.

    Further:  other than selected members of the military, no one is legally obligated to treat the  POTUS with any more or less respect than they treat any other person.  Only commissioned officers of the US military are bound by law (the UCMJ) to treat selected Federal and State officials with a degree of respect in their public statements and actions.  That’s it.

    So long as they don’t otherwise violate the law, everyone else can say what they wish about the POTUS – or to him, if they have the opportunity.  They’re not legally bound to give the POTUS any more respect than anyone else they know.  If they want to publicly challenge the POTUS – or call him a liar to his face – that’s perfectly legal.

    It’s called “Freedom of Speech”, Chrissy-Poo.    Perhaps you’ve heard of it?

    You can get remedial civics education from any number of sources, Matthews.  You might want to check into it.

  • Should veterans endorse candidates?

    Do you remember the Center for a New American Security which was pushing for radical changes to the military retirement system? Well, now they’re warning that we veterans should sit down and shut up during political campaigns.

    The problem is that very few American voters make the distinction between retired military personnel and those on active duty, notes the study, which was also written by Kyle Dropp and Peter Feaver. Active-duty personnel are not allowed to wear uniforms at political events and make political speeches.

    The campaigns, in turn, are aware of this and tend to recruit the highest-ranking retirees they can find to support candidates, particularly “flag officers” – admirals and generals.

    “Retired senior officers may think they are drawing fine distinctions between the formal institution of active-duty military and their own views as retired citizens, but the truth is that no one, especially not the campaigns, is very interested in their views as private citizens,” the study says.

    While the report finds that these endorsements do not appear to notably sway voters, the problem is that over time these endorsements have the potential to erode trust in the military.

    Yeah, since the military is most trusted institution in this country, and the government’s most successful agency, I’m sure there’ll be eroded trust because we endorse leaders. I don’t remember anyone complaining when Medal of Honor recipient, Paul Bucha publicly came out in 2008 and supported Barack Obama for president. But, now when a group of Special Operations folks come out to attack Obama, it’s suddenly going to “erode trust in the military.”

    This is particularly true of some of the negative political ads this campaign season, when retired Special Operations Forces officers attacked President Obama for discussing the strike on Osama bin Laden’s compound, Golby says.

    “The real downside to negative ads is that they do create a perception that the military doesn’t support one candidate, and they raise questions about whether military leaders will be able to faithfully carry out the orders of the other party,” he says.

    Yeah, please provide an example of that ever happening in the history of the United States. In fact, when certain people did indeed refuse to serve as ordered, like the birthers, members of the military were quick to condemn them, regardless of our political stripe.

    And then they quote Martin Dempsey’s scolding of the Special Operations Speaks criticism of Obama as if Dempsey has no political dog in the fight, or as if Dempsey’s words are so sage, we’d have to agree.

    It sounds more to me like the lack of public endorsements from veterans is not helping the campaigns of Center for a New American Security’s choices for this season. Here’s a warning from me to the Center for a New American Security; the fact that you involve yourself in projects that are not in the interests of veterans, you’re in danger of having trust in anything you say eroded.

  • Joe Biden the Democrats’ head troll

    About 250 of you spent 90 minutes with us last night as we posted our reaction to the Vice Presidential debate last night. That’s why many of you couldn’t get in. I never thought that many people would want to play with us. I’ll know better next time.

    But, I predicted in the first five minutes of the debate that Bite-Me lost on style alone. Mr Hanson says he lost on content as well. But I’ve spent the morning going through the reviews of the debate and I’m really surprised at the number of people who thought Biden did a commendable job.

    But this is from a culture who thinks that trolling opinion blogs is an acceptable and successful way to change people’s minds on issues. I’m sure some of our trolls were applauding loudly at Bite-Me’s performance last night while he used their tactics to swing (and miss) at his ideological opponent.

    Of course, if Ryan had taken up some of Bite-Me’s less than civilized strategies, today they’d be calling “foul”.

    I hardly blame Biden, though. It was his parents’ fault for telling him he was smart and for not teaching him to sit and be quiet when others are speaking. It is his fault that he had nothing of substance to point to as successful in the first four years of his administration.

    The Afghanistan War was the Obama Administration’s war to lose and they did. In fact, they’ve done everything they could possible do to lose, and it’s worked so well, in that regard. And it’s all Biden – it was his idea to rely on robot ninja zombies instead of troops on the ground. Since Joe Biden has been absolutely wrong on every single foreign policy issue since he went to Congress, I don’t know why anyone is surprised that it’s worked out like that.

    Bite-Me has never known what he’s talking about. That why he had to plagiarize his work in college and make public pronouncements about how smart he is – again it’s that trollish behavior that his supporters like so much. So the Democrat Party is the party of trolls, and Joe Bite-Me lives under the best bridge in their world.

  • Standing on the broken bodies of veterans

    I’m proud to say that I took part in this little movement the other day on Facebook when some dinguses thought it would be a good idea to use the photo of Juan Dominguez, a triple amputee veteran for a fund-raising campaign. As soon as i found out that Juan hadn’t given his permission to use the photo of him in an ad, I used my customary stinging commentary at the Facebook page. But here’s the story from KGTV;

    Just days after Dominguez moved into his specially designed “smart home” in Temecula, the triple amputee learned he and others were being used to pocket money for political fundraising efforts.

    “That’s disgusting … I look at this and it’s being spread like wildfire through Facebook … within a matter of a couple hours, [it] had almost 700-plus shares; not likes, shares,” Dominguez said.

    Dominguez told 10News a photo of himself from a Los Angeles Times article was used without his permission and taken out of context in the posting. Above the picture reads, “We are the 47%”

    “Now I’m getting these comments like, ‘Yeah, good job on him for even supporting,’ and I never gave permission for my photo,” Dominguez said.

    Dominguez does not claim a political party, nor does he have any opinions about the subject. All he’s asking for in this situation is a little respect, not money.

    The Facebook page has been taken down, but the picture remains at Liberals Unite. Of course, typical of the Liberals who are afraid of opposing commentary, comments there have to be approved, which probably explains why there is only one comment showing.